Flight Model Errors

[kiwikat]

I guess I'll be the first one to point out things I found unrealistic or just plain wrong.1) The takeoff distance is way off. This is probably the worst thing. Everywhere online says a takeoff run of 1000-1250 feet is realistic for the F33. The best I can get is 2400.2) The flaps cause far too much drag. I've had to reduce the flaps' drag scalar by .6 and it still isn't right. 3) The plane is way too sensitive on the pitch axis. It feels more like an aerobatic aircraft than GA. The roll and yaw axis are fine though.4) The elevator trim is also too sensitive. It is very difficult to trim the aircraft properly because of it.I'll add to the list if I find anything else.If you guys can fix the flight model errors, we'll have a real winner on our hands. Visually it is the best Carenado plane yet. I also like the soundset.

[spotlope]

I can confirm the excessive takeoff run. Just tried loading it at Stark's Twin Oaks (7S3), which has a 2465-foot runway. I can't get the F33 off the ground in that distance. In fact, it takes most of the runway just to get the speed up over 40kts. Can't comment on the twitchy elevator trim, because I've yet to get it off the ground. ;-)It looks stunning, but there definitely seem to be some tweaks required to get it flying right.

[Geofa]

I guess I'll be the first one to point out things I found unrealistic or just plain wrong.1) The takeoff distance is way off. This is probably the worst thing. Everywhere online says a takeoff run of 1000-1250 feet is realistic for the F33. The best I can get is 2400.2) The flaps cause far too much drag. I've had to reduce the flaps' drag scalar by .6 and it still isn't right. 3) The plane is way too sensitive on the pitch axis. It feels more like an aerobatic aircraft than GA. The roll and yaw axis are fine though.4) The elevator trim is also too sensitive. It is very difficult to trim the aircraft properly because of it.I'll add to the list if I find anything else.If you guys can fix the flight model errors, we'll have a real winner on our hands. Visually it is the best Carenado plane yet. I also like the soundset.

I'll be putting it thru testing the next few days...Re #1-Are you talking at sea level on a standard day and what is the weight? Give them a non standard day and a load and they will take much more runway. I was for a while based at a small airport with 2500 ft. runway. I had a personal limit of 70 degrees F . Once it reached that I was only going to go out with myself on board and full fuel, and even that could be a little dicey with 50 ft. trees at the end of the runway. Put it in a high density altitude airport with a load and the performance really went down. Of course mine had the 225 hp engine-I am not sure what is on this yet as I haven't had time to look.Re#3-I agree-though I just find it needs a dose of stability in this axisRe #4- The trim wheel works perfectly and moves just the right amount on my rig and trims very much like the real plane-at least on my setup. I am very happy here.I haven't checked the flaps performance yet..or even the basic numbers...

[kiwikat]

Re #4- The trim wheel works perfectly and moves just the right amount on my rig and trims very much like the real plane-at least on my setup. I am very happy here.

Any ideas how I can tame the trim with my X52 pro? It seems this is more of a controller issue on my end than an issue with the plane.

[Geofa]

Any ideas how I can tame the trim with my X52 pro? It seems this is more of a controller issue on my end than an issue with the plane.

I am using a goflight trim wheel so not sure. It sure works great with it.

[spotlope]

Geof, is there an elevator trim indicator somewhere? If there is, I missed it in my first go-round of the cockpit.

[ryanbatc]

Any ideas how I can tame the trim with my X52 pro? It seems this is more of a controller issue on my end than an issue with the plane.

Ditto I use the force feedback 2 sidewinder... Requires a ton of trim for takeoff and cruise and back to landing config

[rossdh]

Couple of other things. 1. Flaps lever only moves to the fully down position2. GPS is really difficult to use in the VC as there are no click spots

[Geofa]

I can confirm the excessive takeoff run. Just tried loading it at Stark's Twin Oaks (7S3), which has a 2465-foot runway. I can't get the F33 off the ground in that distance. In fact, it takes most of the runway just to get the speed up over 40kts. Can't comment on the twitchy elevator trim, because I've yet to get it off the ground. ;-)It looks stunning, but there definitely seem to be some tweaks required to get it flying right.

What was the density altitude, and load? As I mentioned in another thread-when I flew out of a 2500 ft. runway with 50 ft. trees at the end I would not consider a takeoff with more than a single pilot, full fuel, and 70 degrees F. Get near 80 degrees and it was a no go. I am actually finding the fm very good though I'd like a little more stability on the pitch access. The roll rate is excellent, the heaviness of the controls right, and so far the numbers seem right on. Like a bo-lower the nose and she gains airspeed very fast-also good here.

[Geofa]

Geof, is there an elevator trim indicator somewhere? If there is, I missed it in my first go-round of the cockpit.

Yep-push the " a" key a few times and you will get the trim wheel and indicator.Another suggestion-raise your head height a little on this plane-you should see just a little cowling in your viewpoint for an accurate position..

Couple of other things. 1. Flaps lever only moves to the fully down position2. GPS is really difficult to use in the VC as there are no click spots

re: #1-I don't have that problem-works fine with my hardware controller (goflight).

Ditto I use the force feedback 2 sidewinder... Requires a ton of trim for takeoff and cruise and back to landing config

What does a "ton" of trim mean exactly.There have been accidents with bo's because the pilot on a touch and go forgot to retrim. They have quite a heavy force on the controls and perhaps that equates to a "ton" of trim?

[spotlope]

I have a thought regarding the takeoff roll... one of the other slightly odd things I've noticed about this F33 is that it seems to take a lot of power to unstick it from a dead stop to start taxiing. It's almost as if the friction of the ground is too strong. I did manage to get it to take off at Twin Oaks, but I had to dump 30% of the fuel from both tanks and get rid of the passenger. Even then, it seemed very reluctant to leave the ground; only jumping into the air after I yanked hard on the yoke (and with a considerable amount of nose-up elevator trim, too). Is there one scalar somewhere that controls ground friction? If so, that might be a place to start looking to even things out. Just a thought.

[Guest sg38]

I have a thought regarding the takeoff roll... one of the other slightly odd things I've noticed about this F33 is that it seems to take a lot of power to unstick it from a dead stop to start taxiing. It's almost as if the friction of the ground is too strong.

How fast is it coming to a stop without braking during rollout (compared to e.g. the 172)? Might be a bad prop efficiency/engine friction etc.. setting in the air and/or cfg file.

[raymar]

Couple of other things. 1. Flaps lever only moves to the fully down position2. GPS is really difficult to use in the VC as there are no click spots

Check a little more closely to find the click spots, they just not as close to the knobs as most. JUst watch for the arrow to become the hand, they are there.I think Geof is going to have to become the "BeaverDriver" for the Bonanza to get all the little things identified and tweaked. It sure worked for the C185F. I am most disappointed in the lack of resolution in the VC for the labels for the switches. Whoever is making the master list - please add that to the list. Thanks.

[Geofa]

Check a little more closely to find the click spots, they just not as close to the knobs as most. JUst watch for the arrow to become the hand, they are there.I think Geof is going to have to become the "BeaverDriver" for the Bonanza to get all the little things identified and tweaked. It sure worked for the C185F. I am most disappointed in the lack of resolution in the VC for the labels for the switches. Whoever is making the master list - please add that to the list. Thanks.

I agree on the lack of resolution for the switches-especially since everything else is so stellar. Also the beacon is off center..Bill-as far as pulling it off on takeoff-have you achieved enough speed? Mine literally leaps off which is what I would expect-but try to pull it off early and it will just mush. Try at 40 knts just pulling the nice slightly up and hold that attitude till the plane flies itself off.As far as the flight model-I might not be the brightest bulb but it would take me weeks of testing to really see if anything needed to be corrected. So far I don't find the ground roll excessive though it may be a little on the long side. The major thing I notice is the pitch response, and I have noticed a very gentle handling on the stick takes care of that. However, I'd like pitch to perform as nicely as the roll/bank which seems right on (heavyness, response time, smoothness etc.).For those having trouble taking off from a 2500' strip-try single pilot (remove a passenger) and set the temp no warmer than 70F. I unfortunately have to work most the day and can't do tests like that till late tonight...but that was my rough rule of thumb for the 225 hp version.

[kiwikat]

For those having trouble taking off from a 2500' strip-try single pilot (remove a passenger) and set the temp no warmer than 70F. I unfortunately have to work most the day and can't do tests like that till late tonight...but that was my rough rule of thumb for the 225 hp version.

This one's got 285 HP and should be able to take off in less than 1500 feet for sure. I've made some edits and its pretty decent now. I think I'll stop playing with it and enjoy it until they release some patches.