contact with ground makes the plane too stable, bad 3D I'd say..
Ah... so.... Possibility good.
About Real planes with their flight characteristics, relationships between ~~ G-Center / main gears' fulcrum / elevators' fulcrum and square ~~ make their taking-off rotation easier or harder.
The main gears' fulcrum is better to set near of G-Center for easy rotation.
Some fighters' elevator size (often made wider on product models than prototype) are decided by how to make enough tail-down effect for its take-off rotation , instead of Maneuver-ability in the air.
In developing F/A-18E/F
Super Hornet , its main gears' fulcrum is set too backward and too near to elevators' fulcrum; it makes less tail down effect only by elevators. They make V style rudders pull inside to assist tail down in taking-off.
About flight sim 3d models and their flightmodels, each models' 3D Pivot x,y,z=(0,0,0) are better to be made equal to flightmodels' G-Center.
But it is not an obligation.
We can correct flightmodels' G-Center position by FM files' GCenter XYZ entries to set relatives (offsets) for the 3d model, maybe in IL-2 1946.
So, if the plane's 3D Pivot is made too forward than its real one , it makes too stable on the ground and inhibits rotation.
Need to Check real planes' flight manuals with a description where its G-Center existing (some illustration or value tables) and comparing 3d model Pivot (0,0,0) with FM GCenter offset values.
Another case , I talked.
Some Jets show rotation is made good in 6 or 10 degrees pitch-up but no lift until 320 ~ 340 km/h (even finally succeed to take-off without gears breaking) .... they might be less flaps lift effect.
It is also not Engine mod side one.
It's difficult to decide the best values of flaps for heavier jets. Big lift effect values of flaps make planes too unstable in low speeds or too big drag cannot keep approach speed even throttle opened.
IL-2 1946 is not designed for such planes.