F-86A

[Ramstein]

2 hours ago, Stonehouse said:

Yeah bugged. Until fixed the workaround is to turn on the RPM limiter helper before pressing E and then turn the helper off again once the aircraft is started (assuming you don't want the assist from the helper) and then it should start ok. You might need to map the key for RPM limiter helper. 

thank you, now if they would fix the buggy mouse issues...

 

update: sorry, limiter does nothing does nothing. sorry to be a jerk, but I appreciate the help!

 

NOw I see what I can do, as I was on a server I made and I think I have the limiter disabled in the setup. so now I have to go into the files and change the server settings to allow the limiter. ** There is no server setting to allow for the RPM limiter! **I took a chance and allow Throttle limiter, and that worked!  But it's not a throttle limiter, but hey it made the rpm limiter work! What a mess. but hey it is Beta,, I mean Alpha!). I think that will fix it for now. IL-2 send my testing paychecks to: ******** LOLOL

Edited June 30 by Ramstein

[Stolz]

29.06.2026 в 00:12, Avimimus сказал:

I'm curious Gavrick as to whether this is really a gee load issue. I have a strong suspicion that the aircraft is too unstable in pitch at high speeds... again, that is just my intuition - but it does seem to like porpoising and has a really high third derivative in pitch (if you understand what I'm saying) at higher speeds.

It could be that I'm bad at trim or something though... maybe it is the control system?

Yes, I have the same impression — more on an intuitive level. The issue is very hard to reproduce reliably; it feels rather random. Sometimes you deliberately try to break the wings and nothing happens. Other times, at the same speed and with the same stick inputs, they fold without any trouble.

It feels as if excessive peak values are sometimes being injected into the G-load data, even though they should not be there.

This is easy to check: just fly one map on Berloga in the Sabre against MiGs, then fly one map in the MiG against Sabres. The MiG performs maneuvers without any problem, while even a hint of the same kind of maneuver in the Sabre can cause structural failure.

[Ramstein]

12 hours ago, SYN_Mugue said:

I believe the F-86 had a "weight on wheels switch" that prevented collapsing the landing gear when on the ground if the control was actuated inadvertently. At present in game, this feature is missing. 

Hoping it can get sorted at some point down the line.

Thanks,

M.

I thought i had the low rider mod... clears that up...LOL

[SYN_Mugue]

11 hours ago, Stonehouse said:

Only the mains wheels are covered by the weight on wheels from what I've gathered. The nose wheel had a manually placed safety lock which had to be removed prior to flight by ground crew or the pilot during their walkaround. I have reported this during the beta so like you I'm hoping it is something that can be fixed.

Thanks for finding the relevant section Stonehouse, I knew I read it back when fooling around in DCS many moons ago...

And @Dash,Polder, I was not moving at the time of the incident in question.

Cheers,

M.  

[Gavrick]

29.06.2026 в 02:08, Stonehouse сказал:

Not sure if it is modelled but the F86 did experience aileron up-float which may contribute if it is modelled.

Will be tuned in near (i hope) future.

 

11 часов назад, Stonehouse сказал:

The nose wheel had a manually placed safety lock which had to be removed prior to flight by ground crew or the pilot during their walkaround. I have reported this during the beta so like you I'm hoping it is something that can be fixed.

Will be fixed later.

[Pyro]

And the startup thing? Thats quite important as well.

[Gavrick]

1 час назад, Pyro сказал:

And the startup thing? Thats quite important as well.

Cannot reproduce at my current version. So - i guess - it should be fixed.

[Pyro]

Looking forward for that version to go live then 🙂

[Stolz]

28.06.2026 в 22:03, Gavrick сказал:

In next patch breaking G-load for Sabre will be increased (a bit) - to 11...11.5G.

And you can turn on ingame HUD, and check G-load at all aircraft.

I just enabled the HUD and checked the G-load data on Berloga. The Sabre starts breaking apart somewhere around 10–10.5G. I can’t say more precisely because the G-load increases very quickly. I managed to pull the MiG all the way up to 13.8G, with no signs of structural failure.

Given that, according to the manual, both aircraft have a structural failure limit of 12G, will the MiG’s breaking G-load be brought into line with that value?

[Mr_Tayto]

is it a feature of the F-86 that it wants to do an unrestricted climb when you take your hand off the stick? Or am I doing something wrong?

 

It's not my trim, because that doesn't seem to do anything anyway 🤣 It just seems the MiG-15 is so much more stable in all ways.

[Pyro]

There are several ways to trim the aircraft. Ever tried to bind servo trimming? You can doublebind it to the buttons used for regular trimming. If you keep it neutral all the time then yes, it will start to climb as your speed increases. 

[Mr_Tayto]

38 minutes ago, Pyro said:

There are several ways to trim the aircraft. Ever tried to bind servo trimming? You can doublebind it to the buttons used for regular trimming. If you keep it neutral all the time then yes, it will start to climb as your speed increases. 

I'll try that, thanks. I'm trying to keep up with what I've found in here (and it has helped), so I appreciate it.

[Pyro]

You are welcome. This plane is soo pleasant to fly! Fighting MiGs needs a fair bit more effort than the other way around but that makes kills so more satisfying 🙂

 

I'll head over to the screenshot section later 🙂

[Pyro]

On 6/30/2026 at 7:28 PM, Gavrick said:

Cannot reproduce at my current version. So - i guess - it should be fixed.

Todays patch did not fix it for me. The workaround is to enable the RPM Limiter. So i did that and the startup worked. Afterwards i disabled it but tried to reproduce the Throttlemovements the Autostart did, but still could not start the engine.

 

Not fixed.

[Stolz]

Nothing has really changed, except that now the Sabre’s wings have also started coming off randomly and with poor reproducibility during rolls at speeds of 600–750 km/h, even when the roll is not necessarily sharp and without any noticeable G-loads.

The MiG still easily withstands up to 13.8 G. It turns out that simply loading a little less than half a tank is enough to increase its structural strength. With a full tank, the MiG consistently breaks at around 11.5 G.

The Sabre consistently breaks at around 11 G regardless of the amount of fuel in the tank.

[Husar]

On 6/28/2026 at 10:03 PM, Gavrick said:

In next patch breaking G-load for Sabre will be increased (a bit) - to 11...11.5G.

And you can turn on ingame HUD, and check G-load at all aircraft.

Was that issue correct in the last patch?

[Gavrick]

2 часа назад, Husar сказал:

Was that issue correct in the last patch?

No, still no. Will be adjusted in next wersion.

[MaximumLarry]

Question on High Altitude Mach/Speed Limitations:  I was flying at 35k and noticed the red needle on my IAS Gauge fall to 300knots which would have been around MACH 7.5 or so.  Didn't matter because even after I dropped the tanks I still could barely get the plane to go over 220 knots in a level flight at 95RPM.  This seems like it's well below the aircrafts actual performance capabilities.  I would think at higher altitudes both the IAS and the Mach limits would be closer to .9/500 knots.   Is it just "early release" tweaking needed?  Or does the F86 power output actually get worse at these altitudes?

[Pyro]

Thats normal behavoiur as the instruments just dont show the true values. You would need to use a little bit of math to really get the true speed values. The higher you go, the bigger the difference gets.

[Dash,Polder]

2 minutes ago, Pyro said:

Thats normal behavoiur as the instruments just dont show the true values. You would need to use a little bit of math to really get the true speed values. The higher you go, the bigger the difference gets.

Turn on the mini-HUD, all that info is right there and usable.

[MaximumLarry]

Thanks for the replies.  Any reason why I couldn't break 220knots at 35K IAS running at 95-100% RPM?  I don't know that much about the plane.  Thanks

[Senor_Jefe]

https://pilotinstitute.com/airspeed-types/

Because IAS at 35k ft appears much lower than the TAS.

[Banzai]

Airbrake switch on the throttle is not animated and appears to be stuck in retract position. 

[86Cheese]

20 hours ago, MaximumLarry said:

Thanks for the replies.  Any reason why I couldn't break 220knots at 35K IAS running at 95-100% RPM?  I don't know that much about the plane.  Thanks

 

12 hours ago, Senor_Jefe said:

https://pilotinstitute.com/airspeed-types/

Because IAS at 35k ft appears much lower than the TAS.

I'm pretty sure there are charts for each plane in the handbook for Indicated vs. True Airspeed based on altitude

[Senor_Jefe]

1 hour ago, 86Cheese said:

 

I'm pretty sure there are charts for each plane in the handbook for Indicated vs. True Airspeed based on altitude

Don't think the platform matters (making the assumption based on modern airframes).  IAS should realistically the same regardless of pitot system or hardware.  It's strictly a velocity vs environment issue.  There are calculators online you can mess with to change temp from ISA, altitude and other variables to see how it impacts IAS, CAS, TAS and Mach.