Exciting take off runs...

[oldflyguy]

I agree this is one of the best if not the best model in it's class available to the XP community.  However, (LOL!) the take off run in this aircraft is over the top twitchy.  I'm an (ex) real world pilot with about 600 hours in a C182 (that's a lot of landings - always able to use the aircraft again) and a fairly experienced XP pilot since 2014 (I think) and the TBM has a mind of it's own on the take off run (no better in 11.30b3 by the way - although that's not important).  I've also seen this behavior while watching streamers use this model so it's not just my incompetence.  Even using the neat fine tuning to the axis' in beta 3 it's not possible to keep this "wandering" under control.  I use the Gladiator MkII and the T-Rudders - no issue with any other aircraft.  By the way a pilot friend allows me take off in his Lancair (he has two(!) - one is pressurized and retractable) occasionally and although it's more of a handful than a 182 I can still keep centerline with NORMAL rudder inputs.  Having said all of this and it's a lot let me finish by saying this is the only segment of flight that I find wanting with this model.  But I do believe the dev's need to address this...

[WaarEagle]

Well said!  For an aircraft that is perfect in so many ways... the twitchy ground handling sticks out like a sore thumb.  The 11.30 beta fixes a lot of the internal ground handling issues in X-Plane; but the TBM still handles very poorly even in the beta.  Making a custom yaw curve helps a little (I use a linear curve and set a point for .10 response at .30 travel); but I believe the main issues can only be fixed by tweaking the model.  It seems as if the yaw response is delayed -- which leads to over exaggerated control inputs (stability augmentation is not the problem -- I have it turned off).  I hope this gets addressed soon.

[Goran_M]

I can respect you have some hours in flying real aircraft, but you did mention that you flew a C182.  A far cry from a single engine GA turboprop with a PT6.  We had Jason Miller (co-owner of Foreflight) consult with us during development of the TBM (he owns the real one), and we received a lot of feedback from him on every aspect of the flight model.  

Here's a video of him taking his one on his first flight.

Also, as a result of this being only a 6 seater turboprop GA, taking off with too much pitch will result in excessive P-Factor.  Pitching up gently, reduces it.  This has been demonstrated on numerous occasions.  
I can understand that maybe you (both) have some frustration in how it handles on the ground, but we can't change it if our real world TBM pilot tells us it's right.  

I have also watched several streamers flying this aircraft, and I can safely say, at least 3 of the 5 that I have watched have nailed the taxiing, takeoffs and landings when it comes to ground handling.  
One in particular is Grau Adler.  (Josh Gibbs and Cirrusmax are the other 2)
Here's a time stamped video of Grau Adler landing the TBM.  
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/334250069?t=01h18m33s

My intention is not to turn this into a debate about ground handling.  It's simply to re-iterate that, although you have many flying hours under your belt, we had a TBM pilot, who bought one for himself, to help us with anything and everything TBM related.  

Hopefully you can understand our position.

 

Edited November 12, 2018 by Goran_M

[WaarEagle]

Yup... as long as there's little to no crosswind and the pedals don't need to be touched, it lands alright.  The video from Grau Adler actually supports my particular complaint -- the no wind landing was okay; but while he's taxiing, he looks down for a second and almost goes off the pavement.  That's why the takeoffs in the TBM are worse than the landings, it requires more yaw input to counteract the applied power and the yaw instability on the ground is the problem.  In my 33 years of simming, I've seen plenty of flight models tested by real world owners and pilots that handle horribly in a simulator (and unfortunately the TBM appears to be one of them at this point)... actually the TBM handles very well in the air, it's just the ground dynamics above around 20 knots that are so bad.  I'm not going to get into a debate either; but you can either listen to Jason Miller (who probably spends a whole lot more time flying his real airplane than the simulated version) or you can listen to the users who know a thing or two about how a simulated aircraft is supposed to roll down a runway (and know how to correctly compensate for P-factor and torque).  I'll leave it at that.

[Goran_M]

He actually flies X-Plane quite a lot as well.

 

[oldflyguy]

Interesting discussion.  @Goran_M I want to be clear that I have absolutely no issue with any other flight phase or ground handling phase of the TBM model.  It taxi's perfectly and realistically - among the best I've experienced.  Hey it may be too easy.  The climb out and cruise performance is flawless at least from the standpoint of a tired old C182 pilot.  I have no experience a poor landing yet although it took just one experience with too much reverse on the roll out to learn to use that tool sparingly...LOL!  So, I'm sticking to my guns here about the take off roll situation.  Going into a bit more detail the TBM can be managed on the take off roll to some degree if you "dance" on the pedals (tail wheel experience, anyone) very softly but I don't think that equates to the real world.  I think @WaarEagle may have a point about something in the yaw response.  By the way, my only experience with a turboprop on take off was in a King Air - gray day with no wind.  It was easier than my C182...LOL!

[Goran_M]

I hear you, @oldflyguy.  We always have, and always will listen to criticisms.  If something isn't right, in most cases, we'll fix it...whether it's got to do with the artwork (my area) or the systems and flight model (toto's area).  

Jason Miller came into the project well before I was asked to come on board (January of this year), and it was this very aircraft that swayed Jason to X-Plane from FSX.  

I didn't make the flight model.  That was all Toto and Jason, with Jason providing feedback and testing.  But what Toto DID do, was actually code the flight model in areas where Planemaker couldn't go.  That includes ground handling.  Is it accurate?  I can't say it is or it isn't, based on my TBM experience (none).  But if Jason Miller, who owns and flies one on a regular basis, as well as owning X Plane for over a year, tells us the ground handling is accurate, or as close to accurate as Toto could get it, we have to listen to him.  Considering all factors affecting the flight model (prop wash from a PT6 hitting the vertical tail, P-Factor, weight of the aircraft vs propwash), I can certainly see how it could be a very sensitive aircraft as far as ground handling is concerned.  

We can certainly triple check the flight model with Jason and get a final word from him.

 

[MMcCl]

I wonder if you might want to ask more than TBM pilot to evaluate ground handling.  While I understand your position that a TBM pilot has given the thumbs up... that is still only one pilot's opinion.  Given the amount of user comments on the topic, you might want to find a second opinion to verify and provide users with a wider assurance that more than one TBM pilot confirms ground behavior.  I've been using flight simulators for over 35 years (Yes... since Bruce Artwick's version for the Commodore 64), and have 430 hours of real flight time in aircraft ranging from Cessna 152s and 182s, Piper Archers and Arrows, and a Bonanza A36.  This aircraft is pretty much at the top of the list in terms of ground handling difficulties.

I've now taken off and landed your TBM at least a two dozen times... only the last 4 have remained on the runway during both takeoff and landing.  During take off, if I keep torque below 60% until airborne, I'm able to control the excessive yaw instability. Once airborne, I can apply power to 90% torque for a normal departure.  Landings are slightly more stable, so long as prop reverse is never used and touchdown occurs slightly above stall speed.

[oldflyguy]

Thanks @Goran_M!  Regardless this is the aircraft model I'll be "flying" most of the time.  I've really enjoyed and learned from your videos - thank you!  That's funny - I thought that was your video...

Best,

Ken

Edited November 12, 2018 by oldflyguy

[Goran_M]

3 minutes ago, MMcCl said:

I wonder if you might want to ask more than TBM pilot to evaluate ground handling.  While I understand your position that a TBM pilot has given the thumbs up... that is still only one pilot's opinion.  Given the amount of user comments on the topic, you might want to find a second opinion to verify and provide users with a wider assurance that more than one TBM pilot confirms ground behavior.  I've been using flight simulators for over 35 years (Yes... since Bruce Artwick's version for the Commodore 64), and have 430 hours of real flight time in aircraft ranging from Cessna 152s and 182s, Piper Archers and Arrows, and a Bonanza A36.  This aircraft is pretty much at the top of the list in terms of ground handling difficulties.

I've now taken off and landed your TBM at least a two dozen times... only the last 4 have remained on the runway during both takeoff and landing.  During take off, if I keep torque below 60% until airborne, I'm able to control the excessive yaw instability. Once airborne, I can apply power to 90% torque for a normal departure.  Landings are slightly more stable, so long as prop reverse is never used and touchdown occurs slightly above stall speed.

We have.  We had a large group of streamers and testers who put the aircraft through its paces.  In earlier versions, the ground handling was worse than it is now.  That's when Toto fine tuned the ground handling via code, and made a specific point to all testers to really put the ground handling through its paces.  Many of them had the same issues as what is being brought up here.  Very sensitive ground handling, etc...  and it was pointed out that it was supposed to be a little sensitive.  But they did manage to get used to it.  There's the odd 1 or 2 that are still having trouble though, for whatever reason.  I mean, I guess we can revisit the issue, but the question remains.  Do we want to make it handle easier for some people in the community, or do we want it realistic, no matter how hard it is?  For some, not an easy question to answer.
With regards to your takeoff, go for maximum torque, but rotate more gently.  You'll find the torque a lot less pronounced.  Watch the video I posted of Jason Miller flying the TBM in sim.

3 minutes ago, oldflyguy said:

Thanks @Goran_M!  Regardless this is the aircraft model I'll be "flying" most of the time.  I've really enjoyed and learned from your videos - thank you!

Best,

Ken

Many thanks!

[Goran_M]

Just a stab in the dark.  Do you guys turn your yaw damper off prior to landing?

I've seen a lot of people leave it on accidentally.

[oldflyguy]

Yep,  I check that when I disable the AP.  No issue on landing so far - this model hand-flies very nicely...

[PilotGav]

I think it's very important to remember that historically X-Plane's worse issue up to and including the latest release is its modelling of ground handling. I've heard so many others say this as well. 

Not trying to prove a point here... more of a reminder.

[cmbaviator]

3 hours ago, Goran_M said:

Just a stab in the dark.  Do you guys turn your yaw damper off prior to landing?

I've seen a lot of people leave it on accidentally.

it gets off automatically when setting off The AP, I think

[strider]

5 hours ago, MMcCl said:

I wonder if you might want to ask more than TBM pilot to evaluate ground handling.  While I understand your position that a TBM pilot has given the thumbs up... that is still only one pilot's opinion.  Given the amount of user comments on the topic, you might want to find a second opinion to verify and provide users with a wider assurance that more than one TBM pilot confirms ground behavior.  I've been using flight simulators for over 35 years (Yes... since Bruce Artwick's version for the Commodore 64), and have 430 hours of real flight time in aircraft ranging from Cessna 152s and 182s, Piper Archers and Arrows, and a Bonanza A36.  This aircraft is pretty much at the top of the list in terms of ground handling difficulties.

I've now taken off and landed your TBM at least a two dozen times... only the last 4 have remained on the runway during both takeoff and landing.  During take off, if I keep torque below 60% until airborne, I'm able to control the excessive yaw instability. Once airborne, I can apply power to 90% torque for a normal departure.  Landings are slightly more stable, so long as prop reverse is never used and touchdown occurs slightly above stall speed.

After reading this thread I did a bunch of takeoffs and landings to see what the issue is. No issues landing at all! Takeoffs are a little tricky but generally speaking I can the keep the nose pointed down the runway. I think there is a lot of variables here with trim, power, speed in the ground roll, user settings and pilot inputs! Can it use some improvements? probably. The rudder inputs seem a little over sensitive or maybe kind of delayed. But it's definitively better then previous versions. If you can't keep the plane pointed down the runways 7 times out of the 10 then something is wrong with your settings, hardware, or it's pilot operator error.  

Edited November 12, 2018 by strider

[sdflyer]

Actually TMB is much better handling after the latest patch. I can more or less keep her on the centerline during take off roll. Before it was nearly impossible!

 

P.S. I used to own 182F! 

 

[oldflyguy]

182's are great.  Super honest and if you can close the doors you can get airborne.  We don't need no stinkin' weight and balance...LOL!

[MMcCl]

My observation about how the TBM handles on the ground is actually an observation about how X-Plane itself handles the physical forces at work.  Going from a real aircraft to a simulation of an aircraft points out most of the major shortcomings of sitting in a chair and not moving in physical space vs. constantly receiving physical inputs and sensations from the physical world.  It has always felt to me that X-plane is superior as a simulator in modelling aerodynamic forces, however there is still something missing in the way it models the mass of a moving object and inertia.  There seems to be a greater prioritization of aerodynamic force over inertial force.  As the TBM begins to move at low speed everything seems to be fine because there is a low effect of aerodynamic force on the moving aircraft.  But once the plane picks up speed, it seems that inertial force nearly falls away entirely with regard to the direction the aircraft is moving.  By placing a higher priority on aerodynamics prior to the aircraft achieving lift, many X-plane aircraft are all over the place; heavy aircraft behave like they have the weight of a GA aircraft.  This is a symptom of how X-plane behaves, not the specific aircraft.  Some designers have managed to tweak the aerodynamics to simulate greater mass/inertial authority, but that shouldn't be necessary if X-plane modeled those forces properly.  Further,  without the physical sensations of inertia at work, it has always felt strange to me to adequately predict the control inputs necessary to maintain precise directional control on the ground.  We all eventually learn to do it.. as I am learning to do by flying the TBM (which is definitely my favorite aircraft right now).

[coolhand]

Hi guys, I will put my 2 cents on the matter.

I have no experience flying turbos of that size, I only have type ratings for PA-11, C-150 and C-172, but as far as I can extrapolate, the ground handling feels ok for an aircraft with that amount of power.

Also you need to operate this bird according to to the "book", Yaw damper is not to be used below 500 feet AGL. It will try to coordinate the aircraft using ruder trim, so if you try to to takeoff with YD enabled, you will end fighting against its inputs. Also the trim setting is very important during takeoff, make sure that the pitch trim and rudder trim are in green arc before lining up.

I recommend everybody to read the POH available at the Socata site, especially the Amplified procedures, in the section 4:

page 282 - Normal takeoff

page 284 - Short takeoff

http://www.tbm.aero/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/PIM_TBM900__E1.pdf  <-- let me know if Its not allowed to publish links here.

Also keep in mind that besides the maximum x-wind component is 20 kt, in GAs is very difficult to takeoff and land with anything grater than 10 kt and gusty conditions. Additionally is more complicated in a flight sim because you don´t "feel" the aircraft as in the real thing.

Its just my humble opinion,  I never had handling issues following the real procedures. 

 

Best regards and fly safe

Fernando-

PS: Excuse my English, is not my native language.

[sdflyer]

I'm a "jack of all trades"   I have about 18 types airplanes (piston/turbo charged) in my loogbook (single/multi) and around 17 years of flying experience. Basically I own  an airplane and I teach in variety of airplanes. Unfortunately I have nil hours in TBM9000 although I have a little experienced in Turbine Piper Mailbu. To me TBM900 handle on the ground just fine with my hardware. I'm using HOTAS Warthog and CH rudders.

Even though TBM a little quirky on take off roll after last patch to me it handles just fine. I'm pretty sure developers will polish more things over time. My understanding is that the major part of ground handling it is how XP11 handles ground physics at the moment. So we have to live with what we have!

[CDNCAVOK]

On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 5:48 PM, oldflyguy said:

I agree this is one of the best if not the best model in it's class available to the XP community.  However, (LOL!) the take off run in this aircraft is over the top twitchy.  I'm an (ex) real world pilot with about 600 hours in a C182 (that's a lot of landings - always able to use the aircraft again) and a fairly experienced XP pilot since 2014 (I think) and the TBM has a mind of it's own on the take off run (no better in 11.30b3 by the way - although that's not important).  I've also seen this behavior while watching streamers use this model so it's not just my incompetence.  Even using the neat fine tuning to the axis' in beta 3 it's not possible to keep this "wandering" under control. 

Quote

I use the Gladiator MkII and the T-Rudders

 

Lol that is the controller and pedals I want to order, since it is impossible for me to t/o straight with my old Saitek Aviator Joystick with lousy rudder twist control!

 

[Ricardo Pallavidino]

It's ease to roll this baby on the runway if you have no crosswinds. With 7kt side wind it becomes a nightmare, almost like any other GA acft in X-Plane (maybe a bit worst actually).

But for landing is a bit worst since if AP brings you close to threshold it usually gets your yaw trimmed almost all way to one wind side and its fine but for some stupid reason LR made it behave more aggressive in the ground and it's very hard to keep the line.

My next experiment with this issue would be centering the trim after disengaging the AP and control the yaw on the rudder manually to land. I guess I can have a better results

Today I have minimal expectation to perform a straight run after landing in crosswind conditions, which is sad

Why don't you guys try this experiment too and let me know. I need to set some buttons for the rudder trim in the joystick tho

Cheers

[Tony123]

Hello,

 This has always been an issue for me also,  I am not a pilot in RL so I really don’t have anything to compare it to but with that said…. 

Hearing everyone complain about it does give it some merit if only a little as some of these are real pilots.

 I do find it hard to believe that everything I have read over the last year and 1/2, forums, magazines, youtube  about real life pilots and students,  I never hear them complain about keeping the plane on center for takeoffs or landings.  I never see them struggle like they do on x plane I never really hear anyone in real life talk about it.  If I didn’t know better coming away from  x plane I would guess that staying on center line for takeoffs and landings is the single hardest thing to do when becoming a pilot, Not sure. it might be,  I just never read, heard or seen videos of it.

 I have learned a lot in the last year ½,  and it doesn’t matter which plane in x plane I use I still struggle with this  today.  Lastly I will say that this, I have used a joystick, Logitech rudder pedals and red bird pedals which I use now so this is across multiple pieces of hardware.  In the end I’m not sure if it’s me or x plane but I am not buying that this is something that I can’t do.  Nothing I can do about it so I just deal with it.

quick edit, I am not blaming the TBM I experience this with all the planes with xwind landings and takeoffs.

Just my2c.

Edited November 28, 2018 by Tony123

[sdflyer]

I just landed TBM900 with 20 kts crosswind XP11.30b5 . It was very hard and I did one go around, but in the end "crab and kick method" did pay off. Happy flying!

[CDNCAVOK]

5 hours ago, Tony123 said:

Hello,

 This has always been an issue for me also,  I am not a pilot in RL so I really don’t have anything to compare it to but with that said…. 

Hearing everyone complain about it does give it some merit if only a little as some of these are real pilots.

 I do find it hard to believe that everything I have read over the last year and 1/2, forums, magazines, youtube  about real life pilots and students,  I never hear them complain about keeping the plane on center for takeoffs or landings.  I never see them struggle like they do on x plane I never really hear anyone in real life talk about it.  If I didn’t know better coming away from  x plane I would guess that staying on center line for takeoffs and landings is the single hardest thing to do when becoming a pilot, Not sure. it might be,  I just never read, heard or seen videos of it.

 I have learned a lot in the last year ½,  and it doesn’t matter which plane in x plane I use I still struggle with this  today.  Lastly I will say that this, I have used a joystick, Logitech rudder pedals and red bird pedals which I use now so this is across multiple pieces of hardware.  In the end I’m not sure if it’s me or x plane but I am not buying that this is something that I can’t do.  Nothing I can do about it so I just deal with it.

quick edit, I am not blaming the TBM I experience this with all the planes with xwind landings and takeoffs.

Just my2c.

I am an inactive pilot,  but when I was flying (as per the video on my youtube channel) , I never have any problems, even close to maximum demonstrated crosswinds keeping whatever single engine prop bird lined up. The problem is that X-Plane exaggerates the forces such as torque, slipstream, crosswind, p-factor and those forces all change as you accelerate and your control inputs change instinctively as you look straight down the runway to keep the nose lined up. The changes are not linear so it is real tough to gauge in XP. Having said this, I have an old Saitek Aviator joystick with rudder twist which simply cannot cut the mustard! My takeoffs are horrible! Single engine planes oscillate left and right, I am looking forward for the VKB products to show up on Amazon.ca before buying the joystick and rudder pedals. Asides having good hardware, anticipating the changes in forces are the only way to try to stay lined up which is no easy task!