That is absolutely true, it also sounds like it is tricky to get the real thing right I suppose.
Christen Eagle. After the designer, Frank Christensen.
He might have been a Christian, but he didn’t name the aircraft that 
Well, some were and some weren’t.
Especially the Camels longitudinal stability varied between impossible to flare at low speeds and neutral to negative, depending on the amount of fuel.
But no PC based flightsim has what I would call a realistic flightmodel in all flight regimes.
They’re mostly good enough for entertainment though.
3 Likes
I make fun of others when they do that so I guess it’s high time somebody called me out on it. 
Thanks for sharing the pilot report. Honestly though, it sounded pretty docile.
3 Likes
When flown with half tank…
And anything is docile compared to a Pitts.
1 Like
That was really interesting to read @smokinhole. Some very useful information in that post. I’ve been wanting to get the eagle for a while for DCS as it would be so different from everything else I own. Thanks for writing that up.
1 Like
So no, at least in the Cessna 152 in the build I’m using (which is probably different than some of these You Tubers because I do not have the 787 for instance), I cannot get the 152 to spin. I can get it to stall and break, but the spin never develops…instead everything turns into a high speed spiral. Even putting in pro-spin inputs (burying the elevator and stomping and holding the rudder) will only result in a break and what looks to be a spin entry, but the plane accelerates during the descent and the wing does not truly enter an autorotational spin.
Honestly…the more I look at this sim from a flight dynamics standpoint, the more I think it is 99% FSX DNA. Which isn’t bad from the standpoint of still getting a heavily updated sim that looks great and runs great. Unless there is something majorly different with the release build (and I’ll be happy if that is the case)…
2 Likes
As well, the Cessna 152 (and this may be true of all the planes…further investigations coming) has absolutely no spring to the landing gear struts. You can plow it onto the ground very hard and stiffly and it is almost like the plane gets stuck to the ground with no spring or bounce at all. Very…sterile feeling.
In fact, you cannot porpoise it. If you hit your nosewheel first, the mains hit and instantly stick to the ground, and the nosewheel does not rebound back into the air. Weird. But…you can wheelbarrow the plane on the runway…I just spent a few minutes at Edwards running down the runway with the nosewheel on the ground, and alternating balancing the left main in the air and the right main in the air…so there is some phsyics-y stuff going on there…but it nothing to do with struts/wheel interaction with the rest of the body of the airplane.
2 Likes
There are also no blown tires or skidding tires. The 152 apparently has anti-skid since you cannot lock up the brakes.
Surprising given what they said in some of the promo vids.
1 Like
So things are a bit better for the Boeing 747. It exhibits some nice body roll as you feed in the rudders or aileron. I basically just set up a scenario at Edwards, accelerated to around 80 or 90 knots and then input aileron and rudder to see if the body would sway (it does) and the main gear does compress and extend as one would expect. I took off at around 140, let it climb up to 40 or so feet, closed the throttles, and let her hit pretty hard and it DID bounce back into the air. So…shock absorption/strut type stuff must be on a per-airplane basis…which is encouraging.
1 Like
Well…let me qualify that I guess. I did get it to bounce once…but I think it was because I had some elevator feeding in at the time anticipating it would be too hard. I just tried it again and really DROVE it onto the pavement, and it exhibited the same kind of sticky “we are done flying” characteristics. I hit the nosegear first hoping to see it rebound, followed by the mains, and that did not happen. As soon as the nosegear hit hard, the mains all sort of just suction cupped to the runway.
I guess the point of the matter is…X-Plane is still far, far superior to my build of MSFS when it comes to ground interactions.
2 Likes
The X-Cub feel much better with regards to tire/strut interaction. It will bounce and the struts give a bit…much better feel of actually some interaction with the runway instead of a scripted feeling. So I think the capability is there if the aircraft developers decides to model it…
2 Likes
2 Likes
The X-Cub does not want to spin either. 
1 Like
Full braking and aft stick will prevent the X-Cub from tipping over on its nose. I would think you should be able to lock up the brakes and quite easily tip that thing over forward. I think this is still the problem of all brakes are anti-skid in the sim…whether they are meant to be or not…
1 Like
Why wouldn’t the air speed increase if the aircraft is moving through air?
If the aircraft is in a spin then the instrumentation usually has a hard time detecting airspeed, it depends on the forward movement of the air moving into the pitot tube to determine IAS. In a spin any speed indication is contentious at best and not accurate at all.
1 Like
Odd since they did promote that now aircraft no longer stick to the ground. Maybe they added the ability to the sim but never enabled it for all the aircraft. In the videos, the landings do look sterile.
But I’m also used to DCS and its bouncy gear modeling.
That’s also a thing I noticed in videos, mainly of people who are clearly not pilots/simmers and slam those planes onto the runways at high speeds and steep angles.
No way those landing gears would take that kind of hit.
One of those dudes “landed” a King Air at ~140 knots and with 800ft/sec which would even be hard for a carrier plane and the gear was fine. And not only was the gear fine, it did not bounce at all.
Thank you so very much BeachAV8R.
Copenhagen:
Looks great. There are a lot of correct buildings in central Copenhagen, obvious autocreated ones in certain areas and almost no buildings at all in others. Most noticeable in the harbor industrial areas.
Based on a couple of missing features, the bing map orthophotos used is from no later than the middle of 2018. The features are present in the September 2018 orthos and missing in the May 2017 orthos
FS-074 The last green roofed shed to the right under the right wing/body joint is the home of Copenhagen Suborbitals.
Tandslet:
You found exactly the right spot. On 2 pictures I can follow the road into my parents driveway. All buildings are autogen.
Frederikssund:
I did find my apartment building but it looks all wrong, but that is no wonder as all buildings in the area are autogen.
I do find it cool that you can follow the roads as in real life.
So cool in fact, that I have jumped on the wagon and preordered the basic version. None of the versions have any of the aircrafts or airports, that I am rooting for but I can hope they become available.
Happy Simming
1 Like