Sure, but since i have seen no mention of the soft gear or the 172s in a few builds, i dont think they have changed this behavior yet
1 Like
Just loaded up the 172 G1000. Still feels like theres no differential braking with left/right nosegear input. Even very minor left/right braking (at slow taxi speeds) will just make me go to a full stop, in what otherwise would have been an easy 180 degree turn to complete the runway backtrack. Feels like something isnt quite right here still…
1 Like
Ok I stand corrected: Back on the ground at KTEB, if I apply a slight bit of rudder/nose wheel steering, then add in differential braking and continue to turn, the Skyhawk eventually comes to a stop which was unexpected. Therefore you are correct and my earlier test was not the right one. They may want to fix this sooner or later. Thanks for clarifying!
2 Likes
Thank you for your dedication to check again!
1 Like
Of course, it’s all about getting it right where we can. I misunderstood the problem and since I don’t really use a lot of differential braking as a habit, my brief bits of brake pressure fell short of bringing it to a full stop, which should not happen under power. OTOH, I can live with this as is, but since they are asking, they should continue to tweak it!
1 Like
I am not on the beta so I can’t try it, but the above description by Jummivana just sounds wrong. In a real C172, you don’t need rudder input to turn using differential braking. Doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, but you can drag a brake to make it turn without rudder input while you’re rolling. If you want to make a tight turn while taxiing, you’ll use differential braking and rudder, but the code shouldn’t interlink the functionalities. They’re not interlinked in the real thing.
Edit: I should add that you can tighten up a turn on the ground by pulling back the yoke and adding some throttle to lighten the load on the nose gear, while you apply rudder and differential braking. A proper ground physics model would model forces at all three wheels, with things like braking and flight control position influencing the results. I had hoped we’d make some progress towards that with this update, but maybe I was naive?
8 Likes
Here’s the results of some online research on the Cessna 172.
- Nose wheel deflection with full left/right rudder ± 10 Degrees
- Nose wheel deflection with full left/right rudder and differential braking ± 30 Degrees
- Tightest turning circle with differential braking 27 feet.
- Wingspan 11 metres
Observations in the sim
- Nose wheel deflection doesn’t change with differential braking
- Turning circle doesn’t change with differential braking (if you can keep it moving)
- Turning circle looks to be almost two wingspans so about double the IRL tightest turning circle
I do see that this bug has been logged but just wanted to add a bit more detail.
6 Likes
Good day fellow simmers
Im not sure if you already aware of, but,
It is possible to adapt diferential toe brakes scale,
This is possible to do in the aircraft own system.cfg under section [ BRAKES ]
here you could up the toebrake scale default is set at 0.66
And for nosewheel steering it is a miscellaneous control option and you can bind to an axis and set sensitvity for it.
In the aircraft own “flight_model.cfg” you can adapt the nosewheel steering
under section [ contact points ]
But you probably new already
Before the edit make a backup of the files you want to modify
Regards
Sebastiaan
The current SU15 beta C172 A1000 ground handing when tryng to taxi , is so messed up it, it defies any form of simple description !!
The C172Sp Classic (that has not been updated in SU15 beta) is currently far superior.
The best way to describe the C172 A1000 is “TWITCHIE” and highly unstable, and prone to tipping over on it’s side far FAR far to easily.
Did anyone at Asobo really even test the C172 A1000 after ground handling changes in SU15 beta ? I cannot believe anyone did ?
I hope it is a beta WIP !!!
5 Likes
Not on Xbox and the 172 G1000 has been modified for SU15 Beta and feedback has been requested. Modifying the model would be pointless and defeat the purpose in this case.
Useful info for PC users in other cases though.
I have given up on the 172 for now. I find it increasingly frustrating to taxi at tax speeds. Hard to turn, requires huge amount of input from me (Thrustmaster pedals) with varying levels of sensitivity tested. This is just my personal experience, I have been trying to taxi. I spent about 20 minutes just practicing around an airport.
Look forward to more updates on the ground handling.,
Have you checked from outside that the nose wheel is deflecting when you apply rudder during taxi? I was taxiing around last night and could easily turn 180 degrees in less than half a standard runway width. I did notice that applying a little too much throttle would cause it to tip over though.
ill check next time - thanks! 
You are right, i keep forgetting xbox, this cannot be done
No problem. The main point though is that the ground contact has been worked on for SU15 and implemented on the C172 G1000 so this beta testing is the best opportunity to get it right before its implemented on other models at release. Potentially some benefit to editing .cfg files if it’s to provide successful changes back to the development team.
1 Like
I did some, in .5 and now with .8, and there are some changes made and i guess it is up to testers,
To see what they think about it before they fine tune it,
(But i still prefere the sp classic for i do fancy glass cockpit so much)
They seemed to introducing new ground model tricks like stickyness, lateral and longitudal speeds in relation to former legacy friction
and soft contact simulation physics.
On top of that the seem to devellope gear flex with damping.
Below the Old .5 Flight_Model.cfg
And the new .8 Flight_Model.cfg
I think the rolling stickyness = 0.4 can be upped to 0.6 or 0.7 with a maximum of 1.0
And it can handle more wind speeds or gusts then without tipping over,
But i think it will affect the steering capacity of the systems.cfg of the toe brake scale under [brakes] there and the have not found a balance in it and they could also in Flight_Model.cfg edit or make changes to min_available_steering_angle_pct, which is now at 0.5
I hope for xbox users that they can see on how they make changes to work for xbox.
Hopefully this bug gets the proper fix before the live release, because in its current state id say the G1000 172s is quite a pain to taxi. If it doesn’t make the live release, i’m hoping this topic can survive through the beta and remain
This is not only happening to the 172 btw, the SR22T also got the new ground parameters enabled and yesterday i experienced the exact same behavior where it just stops almost immediately at slow taxi speeds with minor differential brake input. Its smelling like the new system is a bit broken since the bug is translating to other planes. I had to go way off the runway to make a 180 turn to line up on the runway - pretty immersion breaking…
1 Like
Doesn’t the SR22T have a free-castering nose wheel? Or is that a difference from the base model SR22? (My google searches indicate it does indeed have a free-castering nose wheel, meaning the rudder pedals should have no effect on how easy it is to steer at low speeds because there’s no connection between the pedals and the wheel.)
In the sim they decided to let us have rudder pedals connected to nose wheel steering as a QoL thing, but yes in the real aircraft it is not connected to the rudder pedals.