cub footwork on rudder

[Oracle427]

.... Especially relevant as all beautiful/interesting/desirable planes usually are taildraggers

Amen!

[DHenriques_]

[quote="Dooga.... Especially relevant as all beautiful/interesting/desirable planes usually are taildraggers

Amen![/quote]

As an instructor I specialized in advanced tail wheel instruction in a range of airplanes from J3's to AT6's, Stearmans, and Pitts S2's. Loved the tail wheels but I have to admit there were a few airplanes with nose wheels that gave me a run for my money.
The T38 comes to mind as a nose wheel bird that had a "bite" waiting for you the instant you got a bit careless! )))
Dudley Henriques

[Dooga]

As an instructor I specialized in advanced tail wheel instruction in a range of airplanes from J3's to AT6's, Stearmans, and Pitts S2's. Loved the tail wheels but I have to admit there were a few airplanes with nose wheels that gave me a run for my money.
The T38 comes to mind as a nose wheel bird that had a "bite" waiting for you the instant you got a bit careless! )))
Dudley Henriques

You have time in a T-38? Niiice... My favorite jet, I'm a peaceful soul so I prefer trainers

What I would give for some Texan time... Still got access?

[DHenriques_]

As an instructor I specialized in advanced tail wheel instruction in a range of airplanes from J3's to AT6's, Stearmans, and Pitts S2's. Loved the tail wheels but I have to admit there were a few airplanes with nose wheels that gave me a run for my money.
The T38 comes to mind as a nose wheel bird that had a "bite" waiting for you the instant you got a bit careless! )))
Dudley Henriques

You have time in a T-38? Niiice... My favorite jet, I'm a peaceful soul so I prefer trainers

What I would give for some Texan time... Still got access?

Long ago retired.
If you ever want some T6 time and have a few bucks to spend I'll introduce you to some friends who operate a very good T6, TF-51 and L39 operation. T6 dual is a possibility.
DH

[AJ Brink]

Good day mr Henriques and Gents.
My name is AJ.

I also found the ground-handling a bit on the docile side. I have searched a variety of forums and stumbled upon this one (amongst others). No joy with any solutions provided.

So I have played with both the air file and config file making minor modifications and came up with what I consider to be a little less stable ground handling, requiring more rudder work. I also made the differential braking less sharp so that it can be used for steering.

Two questions now:
1) Any real-life J3 pilots willing to test-fly my mods (for feedback/suggestions) so that I know whether I am on the right track [you will need rudder pedals though]?
2) Am I allowed to make my mods available to members on this forum or best keep it to myself?

Regards
AJ

[Lewis - A2A]

Good day mr Henriques and Gents.
My name is AJ.

I also found the ground-handling a bit on the docile side. I have searched a variety of forums and stumbled upon this one (amongst others). No joy with any solutions provided.

So I have played with both the air file and config file making minor modifications and came up with what I consider to be a little less stable ground handling, requiring more rudder work. I also made the differential braking less sharp so that it can be used for steering.

Two questions now:
1) Any real-life J3 pilots willing to test-fly my mods (for feedback/suggestions) so that I know whether I am on the right track [you will need rudder pedals though]?
2) Am I allowed to make my mods available to members on this forum or best keep it to myself?

Regards
AJ

Hey Aj, best to start a new thread for your mods. Though be aware cfg work will invalidate the entire flight model, also worth remembering that Accu-sim aircraft works outside of the host sim (FSX) so the cfg's are set a specific way to enable the Accu-sim simulation engine to work correctly.

thanks,
Lewis

[Oracle427]

I haven't down a J3 for a couple of years but I'd like to give it a try.

[AJ Brink]

Thanx for your reply Lewis

I am hesitant to start a new thread, as I am not a developer. I am just responding to an existing problem mentioned above (and it seems on the net there are others out there who feel the same).
I have no intentions of trying to peddle mods - just trying to put heads together with you guys in order to get a more realistic ground-handling cub. Maybe someone else has already solved the problem? Or has some ideas or suggestions?
I remember previously swapping ideas with a very helpful guy called Napamule about modifying fsx taildraggers for ground-handling, but have lost his e-mail address...

Lewis, yes, I realise that things are a little more complex.
I do not have the Accu-sim add-on, so I do not know how this will be affected by making changes to the config file.
My primary changes are to the air-file, but I have made minor mods to the cfg file as well.
It took quite a bit of tweaking various aspects to ensure that the J3 flies well and I think it still flies ok.
I think I am on the right track(?)

I also wanted a Cub with a stronger engine, so I gave it a 100hp engine (comparable to legends cub - personal choice) but it is easy to change it back in the cfg file to 65hp.
I made the rudder a little less stable (yaw damping thrust) and adjusted the yaw moment thrust as well. For making sharper turns (as in RL) the stock differential brakes were too sharp and the plane would come to a halt when used (although I have rudder pedals i use the joystick button as brake while turning - not ideal but serves the purpose od simulating differential brakes).

Oracle 427, thanx for volunteering.
How do I go about sending them to you for testing?

AJ

[AJ Brink]

PS. What I propose is that whoever test-flies my mods simply back-up their original .air and .cfg files into a created folder (named "original") in their aircraft file.
That way we can test the mods without the accu-sim patch being affected permanently.

If it is then established that my adjusted flight model is more realistic, and somebody wants to actually use it, I can find ways to get around using my .cfg file (then rather use the patched accu-sim .cfg) and instead I will just mod the .air file to get similar results.

But first I need feedback whether I am going in the right direction with ground-handling....

AJ

[Lewis - A2A]

Hey AJ,

without Accu-sim you will not be getting the full real experience anyway, Accu-sim adds a whole heap of new physics for example.

thanks,
Lewis

[Oracle427]

I am running Accusim so I'm not sure what results I would get vs yours. I used a J3 with a clutched tailwheel. As I understand the A2A version does not represent this and is a fixed tailwheel. This makes it a little more "rigid" in ground handing. I do feel that there is a tiny bit of latency in the rudder response, but nothing that I'm overly concerned about. I'm more interested in seeing what has been done.

If you put it up on Dropbox I can pull the files.

[Lewis - A2A]

I am running Accusim so I'm not sure what results I would get vs yours.

Yes this is why I mention the Accu-sim part, Accu-sim takes up the realism by adding all manner of things including as mentioned whole new physics, not sure how a none Accu-sim file version would interact with the Accu-sim counterpart. Will be good experiment either-way

cheers,
Lewis

[AJ Brink]

Thanx Lewis

I struggled previously with trying to mod another plane (supercub) to do a brake-stand take-off, until I discovered how A2A's J3 does it effortless and nicely, so I shelved that project and bought the J3.

Now I just want the ground handling to improve a bit. It sounds as though Accusim would be my next step. But I am not sure if that is maybe what I am missing to give the J3 slightly less stability on the ground. I don't care much for bells and whistles - just as much realism as fsx and A2A can handle.
Before I go and get Accusim, or try and mod that, I would just like to see if I am on the right/wrong track with some suggestions for improvement.

Much obliged for your willingness to help Oracle 427.
Here is the link to my dropbox:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uk6o22eg7yw6 ... d5J_a?dl=0

Regards
AJ

[AJ Brink]

Another alternative pair added under mod3 folder of my dropbox: the tailwheel castors easier on this one...

[Oracle427]

I tried the non-mod3 one earlier and found it has a lot more adverse yaw, and too much in my opinion collection. Not that I trust my recollection very much at this point. It seems like I can get the nose to sweep 10 degrees (just a rough guess) to the left or right in cruise with max aileron input and that seems excessive. I think less than half that amount would be much closer to reality. I did practice turns without rudder and I remember that the nose would yaw a small amount opposite the turn and then slowly begin to yaw into the bank.

All the controls appear to be much more effective in addition to the rudder, I would say excessively so. The airplane feels much more nimble than I remember it should be. Perhaps a placebo effect.

I specifically remember that the rudder became rather ineffective at idle power and at approximately 20mph when the tail will begin to settle down shortly after doing a 2 point landing or after doing a fast taxi.

Aside from that, I like the way that the tailwheel will breakaway when taxing. That is closer to the handling in the one I used, though not quite the same as this version doesn't behave like it has a clutch.

I also get a strange buzzing sound that won't stop at full power. I noticed that the RPM will now reach red line with full power in a climb with the extra HP, so I guess I am hearing some sound related to the excessive RPM. I could not reach redline in the 85hp version that I flew unless I left full power in a level attitude.