Is there a way to increase the parking brake effectiveness?

Is this a problem with all aircraft or a specific one?

Ya man there is a way. I was gonna posta thread today about it to ask if anyone knows how to do it. I know its in the Aircraft.CFG but I dont know what the value is anyways if someone could help that be great. If I find out somewhere else I'll let you know. Take Care.

Is there a way to increase the parking brake effectiveness?

Is this a problem with all aircraft or a specific one?

I think all, if you just let them sit for hours, and the jets seem worse. It not a really bad problem but sometimes it can be annoying.And with the ConcordeX INS setting the aircraft must remain still.

true, it can lead to some problems. (on that rare occasion)There are a few threads on this topic

Is there a way to increase the parking brake effectiveness?

One of the smart guys on the Maddog forum - Lennart Vedin - has created a small .exe which ... apparently .. works... I can't verify this, but check it out, it may be the answer.Here's the post :-http://www.flythemaddog.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=8261and Lennart's site:-http://hem.passagen.se/lvedin/dk/freeware/fs/

How can a modeler determine what is causing this 'creeping' without running into the obvious I don't know. Is it because he used MICROSOFT MD-83 cfg and air file (and can't/won't make changes because of the EULA?). And what does this 'fix' really do? He don't say. It doesn't matter. Follow me.So, if you look at the MD-83 cfg you will find: 'toe_brakes_scale = 0.89'? THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. But they have to make it this so it don't nose dive when you apply brakes. Bogus. (Yes YOU MS!). THE CONTACT POINTS compression for nose wheel is INVOLVED in this, but since I don't have the Mad Dob, I can't advcie. But I assure you it (nose wheel compression ratio, etc) is WRONG. Post that section and I can test/comfirm). So change value to '=1.031' and if you want 'differential_braking_scale', make that '=0.800'. Then you HAVE to go to air file where you will find: (in section 1011, Flight Dynamics): 'braking strength=0'. Change that to '= -32767'. This regulates braking much better.The MD-83 has a 'cargo' load of 33,000 Lbs. Which (some modlers ASSUME) 'requires' more STATIC THRUST in (TurbineEngineData) section? In the default MD it's 21000 lbs of thrust. So if your Mad Dog has static thrust of 36999 to 56999 (or something along those lines- which is excessive!!) then you will realize that THIS is why it creeps even with the parking brake applied. No brakes & too much static thrust-dah! So you could reduce the 'cargo' load to 22000 (and pretend it's 33000-hey, whatever works!). So reduce the static_thrust to between 21000 and 37000 (MAX!!!). Your Dog should not creep now. Unless you have 11000 load and 12% fuel, then it might as the weight factors in air file is '=0' (should be '32768'), and empty weight is '=0'(s/b around 80,000 Lbs).Now if it's a FSX 'compliant' model (ie: 'fsx' air file) then all this gets taken care of in the cfg. But if you use a different model (ie: air for FS9) such as one with entries with '2k2' sections, then you need to make these changes so the brakes and engines will be effective in FSX.THEN in (jet_engine) section increase the 'thrust_scalar' to '=1.3' (or even'=1.5', it's 'ok') to compensate. (If your cfg don't have that section here is what it looks like so you can add it to cfg:[jet_engine]thrust_scalar=1.0 //it can be (MAX) of 2.0 //scalar could be 0.9999 or 1.4999 (or 2.999 ?) for values. Pick your poison-hehe.This is where you 'compensate' (in FSX !). I know, the popular notion has always been that there is where you increase thrust to get higher speeds and/or more 'power'. Perhaps for higher cruise speeds at altitude. But we're talking about thrust for take offs. So I understand the 'mind set' (perpetuated by 'noob' tweakers). SDK? It's not in there. (It's a NON SDK subject, so I don't want to 'hear' it Bill-bug off).CBNapamule

Jeeezz.. I'll just keep my dumb mouth shut next time.

I'll just state that some of what 'Napamule' posted is 100% completely inaccurate. Do so at your own risk.The reason aircraft in flight sim creep: friction coefficients in the base sim. As one person already stated, the physics of how tires interact with a surface are extremely complex... moreso than aerodynamics actually.

To add more to what Ed wrote...I've even seen some aircraft that will "creep" forwards, backwards and even sideways when parked cold and dark, with the parking brake set! I've also seen aircraft that would "twirl in place" slowly, taking as much as a full hour to rotate 360

One solution is to only switch engines on after your push back is done and you ready to taxi