VNE discussion (vote!)

Moderators: Uros, OXO, BenFest

Should Condor use real flutter speeds? (Your opinions)

Yes. Real flutter speeds (+ optional penalty for flying over Vne)
76
78%
Reduced flutter speeds (like it's currently in condor) to prevent people flying over Vne accepting condor has a modifed flutter behaviour
21
22%
 
Total votes: 97

User avatar
JShieck
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:08 pm

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by JShieck » Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:28 am

Dear Condor team,

due to the users' opinion shown in the poll and in order to enforce the realism in Condor I would like to suggest you to correct this as a feature in one of the next updates.

I am sure the community will be very thanksfull.
Even if Condor has almost a monopoly in it's business I know our community is proud of how close Condor is to the reality.
At this point I want to thank YOU, dear Condor team, for make it possible for us to follow our passion everytimes in your simulator.

We all know writing, changing and updating programs, especially this great simulator, is a huge amount of work I convince Condor will be on the rigth way with this update.

Yours faithfully
Julius Schieck

User avatar
congo
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:21 am
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by congo » Sun May 09, 2021 10:28 pm

Then, COTASA users will always have an advantage, and XC Soar users also.

So a new (and unrealistic) TAS gauge would need to be implemented in Condor to
keep a level playing field for those who choose NOT to use third party add-ons
in their Condor careers?

Even now, the Condor purist is at some disadvantage with those pilots who use
exterior software, for a number of reasons, not just because they have TAS
indicated.

I do not regret that third party add-ons are used in competition, as they are used
in RL flying and it is a desirable training tool to use them in Condor.

I do wish that the real flutter speeds could be used, (and voted so),
but at what cost to the fairness of competition? It is obvious that pilots with
a TAS indicator already have a distinct advantage in any Condor task with enough
energy to run Vne.

Personally, I find such fast tasks very stressful anyway, where you no longer need
to show some restraint fearing performance loss for going too fast, and this just
gets worse as the gliders increase in performance.

Just my two cents :)
Image

User avatar
JShieck
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:08 pm

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by JShieck » Mon May 10, 2021 7:35 am

TAS indicator for (Condor) PDA or LX 9000?

Lenticular
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:29 am

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by Lenticular » Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 pm

Real speeds!

Otherwise it is a very "gamey" mechanic to fix a perceived problem that should be dealt with via other means (as already suggested - harsh penlty for flying faster than Vne in a race).

Physics doesn't care about race rules. ;) Also, not all of us fly Condor to race. ;)

Calculating approximate TAS isn't hard. It's roughly +2% of IAS for every 1000 ft of altitude. If you're at 10,000 ft then TAS is 20% greater than IAS.
G-ZULU /// LTN
Image

User avatar
congo
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:21 am
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by congo » Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:21 am

Lenticular wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 pm
Calculating approximate TAS isn't hard. It's roughly +2% of IAS for every 1000 ft of altitude. If you're at 10,000 ft then TAS is 20% greater than IAS.
Yeah, sitting here at my desk at night for a relaxing Condor race, constantly calculating TAS as I fly along, WooHoo! :shock:
Image

User avatar
wickid
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:32 pm
Location: Venlo, NL
Contact:

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by wickid » Sat Sep 04, 2021 1:03 pm

Even easier is 1 kph per 100 meters. So 2000 meters = 20 kph less.
PH-1504, KOE

johngfoster
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:57 am

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by johngfoster » Sun Dec 26, 2021 11:15 am

As mentioned previously, there are two factors to consider when looking at Vne: flutter, and load factors on the airframe. There is a yellow arc on the ASI for a reason. My suggestion, IF they are going to consider changing this, would be to make flutter speeds real like in real life, but also make the ability to break your wings off at lower speeds, below VNE, if you are flying in turbulence at speeds in the yellow arc. This would be a considerable amount more work for the design team, if they feel up to the challenge. You wouldn't fly screaming along a ridge at 280kph in real life, even at sea level, unless the ridge was a perfectly straight ridge and the wind was perfectly smooth without any turbulence. While I'm all for better realism, I think they've done a pretty good job with this software so far, and would have no major complaints if this didn't change once Condor 3 came out.
Image

User avatar
JShieck
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:08 pm

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by JShieck » Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:24 am

johngfoster wrote:
Sun Dec 26, 2021 11:15 am
There is a yellow arc on the ASI for a reason. My suggestion, IF they are going to consider changing this, would be to make flutter speeds real like in real life, but also make the ability to break your wings off at lower speeds, below VNE, if you are flying in turbulence at speeds in the yellow arc.

G loads are already considered in Condor 1 and 2. You can already break your wings by exeeding the critical accelerations.
(The chat notification if someone breaks his/her wings by exeeding the critical g loads is Pilot-XY likes G Forces.)

So only real Vne is missing.

User avatar
wickid
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:32 pm
Location: Venlo, NL
Contact:

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by wickid » Mon Dec 27, 2021 10:58 am

JShieck wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:24 am
johngfoster wrote:
Sun Dec 26, 2021 11:15 am
There is a yellow arc on the ASI for a reason. My suggestion, IF they are going to consider changing this, would be to make flutter speeds real like in real life, but also make the ability to break your wings off at lower speeds, below VNE, if you are flying in turbulence at speeds in the yellow arc.

G loads are already considered in Condor 1 and 2. You can already break your wings by exeeding the critical accelerations.
(The chat notification if someone breaks his/her wings by exeeding the critical g loads is Pilot-XY likes G Forces.)

So only real Vne is missing.
If you read CS22, the turbulence requirements say the structure must withstand an instantanious vertical gust of 15 m/s at the top of the green range and 7,5 m/s at Vne. This with a safetyfactor of at least 1.5. These kinds of extreme turbulence I haven't found yet in Condor. So it is mostly full elevator deflection in the yellow arc that will break gliders in Condor. This already happens.
PH-1504, KOE

User avatar
JShieck
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:08 pm

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by JShieck » Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:33 pm

You can select severe turbulence in the weather settings even if this option is set to light.
(I think I do not need to explain why people like to fly with light turbulence setting instead of heavy turbulences.)
However, if you have a wish for heavier turbulences and wind shears I suggest to add it to the weather wish list in the Condor3 wish list threat.

arneh
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:34 am

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by arneh » Tue Dec 28, 2021 12:19 pm

wickid wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 10:58 am
If you read CS22, the turbulence requirements say the structure must withstand an instantanious vertical gust of 15 m/s at the top of the green range and 7,5 m/s at Vne. This with a safetyfactor of at least 1.5. These kinds of extreme turbulence I haven't found yet in Condor. So it is mostly full elevator deflection in the yellow arc that will break gliders in Condor. This already happens.
I actually experienced the wings breaking off in turbulence once in Condor 1 :) It was with very extreme conditions with very strong wind and steep ridge, where the sudden change of lift combined with other turbulence created enough G for the wings to break off even when I was going below Va speed.

johngfoster
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:57 am

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by johngfoster » Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:17 am

JShieck wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:33 pm
You can select severe turbulence in the weather settings even if this option is set to light.
(I think I do not need to explain why people like to fly with light turbulence setting instead of heavy turbulences.)
However, if you have a wish for heavier turbulences and wind shears I suggest to add it to the weather wish list in the Condor3 wish list threat.
I realize you can set turbulence in Condor2. My point is, in real life, you don't go screaming along a ridge at 8,000 ft at 270kph. Why? Because if you do, you seriously may break your glider. The stronger the winds, the stronger the lift, and the stronger the turbulence. In Condor2 it is not like this, at least to the point of risking your glider. If you have enough lift to fly that fast, sure you will have turbulence, but it will not be enough to break your glider. If you set the turbulence setting to very high, then the air EVERYWHERE is turbulent, not just on a ridge. My point is that if we are going to request realistic VNE/flutter (which I voted for), then we should also request realistic turbulence that would break your glider if you are flying fast enough in it on a ridge, even though you are below the speed for flutter. This should counterbalance the tendency for people to unrealistically put the nose down and fly faster than VNE if the flutter speeds are increased to match real life.
Image

User avatar
JShieck
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2018 6:08 pm

Re: VNE discussion (vote!)

Post by JShieck » Wed Dec 29, 2021 6:24 pm

johngfoster wrote:
Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:17 am
I realize you can set turbulence in Condor2. The stronger the winds, the stronger the lift, and the stronger the turbulence. If you have enough lift to fly that fast, sure you will have turbulence, but it will not be enough to break your glider. If you set the turbulence setting to very high, then the air EVERYWHERE is turbulent, not just on a ridge. My point is that if we are going to request realistic VNE/flutter (which I voted for), then we should also request realistic turbulence.

I see your point that it always should be as realistic as possible. So I support your wish. Nevertheless you should post it also in a weather related forum to get listend.

Let's hope both gets implemented.

Post Reply