@willisxdc is talking about the takeoff case.
Asobo is aparently still working on the elevator effectiveness.
In previous version you could force a tailstrike with e.g. the 152/172 at 0kts at brake release.
Now it’s the other extreme, you can’t lift the nosewheel from the runway.
edit: You can still do that? Which aircraft?
I’ll need to retry in that case. I’m sure I’ve trundled along the runway in the BBS BN2 Islander with the nose off the runway. This might be a good reason for me to try out one of those recording programs I’ve never used before.
The ability to rotate prior to Vr depends a lot on the aircraft (and CG).
On some aircraft you can’t, on some aircraft it’s very easy and very soon.
The bigger the aircraft, the more effect the CG position has.
Yeah, it makes sense it would be a per aircraft issue, rather than an issue across the board.
So presumably even on aircraft that won’t rotate early when configured normally, you could “get around” that by setting the CG further back than is safe to fly? I must confess I don’t tend to mess around with that too much, unless I was using something like Neofly, which currently doesn’t do a great job when assigning loads due to, I think, sim limitations.
Yes, I’ve seen that image before, on the Discord recently.
Yeah I noticed that, on aircraft with trimmable horizontal stabilizer it works the same which is weird because that type of system can be perfectly simulated the way it is already. For some reason they chose to use the same workaround used on conventional elevator with trim tab.
How can one compare the performance and output the graph, so it can be compared?
It’s not trivial, here’s what I did:
So to all Real Experts on this forum: here’s your chance:
Thank you for sharing with us, I am sure, Asobo will improve on our great simulator, and we will have more realistic performance of all aircraft.
I like these graphics, it is like Matlab, and Mathematica, It can be used to simulate accurate flight model, and improve greatly on our artistic simulator. The Fine Art of numbers can enable users to have an option relative to their preferences, what they love more, graphics, or physics, and then enable users to choose relative to their hardware performance, and if there are users that don’t mind investing in two systems, or more CPU cores, as well as GPUs, then they can have even a better experience with the simulator.
Do you know what the general compensation is for flight characteristics consulting?
Compensation? Seriously?
A warm fuzzy feeling from the knowledge that you were able to assist in making our hobby better.
Or a hat. A hat would be lovely.
Ever tried emailing a hat?
I truly hope they bring aboard some RL pilots with hours closer to 5 digits instead of 3 digit PPL “aviator-gods”, or even worse, simmers pretending to be RL pro pilots, those could actually do some damage 
I think anyone foolish enough to do that would be found out quite quickly.
Out of curiosity, do you think that this video is a normal day-to-day operation?
Do you believe that those out-of-control take-offs and landings are the norm of the industry?