Ground physics in DCS World 1.5.8 and 2.2
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Ground physics in DCS World 1.5.8 and 2.2

  1. #1

    Icon5 Ground physics in DCS World 1.5.8 and 2.2

    Hi,

    long time no post :-)

    IO was once a very active MSFS user, am still a erratic X-plane user, but am mostly, these days, a "Combat Pilot" :-)

    I was pushed into DCS World and IL-2 Battle of due to the lack of satisfaction with the flight dynamics and overall physics modelling, and "feel of being there" ( not ) provided by any of the civil flight simulation games I used. I exclude Aerowinx PS1 and PSX, ELITE IFR, and Condorsoaring because these have / had a specific use and are on a different class, IMO...

    But straight into the tittle of the Post, I share my simmer time these days playing both IL2 Battle of and DCS World WW2 modules ( and also the UH-1H )... Both flight simulators are at the very top of my ranking in terms of flight dynamics modeling plausibility / quality, but also in what concerns damage modeling, and even visuals.

    I can't really say I prefer one - both do a remarkable job, and if one performs less than the other in a specific aspect, it's easy to find another feature that makes them even again...

    The specific aspect I would like to gather your opinions on in this thread is ground handling, and in special, for those of you who own the Bf 109 K-4, and are also owners of IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad / Moscow / Kuban, how find it modelled between the two sims.

    .) IL-2 fighters, and in particular the 109s, give me a better sense of weight / inertia on ground, while taxiing, taking of and also during the landing run;
    .) DCS World fighters, and in special the 109 K-4, appear to model some aspects of ground physics, namely the tail surface authority at taxi speeds and power settings a bit more close to what I see described by RW 109 pilots, namely the fact that the rudder, for instance, is very inneficient until above 120 km/h IAS during the takeoff.

    I find, for instance, that it is prcatically impossible to taxi straight ahead in an 109 in IL-2, even with the tail wheel locked, without using almost permanent right rudder input ( in the absence of any significant wind on ground ). AT the same time, the rudder is actually effective enought to allow me to steer during taxi, while in the DCS K-4 I am forced to use diffrential brakes.

    But in many youtubes I watch, it is evident that the pilots are using the rudder to initiate or counter their turns during taxi, and in the pilot notes it is mentioned that "bursts of propwash" and forward stick to turn the tail lighter, help with tighter turns - something that I can't really replicate in the DCS 109 K-4, no matter how many fuel I get into the main and MW-50 tanks - filled, unfilled... it doesn't change this inability to steer without using the toe brakes...

    I would like to get your opinions on this matter
    Hey you chicks, flying bricks! Come fly gliders !!! Be outsiders...

  2. #2
    SOH-CM-2023
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Age
    65
    Posts
    1,232
    Blog Entries
    1
    I see your point, but it is very difficult to give a final judgment since we are missing motion cues which, I think, are very important with ground handling. Also, some pilots may use a combination of brakes and rudder at very low speeds (rudder can be surprisingly effective due to propwash) and decreasing brake input as speed builds up. What strikes me in both simulators that planes are very ‘slippery’. You can have quite large slipping angles on the ground without the plane tipping over.

  3. #3
    I think the DCS Spitfire is incredibly good and it's been said by "Real" tail dragger Piliots to be very realistic ground physics,You have to do a "Rudder Dance" to keep her straight and level on take off.I do not know enough about IL*2 Ground physics to comment.

    Patrick

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Phantom88 View Post
    I think the DCS Spitfire is incredibly good and it's been said by "Real" tail dragger Piliots to be very realistic ground physics,You have to do a "Rudder Dance" to keep her straight and level on take off.I do not know enough about IL*2 Ground physics to comment.
    Hey Patrick ! You around here :-)

    Yes, me neither... and I agree that they both share good aspects of modelling, and since I've never even by close flew such a type of aircraft, how can I say which one is correct ?

    I tend to believe myself that DCS is more "perfect" in the details put into the characterization of the various aircraft, but for instance all feel as if they are too light while on ground. A small burst of power and they're moving, loosely... I find the inertia in IL-2 ground physics more believable. It's like looking at those X-Plane videos ( to bring yet another sim to the discussion ) where we see a landing or takeoff in an airliner, like an A320, and it snails along the runway madly in such a way that it it was the case IRL, the PAX would really feel dizzy...

    But regarding the "rudder dance", as I have actually posted at some thread in the ED forums, indeed it is much more plausible in DCS, both in the Spit, and in the 109s if you try to take off tailwheel unlocked...

    BTW, Patrick, if you can, give a try to that F4-U recently updated for X-Plane 11 ! I really like it, and even ported the landing gear damping constants into the MDLAG 109s, to make them more controllable on ground :-)
    Hey you chicks, flying bricks! Come fly gliders !!! Be outsiders...

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •