Carenado C185F Bush Review Feedback

[kiwiflyer45 123]

I enjoyed reading the review of the Carenado C185F Bush. It was well-written, well-illustrated and I thought it was accurate and fair. There were just two omissions that I think could have been mentioned.1. I have found that it has a surprisingly high FPS hit for a GA product with a simple, analogue panel. I even tried converting the textures to DXT3 to see if that would help but it didn't make any appreciable difference. I think readers with modest systems should be warned that they may not be pleased with the FPS they may get from this otherwise excellent product.2. I found that there were several "tweaks" that I had to make to the aircraft.cfg file to correct a few issues. The "Tundra" model could only be flown on and off very smooth surfaces. If there were any irregularities in the surface it would begin bouncing up and down and then "crash." The reason was that Carenado used the same numbers for the Tundra version that they used for the conventional wheel version. That meant the extra radius of the tires was screwing up the contact points. The POV also needed to be adjusted. I have several thousand hours on real-world C185's and although I'm a short guy (5'6") I could still see the top of the cowling. Yes it's a tail dragger and yes, like any taildragger you do need to "fishtail" the rudder when taxiing so you can see ahead, but the real thing is not as bad as the Carenado version. Lastly, there was neglible torque yaw on take-off. The real 185 needs lots of rudder when you apply full power and also when you raise the tail to the take-off position. If anyone purchases it and finds any of these things an issue, there are threads in the Carenado support forum that address them or they are welcome to PM me and I'll send them my tweaked .cfg file to try. (I take no credit for the tweaks BTW - there were some wonderfully helpful and knowledgable users on the forum who walked me through it)...It's a great product and was accurately reviewed but I just felt I needed to add some "caveats" so potential buyers know that there are some flaws. But it is worth buying and the floatplane version is especially enjoyable and brought back a lot of good memories for me.

[Benjamin J 751]

Thanks, both for the kind words and the useful comments! I think future buyers (myself included, by the way), will find it useful. I agree with you that the POV could have been a bit higher. You are sitting a bit low in the cockpit. If you looked at the video I made, you might have noticed I actually shifted the POV a tad higher so I could see more through the windshield.The tweaks you talk about, were they necessary because the plane bounces almost always on landing, or only on bumpy surfaces? I have had exactly the same problem you described, so I emailed them and got a tweaked aircraft.cfg from them which pretty much fixed it. That said, I did not test the aircraft on grass or dirt strips, now that I think of it... Only water and concrete/asphalt.

[kiwiflyer45 123]

Thanks, both for the kind words and the useful comments! I think future buyers (myself included, by the way), will find it useful. I agree with you that the POV could have been a bit higher. You are sitting a bit low in the cockpit. If you looked at the video I made, you might have noticed I actually shifted the POV a tad higher so I could see more through the windshield.The tweaks you talk about, were they necessary because the plane bounces almost always on landing, or only on bumpy surfaces? I have had exactly the same problem you described, so I emailed them and got a tweaked aircraft.cfg from them which pretty much fixed it. That said, I did not test the aircraft on grass or dirt strips, now that I think of it... Only water and concrete/asphalt.

Hi BenjaminAs I recall, nobody from the support staff got involved in the forum discussions that resulted in me being able to tweak the aircraft.cfg file. The great guys who helped me were all very well-informed users. But it's probable the Carenado staff read the discussion and hopefully the revised file they sent you fixed the problem. It was pretty clear to me that they had not tested the Tundra file's behavior on the ground - if they had, they would have realised what the problem was. (The bigger tires did not work with the contact points for the standard version). But give it a try on a bumpy airstrip or land it anywhere on a reasonably flat bit of ground. If it shakes itself to death, it's not fixed. If it does, then they fixed it with a revised file. (And in case anyone thinks it was my lousy landings that were the problem, it also happened on take-off!) :Raised Eyebrow: Cheers

[Benjamin J 751]

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll try to land it on a bumpy airstrip next time.

[qazs022002 0]

I found that there were several "tweaks" that I had to make to the aircraft.cfg file to correct a few issues. The "Tundra" model could only be flown on and off very smooth surfaces. If there were any irregularities in the surface it would begin bouncing up and down and then "crash." _________________Prada HandbagsLouboutin ShoesDiscount Christian Louboutin