New aircraft

1st Official Post

    What sort of new aircraft would people like to see introduced to AF2. I personally would like to see some regional jets and turbo props (ATRs, Q800, BAE 146 etc) or some classic airliners (HS748, BAC 1-11, trident, comet, tristar Concorde etc).

    As much as I am looking forward to the new P-38, I am not overly bothered by more military aircraft unless there are missions or combat mode. Feel free to model an English Electric Lightning or Avro Vulcan though!

    Is there any way that FSX or xplane models can be ported to AF on iOS or if users can design and share aircraft to promote a community or aircraft modellers?

    Well, I love to fly sinlge-seat fighters from WWII (I don't care a combat mode is supplied or not). With any new sim the first thing I do is fly the P-51, Spitfire, Corsair, and P-38 (if they are available), and if they all handle the same I know it is a low quality sim.

    My judgment is that the AFS Corsair is very accurately implemented. Hopefully, any new WWII birds that are added will have similar quality in the flight dynamics, exterior views, and cockpit layout. I know it is tremendously difficult and time consuming to develop high-quality sim-aircraft, so I am fine with them being IAP add-ons like the Corsair.

    I would also like to see some ultra-light aircraft modeled. AFS does such a great job with soaring planes I am sure an ultralight implementation would be terrific too. This also would likely be an IAP item.

    Best,

    Adak47

    The Aerofly FS iPad/iPod Corsair is exceptional, a joy. The Aerofly 2 iPad/iPod Corsair is uncontrolable and shockingly unfit for use. How did it get past any sort of checks before being offered as an in-app purchase? A fix is promised. I am posting this because you seem to be describing the PC/Mac version in the iPad/iPod section and the "2" iPad/iPod Corsair is nothing like what you describe.

    Quote from Overloaded

    I am posting this because you seem to be describing the PC/Mac version in the iPad/iPod section and the "2" iPad/iPod Corsair is nothing like what you describe.

    Yes, that is all I have access to. But if I get a mobile device, I want it to be able to run the Corsair and other IAP's as well as they work in Aerofly FS. I had no reason to suspect this would be a problem. Sorry to hear it is. Keep us posted on whether the coming "fix" solves the problem or not.

    Great timing. I actually just bought the Corsair last night. It's impossible to take off without going off the side the runway. It's also ungainly when approaching the runway with full flaps although I'm treating all this as a challenge at the moment.

    • Official Post

    Hi,

    first: I have no iPad to test it myself. I am waiting for the next PC version...

    you need to counter the torque of that huge prop with ailerons and use the rudder to stay on the center line. For the first attempts make sure the wind is coming from the front.

    For the landing a good headwind can help a lot. Use the rudder once you touched down. You'll need more rudder input because the prop wash is less than it is on take off.

    Its all a matter of doing it over and over again.

    Good luck,
    Jan

    Hi JetPack, IPACS have admitted that it has problems and will fix it with one of the updates. It is not a user competency issue, it is genuinely aweful. If you can try the mobile Aerofly 2 (mobile Aerofly FS is great) version you might agree.
    For more detail see my 23rd December post.

    I have now managed to take off in the Corsair while staying on the runway and I have also landed safely but it is a frustrating plane in general. On take off, add soon as you throttle up, you need hard right rudder before you start moving and you can just get up to take off speed before drifting off the runway. On landing, you need to be careful with approach speed as a tiny drop in speed sends the Corsair into a nose dive even though the airspeed is well in the green.

    I also discovered another bug when testing out take offs with the Corsair. If you crash on full throttle, you are back on the runway ready for take off with full throttle but you plane is stationary. You need to manipulate the throttle slider to get the plane moving.

    Quote from donka

    I have now managed to take off in the Corsair while staying on the runway and I have also landed safely but it is a frustrating plane in general. On take off, add soon as you throttle up, you need hard right rudder before you start moving and you can just get up to take off speed before drifting off the runway.

    My reaction to taking off in the Corsair the first (several) times was the same as yours -- it veered sharply to the left and it was very difficult to maintain directional control, with lots of swerving back and forth. The same on the ground roll following landing -- a pronounced tendency to swerve left and right with the smallest control inputs, especially as you lose airspeed. Finally, on take-off or landing excessive nose-up attitude at or near stall speed produces a marked left-wing drop.

    As described by Vought Corsair test pilot Boone Guyton in his book "Whistling Death" (1994), all of these quirks are characteristic of the real F4-U. The left wing drop is one of the reasons the Corsair was coined the "ensign killer" -- due to the many carrier landing accidents by inexperienced pilots. In a comparison of the various WWII fighters, a Navy evaluator characterized the Corsair as the "greatest ground-loop aircraft" of all time. So part of the ritual in learning to fly the Corsair is to become intimately familiar with these defects and compensate for them through training, just as Jan explains.

    With the Piper Cub you get the same pull to the left on take-off, but it is very tiny because the small engine produces much less torque.

    All this said, it is possible the Corsair implementation on iOS devices is flawed in some way. I am just saying that even when this is fixed you will have to deal with the issues noted in my 1st paragraph because the AFS Corsair is modeled very accurately, warts and all.

    Enjoy the Corsair -- it is a terrific aircraft!

    Adak47

    The problem in the "2" version is fundamental crippling of the controls. In what I presume is some sort of dreadful landing/take off mode, on the ground the physical movement of the rudder and elevator is reduced to almost nothing, it can be seen in external view on take off. When landing the elevator is ineffective, if it moves it does nothing, there is no control authority available. Once "landed" the "2" waffles on for ages at low speed with the tail magically held up despite full aft stick! The minimum speed to be able to keep the nose from dropping on a full flap approach with a tiny control reserve for a flare is 125 kt, that is with nearly full aft stick. The magic floating tail will not go down above 66 kt, do the PC/Mac people have to put up with that? The mobile "FS" version handles well and is probably similar to the PC/Mac version, I don't know as I haven't got the PC version yet. A forum member who cannot control the "2" version Corsair is not a rubbish flyer, the "2" Corsair is at fault. See my post 23rd December.

    Full aft stick at 110 kt, rate of descent rapidly going past -3000 feet/minute. Out of control.

    Quote from Overloaded

    The minimum speed to be able to keep the nose from dropping on a full flap approach with a tiny control reserve for a flare is 125 kt, that is with nearly full aft stick.

    This is not the case with the Aerofly FS desktop Corsair. I routinely land with full flaps at about 71 kts, which is a tad above the stall. Take a look here:

    http://youtu.be/BXUVQdipIgA

    Adak47

    Very nice, your you tube notes are spot on, for inside the cockpit I use the top right corner of the three switches on top of the coaming as a reference and try to rotate the (Aerofly FS mobile) plane so that the horizon reaches the corner just as the wheels touch, too fast and they won't.
    Have you tried wheeler landings? You need to be a little above the stall allowing enough time to level the plane to almost level flight so that the bounce when the main wheels touch is minimal. Cockpit view would be good and would allow the tail to be held up until the speed had bled off to below the stall, with only very minimal braking of course.

    Quote from Overloaded

    Very nice, your you tube notes are spot on

    Thanks, I appreciate the feedback.

    Quote

    Have you tried wheeler landings? You need to be a little above the stall allowing enough time to level the plane to almost level flight so that the bounce when the main wheels touch is minimal. Cockpit view would be good and would allow the tail to be held up until the speed had bled off to below the stall, with only very minimal braking of course.

    Wheel landings should be easier than 3-point landings, but I have had difficulty doing them without skipping. I will try your method and see if I can make it work. Thanks for the tip!

    It does skip a little but if the bounce is small enough a hint of forward stick kills it off, in real life the give of the tyres and oleos defines a semi level flight transition zone between first touch and significant force being sent up the landing gear. You are using a joystick or yolk?
    Depth to the runway is very hard to judge in a sim, I will try looking at the top display height indication and try it as a digital radio altimeter.

    The height display jumps in 10 feet increments, not a help. The wheeler is not hard if the rate of descent is almost nothing when the wheels touch, photo of first attempt today, a minute ago.

    Aerofly 'FS' Corsair (nice version).
    This can be done in the "2" at twice the proper speed, can't 3 point.
    PS look at the grooved concrete runway! That is why the Aerofly helicopter might be so sweet in low hover.

    Edited once, last by Overloaded: Noticed the grooves (February 15, 2015 at 2:58 PM).

    Quote from Overloaded

    It does skip a little but if the bounce is small enough a hint of forward stick kills it off, in real life the give of the tyres and oleos defines a semi level flight transition zone between first touch and significant force being sent up the landing gear. You are using a joystick or yolk? Depth to the runway is very hard to judge in a sim, I will try looking at the top display height indication and try it as a digital radio altimeter.

    I am using a mouse, which works fine for me. I've tried gamepads and joysticks and do not find them much better than the mouse as a controller. Of course, the mouse is not a self-centering device, but that doesn't bother me at all, and in fact it means I can easily make trim adjustments for pitch and bank by simply picking the mouse up, moving it in the required direction, and putting it down. I sure prefer that to using different sets of paired keys! It is much more intuitive. (I do use keys for the rudder trim, obviously.)

    From reading your posts, I am probably doing a little better than I thought since it is the little skips that I have been trying to kill. Wolfgang Langewiesche's classic book "Stick and Rudder" describes the proper technique for wheel landings on pp. 305-309. He notes first that the conventional method of landing fully stalled in a 3-point attitude is inherently dangerous. You basically take the aircraft to the edge of uncontrollability, let it fall in, and hope things will work out. The wheel landing, by contrast, puts the plane on the ground with minimum loss of controllability. You land at an airspeed well about the stall and then keep the aircraft in contact with the runway using forward stick pressure (just as you suggest). To avoid skipping, you "plaster" the wheels on the runway by letting the wheels make contact and then briskly applying forward stick pressure to keep it there. Through the ground roll you gradually ease off the forward stick pressure, but you keep the tail up as long as possible to maintain good visibility and directional control.

    Unfortunately many military pilots of WWII tail-dragger fighters considered wheel landings "sissy" because they were easier to do -- for use by pilots of doubtful piloting skill. But in the C-47 the wheel landing was the preferred method, as I recall.

    In any case, when I try to use Langewiesche's method in AFS one of two things usually happen: either I don't use enough forward stick on contact and the Corsair skips, or if I use enough it noses over. I think the AFS Corsair is programmed to be so sensitive to nosing over that it does so even with relatively small forward stick input. So the "plaster-it-on" method does not work very well with the AFS Corsair. But it should. For the aerodynamic reasoning, Langewiesche's book (McGraw-Hill, 1974) has a great drawing on p. 306 of why a slight tail-high attitude with the wheel landing keeps the aircraft on the ground even though it is well above stall speed. Indeed, nosing over is only a problem if you don't have enough speed when you plaster it on.

    I have been able to successfully make a smooth wheel landing with the proper (fuselage-parallel-to-the-ground) attitude, and without skipping, but it is very, very difficult. And it should be easier than the 3-point landing. Anyway, if I get around to it, I will make a video of a reasonably decent wheel-landing with the touchdown being viewed from the side like your screen shots. But I need more practice!

    Your point about the oleo and tire pressure damping of the tendency to skip is excellent -- AFS does not seem to model that, as there is no evidence of oleo compression or tire-deformation from a close-up side view of the landing.

    This has been an interesting discussion, Overloaded.

    Adak47

    P.S. Did you ever notice that in the TV series Baa Baa Black Sheep the Corsairs nearly always used wheel landings? They were usually somewhat tail low, as if in a compromise 3-point/wheel landing.

    Good read there, I saw video of Corsairs landing like that on what looked like a jungle strip, they looked like as if they were doing a slower approach short field landing. There is an impressive you tube video called DC 3 short field landing where it was planted hard as you describe and held nose down to kill lift so that the weight was on the wheels for braking.
    An old wartime training video shows a Corsair demonstrating a full flaps power cut 3 pointer to catch wires, that would rely on the undercarriage absorbing the shock. The normal landing was a 30 degree flap tail high wheeler method.
    In a sim one of the biggest failings is the lack of a sense of closeness to the ground in landings, a flare, plant or 3 pointer is often not quite at the height that had been judged, a mix of peripheral vision, real world level of detail and 3D vision being missed. A true full greaser landing in a sim is always a mild surprise due to this ambiguity, wheeler landing suffers more from this as a nose-wheel flare and 3 point hold-off settle themselves but a wheeler almost flat glide angle arrival needs to be fairly inch perfect.
    The mobile FS Corsair oleos do compress but this might not mean realistic shock absorbtion especially in a carrier aircraft model.