@SkyJayTheFirst
Yes, for now.
Not until you know how exactly aoa work both irl and in SP and how rudders can control pitch.
You know... just to not over-complicate things.
@SkyJayTheFirst
Angle of slip in the code (in this version) is just use to determine whether the plane go forward or backward, it didn't contribute to any stability.
You'll need more code that involve angle of slip to really make it work as stabilization.
I think you should learn more about what angle of slip and angle of attack do, and the problem will sort itself out.
I want this to be your Eureka moment lol.
Hint:
Cobra is high angle of attack.
Angle of attack is not in yaw axis.
@SkyJayTheFirst
That's what I really mean in the first comment.
So I think you got some terminology mixed up.
therefore I wanted it to spin smoothly, yaw-wise.
So I think what is the closest to your description is flat-spin.
And you also want the plane to side slip freely by pointing rudders into the wind so it'll provide minimal yaw stability.
The thing is angle of attack has nothing to do with this, what you need is angle of slip which is angle of attack but for yaw.
I think it's flight control is pretty much on point now.
And I've noticed the rudder react to aoa which will force the plane to yaw to the right when doing cobra or other high aoa maneuver.
One question is what you intended to do with aoa code in rudders?
@CharlieLol
The entire plane shake because of wing flutter so those control surfaces try to stabilize the plane.
If you ever been in a plane flying through turbulence, you'll see control surfaces shaking just like this.
@SkyJayTheFirst
So I generally tell people to try putting CoM in front of CoL but not far apart, enough to stall but not enough to flip.
All in all, CoM is just a rough idea because the exact position is depend on many other factor, you just need to test it out until you find what work best for that particular plane.
For example, Pixy has many parts at the rear (there also high drag airbrake) so drag at the rear will be huge too, that's what keep the plane stable, to help it to stall easily, CoM will have to be in the rear.
In other word, CoL in the builder is true for normal flight but at high aoa it's not the same anymore.
And for my SU-57, I made it with some stability in mind, like irl SU-27 that can do Cobra without tvc, that's mean it's unstable enough to do cobra but stable enough to recover.
Assuming I wanted to keep the center of mass and lift in the same spot with the Star Raven, how would I go about tuning the AoA characteristics, if inserting angle-of-attack controls isn't foolproof?
I guess you'll have to increase drag at the rear (maybe by xml), it's not advisable because it's just like moving CoL backward but without moving blue circle in editor.
But again, technically it is just moving CoL with extra step so the final answer is NO.
@SkyJayTheFirst
In a way, yes.
I'd rewrite that to just "the plane will go as long as the command will go, it'll stop if there is no command."
For the fix, I've already answered it in F-44-B1-Star-Raven but I'll just summarize it.
Make CoM go forward or CoL go backward will eliminate the instability, bigger elevators will help a lot too.
In my opinion, plane this size should have bigger elevators.
Maybe really big V-tail?
idk, it's you to decide.
@SkyJayTheFirst
I'm not quite sure if your "flipping" is difference from my "flipping", just describe exactly how you get my both plane to "jerking around violently at high angle of attacks".
I think we are missing something here.
And for how I reproduce the flip it your plane, I get speed up to about 700-800 km/h IAS and then activate AG1 (so it'll flip easier) and pitch up for a very short time, the plane will flip and continue flipping even though I'm not touching the control and will stop when the nose is pointing backward (which is it's balance point) like the backward dart analogy I described earlier.
If you play around model planes so much like me you'll "feel" the point of no return (while pitching) in the scenario I said.
Control inversion problem is gone.
Now I think you fully understand about () and the flow of math in code.
Good job.
Problem with flipping at high speed high aoa is still there unfortunately, hope you'll fix it soon.
And about main landing gear position, it usually a bit behind CoM on most if not all plane, it'll help in takeoff and landing a lot.
@SkyJayTheFirst
Angle of slip is angle of attack side way, I'm not sure what else you do with angle of slip beside determining whether the plane is flying backward or not.
@SkyJayTheFirst
(abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1) will output 1 if flying normally and output -1 if flying backward.
But normally, in the code, if there is no () the code will do the * and / first and do + and - later.
So 3 + 2 * 2 will be 7 instead of 10 because 2*2 first then add to 3 later.
But if you use () like (3 + 2) * 2 to control the flow, it'll output 10.
Same goes for your code, the (abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1) is lost somewhere so it does not invert the entire code.
If not counting (abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1), all of the code was written for forward flight only, the code will have negative effect when fly backward.
And angle of attack need to be extensively tuned, so it'll not be a smooth ride at first but there is always a way.
For my code I use angle of attack but ignore it sometimes.
Fly better, landing gear and autoaim problems are gone.
But problems I've pointed out previously still existed but will not occur unless I'm really looking for it which I guess is the best that simple code can offer.
So I've dig deeper and found some serious flaws.
- Control inversion for flying backward is bugged, there are "(abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1)" but it need to be final multiplier to work, for now it just multiply to the number next to it. "()" play a big part in all of programming code.
- I tried increased elevators size and the flip is pretty much gone, the plane have more controlling power and gain some stability so it'll not flip.
I guess your code need new parameter to play with, "AngleOfAttack".
@SkyJayTheFirst
If that's the case, it's alright.
But because there are so many things that affect performance, CoM and CoL don't tell the whole story, just a rough idea.
@SkyJayTheFirst
I guess Morgan's pitching power is not enough to flip it at high speed.
Not to mention CoM shift when landing gear is retracted.
I'd say, go with CoM and CoL that suit the need, not just blindly copy from another plane.
@SkyJayTheFirst
I guess you'll need to drill more holes into the body lol.
And for the instability, it happen regardless of setting, when aoa is high enough and speed is high enough but yes, it do happen easier with AG1 on.
Just try grabbing a dart by the tip and try to balance it with it's tail into the wind, you can keep it straight but when the angle is too much the dart will quickly flip.
That's exactly what happen to the plane.
The plane CoM and CoL is like a dart flying backward.
@SkyJayTheFirst
Just to be clear, I'm not the one who invented the original targeting code by any mean but I just reversed engineered it to be more accurate.
After a quick look I've noticed that the code is working fine for gun with muzzle velocity of 1200m/s but your guns have muzzle velocity of 800m/s so no wonder it miss but not miss by a lot.
Just change all "1200" in the code to "800" or change muzzle velocity to 1200.
Other things I've noticed it CoM and CoL position makes this jet unstable, yes it fly nice but high aoa at high speed will flip the plane violently like trying to throw a dart tail first, this could be fixed by powerful control surfaces. (relying on tvc too much is not advisable)
And please please please... 🙏🙏🙏
make landing gears bigger, I got tail-strike on takeoff and belly landing while gears are deployed.
@AVERAGEAVIATIONENJOYER
This is pretty smooth actually.
I guess there are no problems with the code but PID need to be tuned a bit, D in PID is crucial because it'll smooth out the control.
The problem is "- 0.45* Throttle" at the end of tvc code, this is to counter the pitch up movement from thrust line below CoM but it's wrong way, try " + 0.45*Throttle" instead.
I saw someone using gauge for spinning radar, it's interesting so I think you might want to look into it.
I don't have link but I have some idea how it work.
They removed trim, removed gauge face, removed gauge back so all that left is just needle and they put really high number (such as "Time" value in FT) as input so the needle spin continuously.
@SkyJayTheFirst
Too bad F-14 don't have tvc, if it does the remaining engine can correct for yaw by angling outward, the plane won't be spinning easily but it'll fly with some side slip and that can be recreated with any of my plane.
But I guess that's your doctrine, I just don't like that particular tradeoff.
And by stall prevention, I really mean the plane will stall where it shouldn't have to, when pulling hard at not so low speed.
For clarification, I'm not talking PSM mode because in PSM mode we want and we tell the plane to stall.
Stall can occur by exceeded critical aoa or low air speed, your plane stall at high aoa whereas it could be prevented by FT.
In my book, the plane should stall only at low speed where wings can't produce enough lift to keep up and/or not enough force from both control surfaces and tvc to make it.
"In a Raptor, I could put my kid in there and he can do this all day (he violently pulling the stick around) at whatever speed, and nothing bad will happen to the airplane."
-Randy "Laz" Gordon-
@SkyJayTheFirst
Certainly, yes I can, I just flip the plane by pitch instead of yaw.
I think more engine separation would increase tvc roll authority as well.
I guess you have a solid idea how to PSM and now it's time to dig in more about angle of attack and how to prevent stalling.
Rival?
Pff...
I'd be your student if this plane come out just a year sooner lol.
Seriously, this fly surprisingly smooth for how simple the FT code is.
Also slow maneuver help in smoothness a lot as well.
And for non PSM flight, there are a lot to be improve as well.
@Zaineman
lol
That's pretty much sums up your research lol, but I have my theory too, I think it's because of flight computer was attached so the game can't decide what to detach as a missile.
And I just can't tell if you have OCD or not lol, neither I can tell myself if I had OCD.
Hmmm....
If the plane is a giant missile, is there a way to lock and launch itself to the target?
Asking for a friend.
Edit : Also cockpit looks nice, roomy and comfy, nice job.
@YY
Thanks.
That's mean a lot coming from you.
Btw have you try this jet?
It handle backward flying a lot better than the Felon you flown in that video.
@SkyJayTheFirst
That all make sense now, at air speed high enough the plane will stabilize itself either because of a little bit of pitch stability it has or by drag from rudders. (I assume you get rudders to present minimal cross section to the wind to minimize drag but it still there)
@SkyJayTheFirst
I really mean Mister Blue lol.
So your rudder configuration is like the Felon or the Wyvern?
If it like the Felon, it'll need to point into the air stream to present minimal drag to reduce yaw stability as much as possible.
And for Wyvern, it'll become horizontal stabilizer instead so no directional stability.
But I guess to truly fly backward, CoM must be in the same position as CoL so the plane won't stabilized itself in anyway.
@SkyJayTheFirst
Yaw is not the most powerful control in my design and in real life so it would not be surprise if yaw can't make the plane slip at extreme angle.
Felon, Strike Wyvern and Morgan Pixy all have the same issues because of fixed vertical stabilizer, they prevent the plane to slip freely but only Strike Wyvern can fold vertical stabilizer down to make it slip freely.
Also Orange Strike Wyvern have some issue with NACAPROP wings which prevent it from side slipping at high speed even though vertical stabilizer are folded, this issue was fixed in latest Strike Wyvern.
@Cir8
+1Do this
Nice.
+1PSM work well too.
@Khanhlam @Zaineman
+1What can I say, this plane really can do PSM, with some difficulties due to no FT code but it does lol.
@TRD
+1I'll be limiting the part count to 1000.
The HUD is going to change a lot, in the pic is just a placeholder.
@Khanhlam
+1There is no magic button, you need to play around with input and/or those speed and range of motion slider.
@Khanhlam
+1Just find the rotator and disable it.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Yes, for now.
Not until you know how exactly aoa work both irl and in SP and how rudders can control pitch.
You know... just to not over-complicate things.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Angle of slip in the code (in this version) is just use to determine whether the plane go forward or backward, it didn't contribute to any stability.
You'll need more code that involve angle of slip to really make it work as stabilization.
I think you should learn more about what angle of slip and angle of attack do, and the problem will sort itself out.
I want this to be your Eureka moment lol.
Hint:
Cobra is high angle of attack.
Angle of attack is not in yaw axis.
Left me speechless in a lot of ways I guess.
+1But hey, at least it fly well.
@SkyJayTheFirst
That's what I really mean in the first comment.
So I think you got some terminology mixed up.
So I think what is the closest to your description is flat-spin.
+1And you also want the plane to side slip freely by pointing rudders into the wind so it'll provide minimal yaw stability.
The thing is angle of attack has nothing to do with this, what you need is angle of slip which is angle of attack but for yaw.
I think it's flight control is pretty much on point now.
+1And I've noticed the rudder react to aoa which will force the plane to yaw to the right when doing cobra or other high aoa maneuver.
One question is what you intended to do with aoa code in rudders?
@Lifewald
+1Oh really?
I'm so glad to hear that.
Yaw feel weird to me.
+1And stall recovery feels a bit "unnatural".
But it fly well anyway.
@CharlieLol
+1The entire plane shake because of wing flutter so those control surfaces try to stabilize the plane.
If you ever been in a plane flying through turbulence, you'll see control surfaces shaking just like this.
Please don't mind this comment, xNotDumb requested the T in difference post so I just want to keep it in the same post to not miss out.
+1@SkyJayTheFirst
+1np!
@SkyJayTheFirst
So I generally tell people to try putting CoM in front of CoL but not far apart, enough to stall but not enough to flip.
All in all, CoM is just a rough idea because the exact position is depend on many other factor, you just need to test it out until you find what work best for that particular plane.
For example, Pixy has many parts at the rear (there also high drag airbrake) so drag at the rear will be huge too, that's what keep the plane stable, to help it to stall easily, CoM will have to be in the rear.
In other word, CoL in the builder is true for normal flight but at high aoa it's not the same anymore.
And for my SU-57, I made it with some stability in mind, like irl SU-27 that can do Cobra without tvc, that's mean it's unstable enough to do cobra but stable enough to recover.
I guess you'll have to increase drag at the rear (maybe by xml), it's not advisable because it's just like moving CoL backward but without moving blue circle in editor.
+1But again, technically it is just moving CoL with extra step so the final answer is NO.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Also, angle of attack is use to prevent stall so I guess it could work but it'll not completely eliminate the problem.
Here is how angle of attack is use, it just make unstable plane fly, and yes...PSM plane is unstable but not to a degree of a dart flying backward.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1In a way, yes.
I'd rewrite that to just "the plane will go as long as the command will go, it'll stop if there is no command."
For the fix, I've already answered it in F-44-B1-Star-Raven but I'll just summarize it.
Make CoM go forward or CoL go backward will eliminate the instability, bigger elevators will help a lot too.
In my opinion, plane this size should have bigger elevators.
Maybe really big V-tail?
idk, it's you to decide.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1I'm not quite sure if your "flipping" is difference from my "flipping", just describe exactly how you get my both plane to "jerking around violently at high angle of attacks".
I think we are missing something here.
And for how I reproduce the flip it your plane, I get speed up to about 700-800 km/h IAS and then activate AG1 (so it'll flip easier) and pitch up for a very short time, the plane will flip and continue flipping even though I'm not touching the control and will stop when the nose is pointing backward (which is it's balance point) like the backward dart analogy I described earlier.
If you play around model planes so much like me you'll "feel" the point of no return (while pitching) in the scenario I said.
Control inversion problem is gone.
+1Now I think you fully understand about () and the flow of math in code.
Good job.
Problem with flipping at high speed high aoa is still there unfortunately, hope you'll fix it soon.
And about main landing gear position, it usually a bit behind CoM on most if not all plane, it'll help in takeoff and landing a lot.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Angle of slip is angle of attack side way, I'm not sure what else you do with angle of slip beside determining whether the plane is flying backward or not.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Nice.
I'll test it when it come out.
Edit : You use AngleOfAttack in that upcoming version? That's quick.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Ok.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1(abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1) will output 1 if flying normally and output -1 if flying backward.
But normally, in the code, if there is no () the code will do the * and / first and do + and - later.
So 3 + 2 * 2 will be 7 instead of 10 because 2*2 first then add to 3 later.
But if you use () like (3 + 2) * 2 to control the flow, it'll output 10.
Same goes for your code, the (abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1) is lost somewhere so it does not invert the entire code.
If not counting (abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1), all of the code was written for forward flight only, the code will have negative effect when fly backward.
And angle of attack need to be extensively tuned, so it'll not be a smooth ride at first but there is always a way.
For my code I use angle of attack but ignore it sometimes.
Fly better, landing gear and autoaim problems are gone.
But problems I've pointed out previously still existed but will not occur unless I'm really looking for it which I guess is the best that simple code can offer.
So I've dig deeper and found some serious flaws.
- Control inversion for flying backward is bugged, there are "(abs(AngleOfSlip) > 45 ? -1 : 1)" but it need to be final multiplier to work, for now it just multiply to the number next to it. "()" play a big part in all of programming code.
- I tried increased elevators size and the flip is pretty much gone, the plane have more controlling power and gain some stability so it'll not flip.
I guess your code need new parameter to play with, "AngleOfAttack".
+1@SkyJayTheFirst
+1If that's the case, it's alright.
But because there are so many things that affect performance, CoM and CoL don't tell the whole story, just a rough idea.
@Echostar
+1Do this
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1I guess Morgan's pitching power is not enough to flip it at high speed.
Not to mention CoM shift when landing gear is retracted.
I'd say, go with CoM and CoL that suit the need, not just blindly copy from another plane.
@SkyJayTheFirst
I guess you'll need to drill more holes into the body lol.
And for the instability, it happen regardless of setting, when aoa is high enough and speed is high enough but yes, it do happen easier with AG1 on.
Just try grabbing a dart by the tip and try to balance it with it's tail into the wind, you can keep it straight but when the angle is too much the dart will quickly flip.
That's exactly what happen to the plane.
+1The plane CoM and CoL is like a dart flying backward.
@Zaineman
+1Skyjay remind me of myself years ago, let's see how far he can go.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Just to be clear, I'm not the one who invented the original targeting code by any mean but I just reversed engineered it to be more accurate.
After a quick look I've noticed that the code is working fine for gun with muzzle velocity of 1200m/s but your guns have muzzle velocity of 800m/s so no wonder it miss but not miss by a lot.
Just change all "1200" in the code to "800" or change muzzle velocity to 1200.
Other things I've noticed it CoM and CoL position makes this jet unstable, yes it fly nice but high aoa at high speed will flip the plane violently like trying to throw a dart tail first, this could be fixed by powerful control surfaces. (relying on tvc too much is not advisable)
And please please please... 🙏🙏🙏
make landing gears bigger, I got tail-strike on takeoff and belly landing while gears are deployed.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Nice.
I'll be waiting.
You nailed feature after feature and I think eventually you'll be better than me.
@AVERAGEAVIATIONENJOYER
+1This is pretty smooth actually.
I guess there are no problems with the code but PID need to be tuned a bit, D in PID is crucial because it'll smooth out the control.
The problem is "- 0.45* Throttle" at the end of tvc code, this is to counter the pitch up movement from thrust line below CoM but it's wrong way, try " + 0.45*Throttle" instead.
I saw someone using gauge for spinning radar, it's interesting so I think you might want to look into it.
+1I don't have link but I have some idea how it work.
They removed trim, removed gauge face, removed gauge back so all that left is just needle and they put really high number (such as "Time" value in FT) as input so the needle spin continuously.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Yes.
More like only stall when absolutely no way to prevent it.
A good system will do something Randy "Laz" Gordon said.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Too bad F-14 don't have tvc, if it does the remaining engine can correct for yaw by angling outward, the plane won't be spinning easily but it'll fly with some side slip and that can be recreated with any of my plane.
But I guess that's your doctrine, I just don't like that particular tradeoff.
And by stall prevention, I really mean the plane will stall where it shouldn't have to, when pulling hard at not so low speed.
For clarification, I'm not talking PSM mode because in PSM mode we want and we tell the plane to stall.
Stall can occur by exceeded critical aoa or low air speed, your plane stall at high aoa whereas it could be prevented by FT.
In my book, the plane should stall only at low speed where wings can't produce enough lift to keep up and/or not enough force from both control surfaces and tvc to make it.
@Lake
+1There are indeed wing piece hidden in the leading edge extension, mimicking real life.
@Lake
+1No.
I can guide you step by step but I'm not going to make it for you.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Certainly, yes I can, I just flip the plane by pitch instead of yaw.
I think more engine separation would increase tvc roll authority as well.
I guess you have a solid idea how to PSM and now it's time to dig in more about angle of attack and how to prevent stalling.
Rival?
+1Pff...
I'd be your student if this plane come out just a year sooner lol.
Seriously, this fly surprisingly smooth for how simple the FT code is.
Also slow maneuver help in smoothness a lot as well.
And for non PSM flight, there are a lot to be improve as well.
@AVERAGEAVIATIONENJOYER
+1They called "integral", it's part of PID function I use to control the plane.
@Zaineman
+1lol
That's pretty much sums up your research lol, but I have my theory too, I think it's because of flight computer was attached so the game can't decide what to detach as a missile.
And I just can't tell if you have OCD or not lol, neither I can tell myself if I had OCD.
Hmmm....
+1If the plane is a giant missile, is there a way to lock and launch itself to the target?
Asking for a friend.
Edit : Also cockpit looks nice, roomy and comfy, nice job.
@YY
+1Thanks.
That's mean a lot coming from you.
Btw have you try this jet?
It handle backward flying a lot better than the Felon you flown in that video.
@KudaOni
+1lol
I did it and it's look weirdly anticlimactic.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1That all make sense now, at air speed high enough the plane will stabilize itself either because of a little bit of pitch stability it has or by drag from rudders. (I assume you get rudders to present minimal cross section to the wind to minimize drag but it still there)
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1I really mean Mister Blue lol.
So your rudder configuration is like the Felon or the Wyvern?
If it like the Felon, it'll need to point into the air stream to present minimal drag to reduce yaw stability as much as possible.
And for Wyvern, it'll become horizontal stabilizer instead so no directional stability.
But I guess to truly fly backward, CoM must be in the same position as CoL so the plane won't stabilized itself in anyway.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1Yaw is not the most powerful control in my design and in real life so it would not be surprise if yaw can't make the plane slip at extreme angle.
Felon, Strike Wyvern and Morgan Pixy all have the same issues because of fixed vertical stabilizer, they prevent the plane to slip freely but only Strike Wyvern can fold vertical stabilizer down to make it slip freely.
Also Orange Strike Wyvern have some issue with NACAPROP wings which prevent it from side slipping at high speed even though vertical stabilizer are folded, this issue was fixed in latest Strike Wyvern.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1That function I still can't figure out too.