Hi folks,Just a quick post to update you on the Overland FDE updates I have been working on. By now many of you have downloaded my updates for the A319, A320, A321, A330-200, A330-300, and the A380. Before I finished off the Airbus series with the A340 family, I wanted to let the Boeing drivers know that they haven't been forgotten. I will be turning to the Boeing models next.However, to give you something to whet your appetite, I am just polishing off the Overland 747 FDE. I will release that in the next several days to satisfy some Boeing requests until I get the Airbus A340 family out of the way.Stay tuned!!!-- Outer Marker.

Awesome news, Bryan. I've definitely gotten more out of the Overland airbuses due to your updates. Looking forward to your Boeing fixes as well.Thanks again!

great news and many, many thanks for your work and updates!cheers!

That 747 is a staple in my hangar. Looking forward to seeing the subtle (maybe not so subtle), differences. many thx,

Bryan,Many thanks for your hard work It looks like I now will have to purchase the Overland Boeing planes as well. Have installed all the updates you have provided in the airbus, which has increased my flying pleasure. Carl

sounds great i have a bunch of overland paints waiting to be uploaded from the hangershane

Thank you, Bryan! Can't wait to get my hands on them.And Shane, what are you waiting for? I'm frothing at the mouth for more Overland paints!! Thanks in advance for your work.

Bryan:As you redo the Boeings, would you take a look at the infamous "tail scrape" anomaly experienced by we Overland 737-800 and -900/FSPassengers devotees? It happens if we rotate more than 8 or 9 degrees at takeoff, and not to any other plane -- FSPassengers says we over-rotate, even if we wait to rotate >10 degrees 200 feet or more off the ground! Without FSPax running, the FDE says no problem nor does a visual replay of the takeoff ever show a tail scrape!It's a big problem for those of us who fly the Overland 737 -- Here are a couple of threads that discuss the problem, with a "fix" of the contact points I came up with that didn't really work. (Turns out I was just taking off at a shallower angle and not rotating more until later than than I thought, and I only THOUGHT the fix worked!)" << http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/read.php...375#reply_19761 >><< http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/read.php...521#reply_19770 >>Thanks for all your efforts -- I'm really looking forward to downloading your newly uploaded 747 fix tonight from the library here!Thanks again!

Certainly, I'll take a look at this. I am not familiar with FSPassengers, so I'll do some additional research. I'll need to understand the trigger criteria that FSPassenger uses to determine if a tail strike has happened.I haven't checked out the 737 models yet, but one of the first tests I do for any aircraft is as follows. It will instantly tell you if the weight / balance / contact points are correct:1. Load the 737 or aircraft you wish to test at any airport with a full load of fuel. Press "Y" to enter slew mode. Press "Y" again to exit slew mode. The aircraft should remain stationary.2. Take the same aircraft and put 5% fuel in each of its tanks. Do the slew test again. The aircraft should remain at rest. If at any time the aircraft lurches forward at 250+ knots, there is an issue!The other possibility is that the moment of inertia values are off. It is possible that the 737 has too high a pitch inertia value and a high elevator effectiveness value. While the high effectiveness of the elevator makes the pitch rate seem reasonable, FSPassengers may be looking at the inertial value and read too high. I'll certainly look into this and maybe we can do some beta testing.-- Bryan

>>It is possible that the 737 has too high a pitch inertia value and a high elevator effectiveness value. Oh, I agree completely. I think it's . . . uh . . . that first thing! :-badteeth >>FSPassengers may be looking at the inertial value and read too high. Seriously, this sounds very reasonable based on my experience with the situation. I've raised the tail strike points into the fuselage as much as 5 feet and still gotten the tail strike from FSPax.>>I'll certainly look into this and maybe we can do some beta testing.This would be too cool! It drives me absolutely crazy, and I know people have been posting about this over at the PSPax forum for at least a year. Their response is always that there's nothing they can do because they can't replicate the issue. :-roll

Great news!Since you seem to know a thing or two on the Overland planes, I have a question: is there a merge between the Overland A340-500 and the PSS A340 panel? I know, the FMC would show somewhat wrong values, but still I'd be curious.ThanksChris

I am assuming you want to use the Overland model, but use the PSS panel as it simulates a more technical array of aircraft systems right?If that is the case have you tried panel aliasing? Indulge me for a moment, and forgive me if I am going through something you already know or have tried.In the Overland Aircraft folder, make a copy of the panel folder or otherwise back it up. Make sure only one folder is actually called "panel". Delete any bitmaps you have in the panel folder and then open then panel.cfg file. delete everything in there until it is blank. Then type this:[fltsim]alias=PSS-Aircraft-Folderpanelmake sure that "PSS-Aircraft-Folder" is equal to the folder name of the PSS aircraft you wish to use.Experiment with that and see what happens. Basically you should have the Overland model that calls the PSS panel.I am not familiar with the PSS add-on personally, but the only thing that might be off are the FMC weights and the flap positions. Also, if the PSS autopilot commands a climb/descent based on pitch rather than VSI, you'll run into some issues. Try it out and see, I'd be interested in the results.

>I am assuming you want to use the Overland model, but use the>PSS panel as it simulates a more technical array of aircraft>systems right?Yes, that's exactly it!>>If that is the case have you tried panel aliasing? Indulge me>for a moment, and forgive me if I am going through something>you already know or have tried.>>In the Overland Aircraft folder, make a copy of the panel>folder or otherwise back it up. Make sure only one folder is>actually called "panel". Delete any bitmaps you have in the>panel folder and then open then panel.cfg file. delete>everything in there until it is blank. Then type this:>>[fltsim]>alias=PSS-Aircraft-Folderpanel>>make sure that "PSS-Aircraft-Folder" is equal to the folder>name of the PSS aircraft you wish to use.>>Experiment with that and see what happens. Basically you>should have the Overland model that calls the PSS panel.>>I am not familiar with the PSS add-on personally, but the only>thing that might be off are the FMC weights and the flap>positions. Also, if the PSS autopilot commands a climb/descent>based on pitch rather than VSI, you'll run into some issues.>Try it out and see, I'd be interested in the results.I haven't tried that yet, as I know from experience with other merges (e.g., CLS A340-600 plane with PSS panel, Meljet 777 with PSS panel, etc) that usually one needs to change more than just alias the panels. For precisely the reasons you mention (flaps, VNAV). FMC weights isn't that big of an issue, I am using the PSS panel on the CLS 340-600 and it's OK. Whilst I don't have much hope that it'll work, I'll give it a try and i'll check out this forum to see whether someone has any experience with the merge of these two products.

Let us know how it works -- FWIW, my experience has been that aliasing panels works more often than not -- in an event it'll take about 60 seconds to find out! ;-)

wanted to let the Boeing drivers know that they haven't been forgotten. I will be turning to the Boeing models next. Woot :)