RealAir Marchetti SF260

[michal 44]

Rob,While developing this flight model did you also have to resort to some "tricks" similar to what you had done in FLY (if my memory serves me right) - like adding fake wings, etc ?? Michael J.

[LAdamson 240]

>Rob, >>While developing this flight model did you also have to >resort to some "tricks" similar to what you had done in FLY >(if my memory serves me right) - like adding fake wings, etc >?? >While watching some aerobatic aircraft perform at a "fly-in" this morning, I was wondering the same thing, and would be interested to know also. Of course it's all an illusion by whatever means possible ----- isn't it? :)L.AdamsonP.S.--- Michael, do you have the SF260 yet? It may just move Rob and Team to the top of the MSFS flight dynamics mountain!

[Guest]

Hi Peter,>Long time no hear.True, there are simply not too many A/C available at the moment that I need to ask questions about ;-)Yes, I like the SF260 very much.It's incredible realistic and immersive.My large pencil SF260 3-view drawing was also the first time in school when I got the best mark for a drawing.(that was at the age of 14 but I still remember and I still have it).The only thing I dislike is the engine response time.Nearly 8sec from idle to full. That's more like a big jet engine.With the rather harsh stall characteristics I would appreatiate and need a much faster engine response.RegardsBernt Stolle Capt CRJ

[Guest]

HI Michael,I prefer to call them "ghost" wings rather than "fake" ;)But no, not this time and you can't really add wings in FS. Even if I could explain, which I am not at liberty to, it would take about a week to write it down!Best Regards,Rob

[Guest]

HI Bernt,I agree the engine run up is too slow. Sometimes it's actually quicker if you gently increase the thrust. I worked for a long time to try and improve this, but it caused other problems and I think FS generally has a slow prop run up time with other aircraft too.Yes the stall drop is crisp, due to the thin tapered wings of the Sf260. As you know this kind of wing tends to stall suddenly with no mush.Cheers,Rob Young

[Guest]

Hi,Just to say that I agree 200% with AFOX when he says "ALL of the flight-simming community should be told about it".I now have like 50 hours on the SF.260 and it has become my default aircraft. I cannot imagine to return to any MS default or 3rd party GA planes. It would be like having to go down to earth once you have been to heaven :-) My only wish is that the next RealAir Simulation aircraft be for FS2002 !Nadege.

[Guest]

NadegeMany thanks for your comments. Our pleasure even with the 260 being payware is the fact that you are having a lot of enjoyement from the skills of Rob Young and Sean Moloney.We are finalising plans to build a Citation Jet CJ1 which is an aircraft I have full access to.It will be as groundbreaking in its own right as the SF260.RegardsPeter

[Guest alanrco]

Just want to say thanks to Rob for the info below. I dusted off my old Saitek(non-USB) 'cause I'm left-handed. No drivers for XP and the default MS 6 button + rudder was so jerky I thought the pots were gone. Lucky I didn't throw it because I discovered by accident that the CH drivers work perfectly for this stick.And yes the CH gear WAS the problem, not only for the spins but also for the awful yaw comming in to land. Strangely it works okay for other craft.The Saitek is better for the 260 tho 'cause it's a stick and not a yoke so more realistic.THANKS AGAIN ROB!>HI Alan, >>We put a note in the docs about CH hardware. The CH sticks >with dedicated trim sometimes fight against the default >settings. Also the CH stick is the ONLY stick we discovered >that did not give us consistent rudder calibration for the >Sf260, even though it appears calibrated dead centre in the >calibration setup. >>In development tests the Sf260 spun both ways fine, but in >fact we tended to get more probs to the right than left. >>Not quite sure about the yaw you mentioned.>Best Regards, >>Rob Young >RealAir Simulations

[michal 44]

Peter,Got my email about the CJ1 (sent about 3 days ago) ? I used the Avsim utility to send it. My typical bla-bla about flght modelling :-lolAlso I wonder which cockpit will be implemented since I understand CJ1 can come with either the latest Collins mutlti-display setup or more old fashioned HSI and EADI (depending on the production year). But I think both have some sort of FMS. Are you good fellows thinking of doing the FMS ?Michael J.

[Guest]

MichaelI had to do the last race by ESPA into France which took me away for a couple of days.I used a Seneca Five owned by a guy I fly for who kindly let me use it as a thanks.He is not a pilot but came as my navigator for the air race.Sadly I have only just seen your mail.The aircraft will be modelled on the CJ1 which is owned by a sister company of the owner of the Seneca five I used for the race.This CJ1 was brand new in february of this year ;-)and I have full access to the aircraft.Peter

[michal 44]

Thanks Peter. Sounds awesome (both your race and the upcoming CJ1).Michael J.

[Guest]

Peter,I wish the Citation you are talking about be number one in the list of the planes to be build by RAS.Sorry for my Fly ! II fellows ;-)Best,Nadege

[Guest]

Back again with a ques for anyone on the RealAir squad...Or anyone with their own licensed copy of the Marchetti.Little birdy tells me on another of my threads that the SF260's registration number can be changed and is visible on the aircraft's fuselage ? Mine won't to do it ? In all fairness to him I should have waited for his answer to my quandry but I'm intrigued and came here. Can you do this ? If so how ? Mine doesn't want to know.Best AFOX :-)

[Guest]

Hi AFOX,Unfortunately the reg numbers are fixed on the SF.260. It looked better that way... :-)Sean MoloneyRealAir Simulations,http://www.realairsimulations.com

[Guest]

Thanks for clearing that one up Sean, cheers.AFOX :-wave