If at the proper airspeed I find the Carenado acts as IRL upon flare on landing.

 

Hi fppilot,

 

Certainly glad we're back on topic. What parameters did you use? Flaps, touchdown speed, power. I flew it similar than I have other Cessnas and that didn't work for me. When I read instructions from RW pilots and RW checklists they said things like "leave a bit of power in on landing" and "hold the nose up as you roll out." The former helped...the latter was hard for me to do (except, oddly, cross-controlled on a crosswind landing).

 

Gregg

Gregg,

I was also busy capturing screen shots of KPHL each time I landed, once each on 09L, 27R, and 17, so I did not note power setting per the numbers, only by lever position. I was full forward on prop pitch and mixture and just under half throttle position on my Saitek Cessna Pro Flight Yoke. Then as I start to flare I cut more power and raise the nose. I replayed the final landing with chase camera view and could see that my flare was not as pronounced as it seemed from the cockpit, with the nose wheel contact coming well less than a second after touchdown. Of note is that landing was to R17 with live weather and based on ATIS was with likely a 12-15 knot tail wind, so ground speed was higher.

 

I was at the second notch of flaps. I normally maneuver at one notch. Depending on distance from the tdz, I typically drop gear and increase flaps simultaneously at the OM and that is from an airspeed of about 120 knots. That tends to counteract the increase in lift caused by the increase in flaps (see more on that below). Back to landings, I seldom land with full flaps, but that would enhance a more nose up attitude at landing. I just find that reduces my visibility (FSX) of the runway more than I like. I haven't gotten into iWear type technology yet. I fly with VC at all times and find I have to manage my VC distance and eye height to maintain view of critical instruments and the runway and still have VC function with my mouse pointer.

 

BTW, one thing about this 210 I do have a complaint about is that lift upon engaging flaps is just too pronounced. I find that to be especially true with the first notch. I am really battling with my yoke to keep the nose down, often seeing the VSI at +1,000 ft or more. It is more pronounced if I engage flaps at 140 knots or so than if I slow to 130, but its still too pronounced at 130 knots, which is a typical flaps engagement airspeed IRL.

The best I could get of a real flair was between 11-12 Mg. I was just doubting that I'd be able to be that careful popping out of a low ceiling and bad visibility since it also required real attention to attitude. I didn't try bigger throttle settings as the float was already pretty high. Maybe a higher Mg would work with flaps 20? I noticed how the flaps seemed to be odd too but it wasn't as big of a deal and I could have lived with it. I didn't fly a full instrument approach...I'd probably just have put the flaps in a little lower speed.

Gregg,

I just checked my log (spreadsheet variety) and I have logged only 9 flights for a total of 7.8 hours in the Centurion, and I believe that would account for 11 landings. One each for each of the earlier flights and then three yesterday with the first two being T&Gs. Before yesterday the most recent was in early March of this year. I'm planning on a hop in the Centurion today from KPHL to KVAY (formerly 7MY), South Jersey Regional, where I flew from IRL from '85 to '98, then from there back to my current base at KESN, Easton-Newnan, Easton, Md. I plan to play around with flap deployment at a variety of speeds, and will also manage speed better on final and touchdown and then post back. I may do some T&Gs at KVAY for old time sake!

-fppiltot

I pulled this out of the hangar last night to see......

 

I actually found that if you add some weight to the middle and rear seats it makes a big difference. 180 pounds for the middle and 50 pounds for the rear (= small child or a few boxes?)

 

70 knots touchdown speed allows a nice mains first with nosewheel down shortly after.

 

I still find the pitch very twitchy without my 'elevator effectiveness' .cfg tweak.

 

It certainly does NOT handle like a heavy 172 which according to actual pilot reports it should.

 

I really like the 210 to look at, just wish Bernt had done the FDE for this one as well but I think it was just before he came on board.

 

It has masses of potential for any FDE gurus outhere....

Somebody feed that info to Bernt right away! I thought about cheating and using my c182 fde...lol.

Well GHarrell got to this before I did today. I am now in agreement with Gregg. I flew from PHL to VAY where I did a pair of touch and gos. Funny, I first typed tough and gos. Anyway, from there back to PHL for a T&G on R17, then back in the air and back home to KESN. Four separate landings. I slowed on all approaches to touch down at or under 85 knots, mostly at 80 knots, all at full flaps. I did not bother changing the default loading of the airplane, which likely affected the results some. So I was in at probably a 170 lb pilot, full fuel, and nothing else.

 

I did not have fun. First, the FSX runway at VAY (South Jersey Regional, Mt Holly, NJ) is unusually narrow, so perhaps I had to spend a bit more of my concentration on staying on center. The 210 was way too buoyant. With full flaps config and 80 knots if I attempted to flare I floated. And not just some. A lot! I had much better success yesterday landing at around 90 knots with only the middle notch of flaps, and also in traditional flight simulator style > flying it onto the runway. i.e. landing level, not flared. Despite dealing with the narrow runway at VAY, I still had the same experience when back at PHL for that T&G. Then again at home at ESN. I had the same experience on each landing, again each with full flaps and moderately slow speed. I have not bounced an airplane like that in a long long time.

 

I noted something else. The screen shot below was taken at 2,000 ft, level flight, 120 knots, and a notch of flaps, which you can see in the screen shot of N108P. Note the slight nose down attitude. A 182 anyway would be nose level or barely nose up in that configuration. If this 210 model is exhibiting a carry forward of that type of deviation to relative scale at full flaps and say 80 knots (not realistically nose-high) then that could make proper flare an issue as in effect it would take, in search of another term, over-corrective action. That's a real life textbook reason for floating on touchdown.

 

I'll be away for the next few days and unable to fly, but I'll be watching this topic to see what experiences come from others.

 

Funny, someone mentioned about the nose gear being hyper-extended. I couldn't see it visually myself (though, watching the airplane, it seemed quite possible) but if they airplane itself has an unrealistic nose down the effect might be the same...nose wheel too level with the mains. I did A LOT of landings with the aircraft, watching the aircraft from the side to observe how it was. Like I said, I *can* make it flare...really flare...but it took focus and, to me, has a very narrow range of success...final at 75 KIAS, holding 11-12 Mg of power in to touchdown (full flaps) (or, perhaps, goosing the power if you got close to 62...I didn't experiment enough with that) and hold the nose at the proper angle and get the airplane on the ground before it hit's 62 KIAS.

 

Something else: stall speed is down around 58 (some models it's less) and, with ground effect, it should float gracefully into the lower 50s if it's handled right. I can't think of a reason for it falling so hard at 61 or less and that, by itself, could be the biggest piece of the problem...falling before the nose has a real chance to come up. If I still had the airplane I'd try flaps 2 to see what power setting to use. Wish I'd done it and I wish I could try the weight settings someone GHarrell suggested (though, they shouldn't be necessary.)

I just flew to Oshkosh and back with a friend in his P210 so I am all about getting this plane where it should be with respect to the FDE! If Bert is still around and would like to tackle the project my friend would be more than happy to help him with some real world numbers.

 

I flew the approach on the way back and I can tell you, from flying a 172, that the 210 is much heavier on approach. Also, he really had the nose up on flare and rollout. So maybe this model is closer than we think.

 

After flying a couple of hours in a real 210 I am dying to fly this one more in FSX. Hopefully someone will get the FDE where it should be because it is a great visual model.

 

Also, he really had the nose up on flare and rollout. So maybe this model is closer than we think.

 

That's exactly what this one is so difficult to get to do. This 210 has to be handled very precisely to get a nose up. You could give your friend the info I posted right above yours on this model to see what he thinks. I agree, it is a beautiful model visually and has nice avionics. I'd buy it again. (High wing aircraft are like The Catcher in the Rye to me. LOL)

BTW, I found this post from Bernt from July 10...

 

http://www.sim-outho...hp/t-68931.html

 

E.g. the F33 and the V35 FDE were rather easy to do because they were based on the A36 FDE and hence not too much work.

The 210 on the other hand uses an entirely different laminar flow wing section so this would require a total new FDE which would take way too long.

Furthermore I've got a lot of promises from 'real' 210 pilots that they would love to help and as soon as I sent them my questions concerning handling etc....silence...

Unfortunately that happens with most projects.

Concerning the Waco, if nothing unexpected happens you can expect my FDEs in all future FDEs for Carenado/Alabeo and Milviz (apart from the 737)

 

He really needs input from a real C210 pilot to even begin to make progress.

Hi, Just to put my 2 cents worth in here, I have AirWrench, the paid version, and I noticed that the flap setting in the 210 was originally set at -52.4. That will give the plane alot of nose down force and cause the pilot to have to input alot more back pressure on the yoke. I haven't found out why with that setting the plane tries to stand on its tail when flaps are lowered but I raised that -52.4 to -40 and I have been getting pretty well perfect landings since I changed it (about 10 landings last night and another 5 or 6 tonight). I cross the fence at 85 and touch with the mains at eighty or less and a second later I hear the chirp of the nose gear. I've also noticed that the bucking (no thats not mispelled) isn't quite as bad either which is really strange since I thought that raising that setting would make it worse. Go Figure. I guess it may have something to do with the flaps drag setting which is set at 19.3, I haven't changed it only the setting called "flaps pitch".

Mark

 

PS AirWrench is well worth the $20 I spent on it even though there is virtually no documentation for the product.

-52.4...is that degrees? I wonder if there's a way to adjust it without a third party product.

well my 2cents. The plane in RL do have heavier nose but not nearly as over "nose down" as in FSX. Flown it once or twice in FSX and uninstalled it. Maybe if they can correct the FDE I will re-install that, but this 210 from carenado have the worst nose down ever you can imagine on landing with flaps. it just was so fundamentally wrong I could not fly it. Yes I have some time on real 210.

 

-52.4...is that degrees? I wonder if there's a way to adjust it without a third party product.

 

you can try "aired". Freeware program.

http://www.simviatio...m&ID=200&page=2

 

scroll down a bit and you will see it.

unfortunately I am not computor literate enough to digg around the inside of this.

Gregg, I believe it is degrees, I didn't get the term right in my earlier post, it is the "flaps pitch" setting but I'm not sure it may just be increments to + or - 100. I'm still playing around with it if I find a way to adjust it in the cfg file I'll certainly let you know.

Mark