Aeroplane Heaven DH98 B Mk IV Mosquito - Released!

Version 1.0.2 has been released.

v1.0.2

- Yellow blur ring added to the blurred prop

- Pips added to the AHI instrument.

- Combustion check for flames should the hush kit be removed.

- Kohlsman scale added to altimeter

- Radiator controls have been recoded to affect temperatures more accurately.

- Ground handling has been changed to be a little more forgiving on the ground.



- There is also a bonus livery in the main package (e.g. not optional) that is of the prototype livery as found at that museum. This isnt entirely the same as the museum version as the museum is using later model merlin engines.


Ground handling a little more forgiving? She is already way too docile with the unrealistic steering tailwheel. No trouble at all even with a crosswind. however with the non-steering mod and same more yaw-

According to the Haynes Mosquito manual:

Take off.jpg

However with the well known non-steering free castoring mod and some more Empty_weight_yaw_MOI the Mossie becomes the beast she should be. Tricky but controllable with twin throttles and differential braking
 
ftl818 said:
Version 1.0.2 has been released.

v1.0.2

- Yellow blur ring added to the blurred prop

- Pips added to the AHI instrument.

- Combustion check for flames should the hush kit be removed.

- Kohlsman scale added to altimeter

- Radiator controls have been recoded to affect temperatures more accurately.

- Ground handling has been changed to be a little more forgiving on the ground.



- There is also a bonus livery in the main package (e.g. not optional) that is of the prototype livery as found at that museum. This isnt entirely the same as the museum version as the museum is using later model merlin engines.


Ground handling a little more forgiving? She is already way too docile with the unrealistic steering tailwheel. No trouble at all even with a crosswind. however with the non-steering mod and same more yaw-

According to the Haynes Mosquito manual:

View attachment 186621

However with the well known non-steering free castoring mod and some more Empty_weight_yaw_MOI the Mossie becomes the beast she should be. Tricky but controllable with twin throttles and differential braking
Click to expand...
The ground contact model was updated to the "new" model. Previously, it was impossible to steer with brakes and a castoring tailwheel, without ground looping. It is now possible. Also, the P factor was restored back to 100%.
 
Folks who have flown real planes know just how much you're missing in a simulator by having zero environmental/momentum feedback. Wanting extreme levels of "numbers" realism while not accounting for those missing items is why IL-2 was such as sh17sh0w -- WW2 would have been won on the ground because all the pilots would have been dead if the stall/torque/other characteristics of real planes had been as hard to deal with as the planes in that sim.

IRL, if you are taking off in a Mosquito, you have a 180-degree view around you giving you instant, surrounding visual indicators, and more importantly, you instantly FEEL a plane starting to yaw due to torque and can instinctively compensate by seeing how that feel changes as you react. VR can address that initial problem slightly (but it's not the same as looking out a real cockpit window at the real world), but sims will never fully replicate that feel. When I flew a full-scale 737 simulator on hydraulics at FlightSafety it managed to capture a lot of the physical feedback, but that was a 30-foot-tall multi-million-dollar installation.

Given the lack of this real-world feedback, toning down the reactions in the sim somewhat while still providing you enough torque/steering/etc requirement to make sure you account for it is the perfect balance of immersion and not making it harder than real life.

TL;DR: I'm glad AH took the approach it did. It's not at odds with the Haynes manual because the Haynes manual is describing flying in the real world. Toning some of this down to basically give a boost/assist to what would be your real-world reactions makes simulation closer to the real flying experience, not farther.
 
Actually, looking at the zip, the flight model didn't make it into the 1.0.2 build for some reason. So, its still the old ground contact model ( for now )

If you want to make the edit yourself to try it, in the flight model config, flight tuning section, comment out the 2 "old" lines and add the "new" stuff.

;ground_high_speed_steeringwheel_static_friction_scalar = 1.0
;ground_high_speed_otherwheel_static_friction_scalar = 0.4

ground_new_contact_model_gear_flex = 0.0
ground_new_contact_model_gear_flex_damping = 0.0
ground_new_contact_model_rolling_stickyness = 0.01
ground_new_contact_model_up_to_speed_lateral = 250
ground_new_contact_model_up_to_speed_lateral_steering = 250
ground_new_contact_model_up_to_speed_longitudinal = 250

You can also change the P factor back to 1.0, without any ill effects

p_factor_on_yaw = 1.0
 
Last edited:
I think the ground_high_speed_otherwheel_static_friction_scalar = 0.4 was changed to 0.5.

Any recommendations for a more realistic (severe) swing effect? I increased the p_factor but it did not change much.
 
DennyA said:
Folks who have flown real planes know just how much you're missing in a simulator by having zero environmental/momentum feedback. Wanting extreme levels of "numbers" realism while not accounting for those missing items is why IL-2 was such as sh17sh0w -- WW2 would have been won on the ground because all the pilots would have been dead if the stall/torque/other characteristics of real planes had been as hard to deal with as the planes in that sim.

IRL, if you are taking off in a Mosquito, you have a 180-degree view around you giving you instant, surrounding visual indicators, and more importantly, you instantly FEEL a plane starting to yaw due to torque and can instinctively compensate by seeing how that feel changes as you react. VR can address that initial problem slightly (but it's not the same as looking out a real cockpit window at the real world), but sims will never fully replicate that feel. When I flew a full-scale 737 simulator on hydraulics at FlightSafety it managed to capture a lot of the physical feedback, but that was a 30-foot-tall multi-million-dollar installation.
Click to expand...
I would strongly recommend using track-IR, it adds a lot of immersion on the sim in every aircraft and gets your experience a lot closer to IRL flying. I scan the cockpit and outside in a repeated cycle like I do while real world flying. Deviation from the flight path during take-off is easily and immediately recognized when you look far in the distance. That's what I got instructed real world. Look far ahead and mostly outside, just quick scans of the instruments. In the Mossie during landing it is speed in the cockpit and position of the horizon in forward view (attitude). Height quickly at 1200 and 700 or 1000 ft (VFR circuit altitudes in the Netherlands) at the altimeter but mostly estimation from looking outside, position along the runway and turning base and final from side view . The 737 is meant to be flow mostly IFR from instruments, not a good comparison in terms of inertia, position above ground and visibilty. In terms of Mossie behaviour, nor are the aircraft I flew IRL, like the ASK13, ASK21 and ASK23 (aerobatics), LS4, Ka7, Ka6E, DG505, Ka7, Scheibe S25 (taildragger) and C150. Malden gilderfield and EHHV.

But in the beginning it is the basic flightmodel of MSFS and Xplane that somehow does not simulate true taildragger behaviour and if a developer stick to that their aircraft will not behave as they should. FlyingIrons went a different path with their Spitfire, Me109, FW190 and Hellcat. Flying their aircraft is a very different experience. But certainly not everybodies cup of tea.

AH made a excellent beautifull Moquito and made it flyable for the average sim pilot with limited experience. The logical choice and fully understandable but some want more....
 
Last edited:
DennyA said:
Folks who have flown real planes know just how much you're missing in a simulator by having zero environmental/momentum feedback. Wanting extreme levels of "numbers" realism while not accounting for those missing items is why IL-2 was such as sh17sh0w -- WW2 would have been won on the ground because all the pilots would have been dead if the stall/torque/other characteristics of real planes had been as hard to deal with as the planes in that sim.

IRL, if you are taking off in a Mosquito, you have a 180-degree view around you giving you instant, surrounding visual indicators, and more importantly, you instantly FEEL a plane starting to yaw due to torque and can instinctively compensate by seeing how that feel changes as you react. VR can address that initial problem slightly (but it's not the same as looking out a real cockpit window at the real world), but sims will never fully replicate that feel. When I flew a full-scale 737 simulator on hydraulics at FlightSafety it managed to capture a lot of the physical feedback, but that was a 30-foot-tall multi-million-dollar installation.

Given the lack of this real-world feedback, toning down the reactions in the sim somewhat while still providing you enough torque/steering/etc requirement to make sure you account for it is the perfect balance of immersion and not making it harder than real life.

TL;DR: I'm glad AH took the approach it did. It's not at odds with the Haynes manual because the Haynes manual is describing flying in the real world. Toning some of this down to basically give a boost/assist to what would be your real-world reactions makes simulation closer to the real flying experience, not farther.
Click to expand...
so much is captured in these flight sims, but it's true that much of what makes flying an aircraft 'real' just can't be (to date anyway) managed by current flight sim programming. We're left with approximations and calculations often made by folks who have never flown, or hold any degree in aerodynamics, physics, or airframe and propulsion certification. These sims are good for what they are - a way for a guy to sit at a desk and enjoy the visuals and processes of flying an aircraft of virtually any type for not a ton of money. But the chasm of things these sims can't do keeps me from spending too much on peripherals. I got a twisty stick and TiR5 because that's all I can justify given the reality check.
 
ftl818 said:
I think the ground_high_speed_otherwheel_static_friction_scalar = 0.4 was changed to 0.5.

Any recommendations for a more realistic (severe) swing effect? I increased the p_factor but it did not change much.
Click to expand...
You could try moving both engines to the right about a foot or two, in the engines config. Except for the steerable tailwheel by default, nothing has been compromised. I would say it is practically impossible to accurately model slipstream around an airframe in these simulators at 30 or 60 fps. You could maybe get 1 frame / hour, or something with some serious calculations that might get close. It is possible to apply momentum to the slipstream behind the propeller ( call it a stream tube ), both in the stream direction and in rotation. However, that's about it. In the case of an airplane like the Mosquito, neither the fuselage or vertical tail is in the stream tube of either engine. So, nearly impossible to model it without some kind of hack. The propwash seems to be at Cessna levels anyway, even for high powered airplanes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top