Simviation Forums

I have CH products flight sim yoke and rudder pedals installed on my computer and it works ok except for IFR.
I have the sensitivity set to max and no null zone and have calibrated everything.
On a precision approach trying to maintain the glide slope its like driving a car with worn out steering.
As I go below the glide slope I easy back,back back,back and then it start to go up so I ease forward, forward, forward alot before  I can stop it going up.
My question is how can I better stabelize the pitch. Is there something in the flight tuning on the aircraft cfg?
Its the same on all the planes only some are worse then others. The Yaw and the roll are ok.
I am running a Pentium 4 CPU running at 3.2 GHz with 2 gigs of Ram and a Nvidia Geforce 6800GT 256 MG
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Pickup

Which model are you flying? This is important...

Some planes are worse than others. The default Baron is ridiculously sensitive when it comes to pitch control. I've yet to find a default plane though, that's "not sensitive enough".

I mostly fly light, GA in the sim, so I can't advise on big jets.

An ILS approach is a little different than a visual approach. The idea is to have the approach stablized a little faster than  for visual; with the gear down , power set and flaps set, by the time you reach the outer marker. If that's all done properly, it's just a matter of using slight pitch changes to stay on glidescope. If you end up having to "chase" the glidescope; perhaps you're not configured.. and/or going a little too fast (or slow).

You can go into the config file and crank up stability.. but doing that enough to stabilize approaches will make the plane fly less realistically during other stages of flight.  

Pick a plane.. I'll fly it too, and we'll compare results..

Should be fun..  :D

Some planes are worse than others. The default Baron is ridiculously sensitive when it comes to pitch control. I've yet to find a default plane though, that's "not sensitive enough".

Try the Ford Tri-Motor sometime...
But that's probably pretty realistic.

ok thanks for the imput, I'll  pick a plane but it will have to be tomorrow evening. I'll get back to you.

General Aviation aircraft:

If I am using an ILS approach, I switch the Autopilot off a couple of miles from touchdown, re-trim the aircraft, and fly the remainder of the course manually, and accurately.... ...!

I find that the Autopilot has a mind of it's own if allowed to control the aircraft for the whole of the landing procedure, and fine control can be lost at the last minute....
...auto-trimmed nose down, dive into the ground, lost nose wheel, damaged props, shocked engine.......!
...auto-trimmed nose up, stall, drop, undercarriage collapse.......!

You can generally tell when you look at the elevator trim wheel, and note that you have to completely re-trim the aircraft before the next successful take-off after using the Autopilot.... ...!

Paul....G-BPLF.... ...!

P.S. For ease of control I switch ALL the Joystick force-feedback OFF... ...!

As I go below the glide slope I easy back,back back,back and then it start to go up so I ease forward, forward, forward alot before  I can stop it going up.  

Don't know how they do it on heavies but I thought you control altitude on the approach with power.

Don't know how they do it on heavies but I thought you control altitude on the approach with power.

You do, on a visual approach (I'm still talking light GA). Using a C172 for an example, you pitch for airspeed (65-70), and then power for altitude, sometimes reversing that order.. But that's the general rule, when you have the luxury of gauging your approach angle by sighting the departure end of the runway.

Flying an ILS approach is a little different. Ideal approach speed is 90kias (C172). And the best way to maintain 90kias and a 500-700fps descent is with a slight pitch down and 1900rpm.

If you've set it up well, it's just a matter of slight pitch changes to stay on glidescope... and then dumping the flaps and slowing to 65-70 when the runway is in sight.

If you pitch for airspeed, and power for altitude while chasing a glidescope needle, you can end up REALLY chasing it and get too far off the power curve (either way). It's so much different than when you can see the runway. The biggest reason that method is taught/used; is that IF the glidescope fails and you have to quickly switch to a localizer only approach; you're in a much better position to just maintain the descent to DH (decision height ).

If your approach isn't set up well enough to stay on glidescope by pitch alone; you're margin for error is gone and you're more likely to be flying a missed approach. It's pretty dangerous to be "pitching and powering" near DH.

I lost focus on that last post

OK Brett, thanks for explaining that.

I have the sensitivity set to max and no null zone and have calibrated everything.  

I have no idea how realistic the flight models are. If you're sure you're doing everything correctly I suggest experimenting with the sensitivity & null zone settings of the pitch axis of your yoke. That's what these setting are for.

I lost focus on that last post  :-[  And over-complicated the simple statement:

You were verbose, yes, but that's hardly a fault, unless you tend to lose yourself on tangents, which you did not do.

It's backwards flying an ILS. You pitch for altitude and power for airspeed.

This is the short of it, but the explanation you gave in the long post only made it clearer to those who don't know.

For what it is worth the default Beach Baron is a dificult plane to handle and is like you said very sensative to input. I use the CH peddles and a Satiek joystick for the rest and this aircraft is touchy to say the least. I have found by shutting down the auto pilot when atc tells you to make your turn to intercept the glide slope and fly it manually from that point on. I have found using full flaps help stablize it somewhat but not a whole lot the trick here is power, I am constantly adjusting power during the approach and the aircraft settles down a good bit. Lots of luck in a cross wind landing it takes nerves of steel to keep it on track. I use what I call the BRILLCLEAN method( a old hair gel product) you know a little dab will do you. Only use a little movement if you try to stear it in you will overcorrect it every time and wind up zigzaging like a sewing machine.

I'm with you guys: the AP has no business flying the ILS approach, except maybe in most heavies (but mind the power in that case!!).

I've also noticed what Brett said about ILS-following requiring "backwards" inputs...

Trying to hit the mark halfway between his first explanation and the second simplified version:

Normally, when you pitch for airspeed, of course your altitude will change, however briefly. This is where you can get into trouble following that glideslope needle.

On a visual approach, it's no big deal... a little slop makes hardly any difference to the outcome of the approach if you stay ahead of the airplane.

In essence, an ILS approach requires you to maintain that angle religiously, so pitch changes have to be avoided once you're established. Even heading downhill, changing throttle settings will vary your airspeed well enough to stay at your desired speed for the approach.

Am I right, Brett?  ;D

Yes, you're right. Kinda

I would like to thank everyone for the input on trying to help me with this problem.
Brett_Henderson I used the default DC3 and also the Default 737-400 on the ILS/DME 1RWY 16 at Kelowna airport B.C. Canada. I did the DME Arc to Witman and turned inbound there onto the ILS. The DC3 was better then the 737-400 with the slop problem.
If I get everything stabelized with the air speed as close as I can, flaps and gear down adjusting power and have the cross hairs all lined up and hold the column it goes for a few seconds right on and then it starts to either slowly drift above the glide path or slowly drift below. That is when I have my problem because  I start correcting by either moving the column down or up depending on which way it is going but it takes 4 or 5  adjustments to stop it and then it goes the other way. I don't want to use the AP because I feel I'm cheating myself out of the practice I'm trying to get. But If real airplanes acted this way on a precision approach it would be very difficult  to keep from going below or above the glide path. With the sensitivities maxed out and no null zone on the controls, and the pitch set higher in the flight tuning of the aircraft cfg. it helped but it still wanders around like a worn out flight control system.
Anyway I'm not complaining but was just hoping to get it a little closer to the real thing.

Also I find that some aircraft in FS 2002 fly better then FS9 as far as IFR goes.

THANKYOU EVERYONE FOR ALL YOU SUGGESTIONS.
pickup