Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-06-2012, 12:48 AM
IvanK IvanK is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 886
Default The "Rudder issue" in the new Beta

Just got to fly the new Beta (been away working since the patch came out away from PC). WRT the "BF109" rudder issue I think rudder behaviour has been changed across ALL types (certainly fighters). The change is both good and bad. The comments below are fairly generic.

Previously any even minor rudder input resulted in almost immediate secondary effects of yaw (roll) ocurring. This was unrealistic. The Secondary effect of yaw is generally a progressive thing requiring significant rudder application (then yaw) for it to start manifesting itself. Typically in most straight wing types a smooth application of perhaps 1/3 to half rudder is required before the roll becomes noticeable. In the current Beta patch this is what I am seeing ... about 1/3rd rudder pedal deflection before I see any secondary effect. However I am not seeing anywhere near enough yaw during the rudder application. This results in the aircraft seemingly not responding yaw wise to the first 1/3rd of rudder application. The first real motion you see as the pilot is the "secondary effect" i.e the roll then yaw starts to come in.

What I should be seeing with smooth progressive rudder application is the Yaw coming on, Then at about 1/3rd to 1/2 rudder pedal application a progressive roll developing. You need to establish the yaw rate to get the secondary effect happening. Of course individual pedal sense settings and speed will alter exactly when this all takes place on your system. Speed and power settings will also affect this.

So in summary imo the later point at which the roll component occurs is an improvement. The lack of significant yaw in the first 1/3rd to 1/2 rudder application could be tweeked a bit.

How to fix imo:
Get the Yaw rate going commensurate with rudder application.... like it used to be. Delay the secondary effect (roll) similar to what we have now .... i.e. keep the the secondary affect (roll) to a similar onset point as it now is, with the Roll rate being proportional to the Yaw rate. This will then provide a more a natural and realistic response

Having said that I think its better than what we had previously.

Last edited by IvanK; 07-08-2012 at 11:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-06-2012, 03:17 AM
camber camber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 105
Default

I would agree but have a couple of points.

The rudder changes are extremely noticable when attempting to get enemy aircraft on sight in the turn. The main problem (as IvanK said) is that attempting to rudder the nose up and down in a steeply banked turn gives a large secondary roll response that is difficult to compensate with aileron. But another problem is that the rudder response is extremely undampened and a rudder input sufficient for any yaw will give large oscillations in both yaw and roll and you end up waggling your nose around the target.

EDIT: not that you should open fire in a side slip anyway, but there is a fair amount of oscillation present!

Setting axis sensitivity to 1.0 from 0.0 (reduces rudder response at low pedal input) does not help because the rudder is hardly doing anything at the low inputs anyway (just some "secondary" roll)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanK View Post
Previously any even minor rudder input resulted in almost immediate secondary effects of yaw (roll) ocurring. This was unrealistic. The Secondary effect of yaw is generally a progressive thing requiring significant rudder application (then yaw) for it to start manifesting itself. Typically in most straight wing types a smooth application of perhaps 1/3 to half rudder is required before the roll becomes noticeable. In the current Beta patch this is what I am seeing ... about 1/3rd rudder pedal deflection before I see any secondary effect. However I am not seeing anywhere near enough yaw during the rudder application. This results in the aircraft seemingly not responding yaw wise to the first 1/3rd of rudder application. The first real motion you see as the pilot is the "secondary effect" i.e the roll then yaw starts to come in.
You can really see this on three channel RC planes (which have large amounts of dihedral and no ailerons). To bank you kick the tail sideways with rudder which is clearly visible, then the aircraft tips toward the yaw.

camber

Last edited by camber; 07-06-2012 at 11:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-08-2012, 03:50 PM
David198502's Avatar
David198502 David198502 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,536
Default

nice one IvanK!
my impression as well in regards of the rudder, but you are certainly more of an expert!
are you in direct touch with the devs?i hope they listen to you...

btw, what do you think of the new elevator and aileron behaviour?
im a 109pilot only, so i dont know about the other planes, except the hurri where a bugreport already exists, but now the 109 seems way harder to control precisely, especially when trying to correct/adjust the aim...
more or less realistic in comparison to the official version?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-08-2012, 04:23 PM
SlipBall's Avatar
SlipBall SlipBall is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: down Island, NY
Posts: 2,719
Default

For some reason, it is common for some files to get screwed up when installing a patch. Anyone having these problem's should first try an re-install, of both the game and Steam.
__________________



GigaByteBoard...64bit...FX 4300 3.8, G. Skill sniper 1866 32GB, EVGA GTX 660 ti 3gb, Raptor 64mb cache, Planar 120Hz 2ms, CH controls, Tir5
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-08-2012, 04:36 PM
41Sqn_Stormcrow
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I personally agree with the principle points exposed by Ivan, I have however some doubt about the 1/3 - 1/2 range as generic values. My guess is that between individual planes and between different speeds this may vary a bit more.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-08-2012, 11:47 PM
IvanK IvanK is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 886
Default

The 1/3 - 1/2 range is just a very generic "pluck" on my part. Stormcrow you are 100% correct that it will vary from type to type and with power and speed as well. Given its actually the yaw itself and yaw rate versus all the other opposing couples that cause this secondary effect of yaw and how apparent it is.

As to the BF109 elevator. Initially it did feel a little sensitive post patch. I adjusted the sensitivity settings externally in my joystick software and so far so good.

WRT to sensitivity settings I set all the sliders in game to 0. I then adjust values in Joystick software ... CH Manager in my case. I found that this gives better results.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.