great airplane except ground handling

[kevinm1]

Remember this airplane react's about a second after you place the input and all the input you made in that second will take effect, if you made a large input and the plane reacts a second later then you will be sent flying, try placing only extremely small corrections and anticipate the engine torque, and if the airplane is vearing a bit make the necessary correction but dont increase the input until you know it's not going to work.  Do a ton of landings, what i've been doing is taking off, staying in the pattern and doing a full stop with a quick reverse taxi back to takeoff.

[cmbaviator]

i think its still a little bit exagerated. I've been flying the majestic Q400 pro edition and its a study level aircraft, during takeoff, i need like 1/2 of rudder deflection to the right to maintain centerline but it is very smooth to maintain centerline.

in the tbm, even 1/100 of rudder input will make you zig zag into the runway, the only way i manage to maintain centerline correctly was to set a very non linear curve to my rudder axis, the draw back is that its more difficult to make 90° and U turn during taxi

[cpuwolf]

 

[sdflyer]

On 1/15/2019 at 2:48 AM, cmbaviator said:

i think its still a little bit exagerated. I've been flying the majestic Q400 pro edition and its a study level aircraft, during takeoff, i need like 1/2 of rudder deflection to the right to maintain centerline but it is very smooth to maintain centerline.

in the tbm, even 1/100 of rudder input will make you zig zag into the runway, the only way i manage to maintain centerline correctly was to set a very non linear curve to my rudder axis, the draw back is that its more difficult to make 90° and U turn during taxi

For the most past rudders in real airplane have significant resistance which is hard  to simulate in XP gaming hardware. For example,  If in  pilot  who jumps from Piper Cub to Piper Malibu  will discover difference in rudder sensitivity very quickly. That lag between expected reaction and  physical force required in my opinion is very well simulated in TBM900. 

I had numerous students in the past transitioning to heavier airplane commonly tend to weer off of runway due to insufficient rudder  application. There is always a small  learning curve between motor skills (physical sensation) and aircraft reaction. So the best advice of XP is to "dance on the rudder" with very small corrections until muscle memory settles within  particular aircraft  model.

[cmbaviator]

15 hours ago, sdflyer said:

For the most past rudders in real airplane have significant resistance which is hard  to simulate in XP gaming hardware. For example,  If in  pilot  who jumps from Piper Cub to Piper Malibu  will discover difference in rudder sensitivity very quickly. That lag between expected reaction and  physical force required in my opinion is very well simulated in TBM900. 

I had numerous students in the past transitioning to heavier airplane commonly tend to weer off of runway due to insufficient rudder  application. There is always a small  learning curve between motor skills (physical sensation) and aircraft reaction. So the best advice of XP is to "dance on the rudder" with very small corrections until muscle memory settles within  particular aircraft  model.

I know but if 0.5cm of deflection makes it difficult to steer... it should be that senstive, it would impossible irl to maintain centerline correctly.

Because if i could use more rudder application that would fine as it is more manageable, but i have to barely apply pressure on the rudder.

As i said with the majestif, i need quite some amount of rudder application to avoid steering left and thats okay because i have some even if i decrease slighty some ruder application or increase it it will not steer severly to the right or less.

 

With decreasing the sensitivity on the rudder pedals AND setting 0 crosswind component on ground thanks to ASXP, its now manageable.

 

[Joers182]

I find decreasing the sensitivity makes it even worse for me. All hardware differs I guess

[sdflyer]

6 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

I know but if 0.5cm of deflection makes it difficult to steer... it should be that senstive, it would impossible irl to maintain centerline correctly.

Because if i could use more rudder application that would fine as it is more manageable, but i have to barely apply pressure on the rudder.

As i said with the majestif, i need quite some amount of rudder application to avoid steering left and thats okay because i have some even if i decrease slighty some ruder application or increase it it will not steer severly to the right or less.

 

With decreasing the sensitivity on the rudder pedals AND setting 0 crosswind component on ground thanks to ASXP, its now manageable.

 

 I'm using CH rudder and it seems work for me. As far as taxing with crosswind I always use aileron- elevator wind correction to stay on center-line 

[cpuwolf]

landing data analysis

https://x-plane.vip/xtdr/static/?uploadid=5c5244938b8fe23485f822dd

 

Edited January 31, 2019 by cpuwolf

[cpuwolf]

1.1.6 yaw control greatly changed, ~1s delay has been removed.  Thank you so much

 

problem is I have to adapt to a new flight model, hahaha

 

and how about my tires

Edited March 10, 2019 by cpuwolf

[skdill]

On 1/15/2019 at 5:48 AM, cmbaviator said:

i think its still a little bit exagerated. I've been flying the majestic Q400 pro edition and its a study level aircraft, during takeoff, i need like 1/2 of rudder deflection to the right to maintain centerline but it is very smooth to maintain centerline.

in the tbm, even 1/100 of rudder input will make you zig zag into the runway, the only way i manage to maintain centerline correctly was to set a very non linear curve to my rudder axis, the draw back is that its more difficult to make 90° and U turn during taxi

 

100% agree. I think it is greatly exaggerate.  I understand the argument of different hardware (I use Thrustmaster pedals) for different folks.  Since this is the case, devs should implement an option for the user to stabilize yaw.  I understand this doesn't make the plane 100% irl accurate but at its current state its unusable and incredibly disappointing.  Running 1.1.8 and still having problems with the takeoff roll and landing at speeds above 50kts.

Here is my response curve and still zig zag all the way to vR

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by skdill

[Gregg Seipp]

31 minutes ago, skdill said:

I understand this doesn't make the plane 100% irl accurate but at its current state its unusable and incredibly disappointing.  Running 1.1.8 and still having problems with the takeoff roll and landing at speeds above 50kts.

I honestly don´t think it could ever get that close.  There a number of limiting factors in the sim and with hardware (and just to mention the side-skidding of tires on concrete in X-plane is pretty bad.)  The one thing I'd say is that I couldn't find any real world incidents of a TBM exiting the runway on landing or takeoff roll nor did I see any talk about a TBM's ground handling being difficult in any articles I read.  And not all RW TBM pilots are great pilots and, yet, they manage to keep it on the pavement.

[Jacoba]

1 hour ago, Gregg Seipp said:

I honestly don´t think it could ever get that close.  There a number of limiting factors in the sim and with hardware (and just to mention the side-skidding of tires on concrete in X-plane is pretty bad.)  The one thing I'd say is that I couldn't find any real world incidents of a TBM exiting the runway on landing or takeoff roll nor did I see any talk about a TBM's ground handling being difficult in any articles I read.  And not all RW TBM pilots are great pilots and, yet, they manage to keep it on the pavement.

I recently flew left seat from Orlando Florida to Muncie Indiana in a TBM for a new buyer, the real TBM is heavy but handles very well during taxi and takeoff roll. 

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Jacoba

[Sims Smith]

7 hours ago, Jacoba said:

I recently flew left seat from Orlando Florida to Muncie Indiana in a TBM for a new buyer, the real TBM is heavy but handles very well during taxi and takeoff roll. 

 

This was developed and they had input from one real pilot. It will be great if we can get this in the hands of few more pilots who can provide a 2nd opinion. I followed all the instruction, fine tune my equipment  and my ground handling/take off/landing got better still I find it very hard to believe in 2019 a real TBM 900 aircraft handle like this.  One thing for sure I will avoid flying in a real TBM 900 if all this is true.

[Jacoba]

53 minutes ago, Sims Smith said:

This was developed and they had input from one real pilot. It will be great if we can get this in the hands of few more pilots who can provide a 2nd opinion. I followed all the instruction, fine tune my equipment  and my ground handling/take off/landing got better still I find it very hard to believe in 2019 a real TBM 900 aircraft handle like this.  One thing for sure I will avoid flying in a real TBM 900 if all this is true.

I always thought it was my computer set up that caused the ground handling issues. Mine lacks rudder pedals, so I auto coordinate my yoke and rudder, which has caused issues with other planes in the past. 

I personally believe the developers did an amazing job with the TBM, they are just constrained by the sim environment. The MU-2 is another example. I've flow those in real life too and its nearly impossible to replicate the actual aircraft to a tee in the sim. Now Tom came very close, but he's still working within the confines of LR XPlane.  

Im very grateful they continue to develop amazing aircraft for this sim. 

But yes the real TBM is a very nice bird to fly. 

Edited April 20, 2019 by Jacoba

[NeoPyro]

I find the takeoff roll is a lot more manageable with the rudder trim in the neutral position.

Also, I don't know how to fit this into my post, but here is a screenshot of my sensitivity settings. They work great for me but as I'm sure everyone knows, YMMV.

Edited April 20, 2019 by NeoPyro

[jfjoubert]

As far as I know Hot Start is doing some experiments w.r.t ground handling. I read it on their Discord System Support Channel.

So let's wait and see...

[Gregg Seipp]

I've done a couple of things to mine which has definitely helped some.  The effect is significantly reduced skidding and over-steering...but it's still not quite as good as the E1000 steering (which I also adjusted).    The nose in the E1000, after a small mod, is responsive to little adjustments and, yet, it doesn't over-steer. 

[Sims Smith]

5 hours ago, jfjoubert said:

As far as I know Hot Start is doing some experiments w.r.t ground handling. I read it on their Discord System Support Channel.

So let's wait and see...

That is an excellent news. Ground handling is the only issue I have with the plane, if it gets better the plane is in perfection for me even in VR!

[Sims Smith]

Those of you who now mastered the control of this aircraft are you able to land it on this airport in CA?

https://gateway.x-plane.com/scenery/page/Q94 (default airport 11.25)

The runway is dimensions:

2625 x 42 ft. / 800 x 13 m

According to TBM 900 site it only needs 2,300 ft.

 

[xpst]

Yup, managed to land and stop the TBM easily in Q94 with a slow landing speed.

... but then I crashed when over-torquing on takeoff :-( ! Grrrr.

[skdill]

Just downloaded v1.1.9

Problems have been solved!!

[Sims Smith]

4 hours ago, skdill said:

Just downloaded v1.1.9

Problems have been solved!!

Agree those terrible memories are now history :-)

 

 

[cbreeze]

Thank you for the great update!!!!!!

[cwjohan]

8 hours ago, skdill said:

Just downloaded v1.1.9

Problems have been solved!!

I agree.  Very stable ground handling now.  No problem at all.  Thanks, developers!

[NeoPyro]

Yup, she is VERY stable now. Quite pleasant to hand fly.