Does it get close? Closer than any other simulator I have tried, except for the "real" simulators.

 

You know what I would suggest ;-)

Well maybe we should take a poll. Personally haven never flown a MU2 I'd be willing to trust what Tom says who has. I've heard they are very difficult aircraft to fly.

 

I have flown a rv6 but only as a passenger so I would listen very carefully to what Larry says who has flown one for years, and consider my voice not as valid here.

 

Perhaps I know a few things about Bonanza's ,Barons,Pipers and Cessnas, Sirus, Lake Amphibians. I know nothing about Mooneys and most homebuilts.

 

I know on the fsx beta teams they take great pains to get rw pilots who are familiar with the aircraft for input. I think it is a good idea.

 

However, here it seems we are talking about "general" areas of flight that pertain to all aircraft that needs to be fixed.

Listening and observing. One comment tho is that if a particular flight model bothered me that much i'd just switch to a different and better one. Interesting how these very experienced pilots have a different take on things tho. With my experience though, I just sit in the wings and enjoy the show and maybe pick up some tips along the way.

 

I will say that I am still surprised how much more difficult flight sim is compared to the real deal.

 

Regards

One comment tho is that if a particular flight model bothered me that much i'd just switch to a different and better one.

 

Jason, I agree, I have a bunch of payware aircraft that I can fly in XPX, I don't need to fly the Baron at all, although I like it. In the beginning I was just curious about the rolling, something that I don't have an issue with in my "paid" aircraft.

 

Geof, good points, I also like Xplane, although at times it may not seem like it. The performance is great, although a little lacking in the "features" department, hope they don't affect performance too much when the time comes.

 

My point was, the aircraft continually rolls right or left with minimal trim input, others don't (payware), why? Some are trying to tell me it doesn't exist at all, well, I sure see / feel it. If something positive comes from the discussion great, if it gets swept under the carpet I feel that is a shame, but such is life.

I also like to think with user input and developers listening it makes the sim even more powerful. But instead of debating it, why not experience it where it works, and copy?

 

One challenge here is the fundamental technical language barrier. Larry has heard me talk about the engineer / pilot interface. My college roomate now heads up Air Force fighter weapons school in Las Vegas....was one of the original F22 operational pilots. The reason I bring this up is we both went to college together, was in ROTC together, he majored in Geography, me in engineering...I wanted to be a test pilot, he ended up being one. We talk regularly and one of the things we talk about is how the process works. The test pilot brings back info on what the plane does, the engineer thinks about why it does it. So if Geoff says, "The plane don't roll"....I think, "well there's a torque from the engines, that's a force, if the plane doesn't roll, what's countering it?" If I draw the conclusion that Geoff is saying torque does not exist because the plane doesn't roll, I am misinterpreting his comment and this back and forth ensues....that's no good....he's just telling me what he's experienced.

 

X-Plane is limited in how much it will simulate. Clearly a line has been drawn in the sand by Austin that says, "I want it to be good enough to sell" and for that it has to be a minimum reasonable level to get a majority to buy it"...well that has been reached IMO so mission accomplished in that regard for him. For others of us, we desire more so we try to bend x-plane as far as we can.

 

Muskoko, yes, I can make the Baron do just about anything..make it handle darn near like a 747 if I like. I don't have any Baron time to compare it against nor had enough motivation given my other responsibilites to focus on it heavily....as of now the best I can do to improve it is some "back and forth" with someone like Geoff As far as it constantly rolling for you....I am not sure exactly what you are experiencing so its difficult. On my end, I can trim it with my joystick and fly hands off for several minutes with the absolute minimum of noticeable roll..maybe 5 degrees over 3 mins? which I think is pretty good hands off. I can up the 'inertia' value a bit....a common way to stabilize x-planes twitchy behavior....I can crank that up so high the plane will barely roll at all.....there's a few stability values I can mess with, some incidence values, etc.

 

As far as the duchess goes, who knows...I can think of several thing Goran might have done and there's no reason I can't do the same to the Baron...we could make both handle identical if we liked. I just don't get a whole lot of wheels squeaking enough to make me grease it I guess, but you guys here are starting to squeak pretty good so perhaps I'm ready to grease the Baron a bit

 

Tell you what I'll do. Here's a link to a modified Baron file. I didn't do much to it, just tweaked it here and there, didn't even bother to test fly it. I'll let you guys do that. You guys try it, report back and we'll use this same link to pass files from me to you. I'm not going to overanalyze it, you tell me what you observe, what you think you should observe and we'll do a few iterations. You guys are some tough customers and I can make you happy, I'm happy!

 

Tom K

 

https://dl.dropbox.c...80/Baron_58.acf

 

Tom K

Well I downloaded the tweaked file (thanks Tom), to be honest I didn't notice much difference. So I had a brain fart moment and thought to myself, why not just copy / change some of the settings from the aircraft you don't have an issue with to the one you do. So I went into PlaneMaker and changed a bunch of the "Trim and Speed" settings to match the other aircraft and low and behold it settles it right down for me trim wise.

 

Now, this may make it fly / feel more like a "*******" than a Baron, that I don't know, and at this point I don't care, I like the way it flies now. (for me)

 

Just to add, the frame rates are getting ridiculous, in a good way. My 3 monitor setup (3840x1024 45" horizontal view) with the settings pretty much maxed out, no HDR, light clouds in the sky (real weather), in a rural setting, were sitting pretty much locked at 120fps and very smooth / clear. I then maxed everything out except shadows (3rd from bottom), no HDR, and they dropped to a solid 50fps, very nice.

 

Edit: Every time I exit PlaneMaker I get this crash report, anyone else?

 

 

Glad to hear Muskoka. I think that is the perfect approach and glad you were able to tweak it to your liking. I'd be curious to know what settings Goran used, I'll have to ask. I had taken the Baron trim settings to some pretty low values without it feeling like a train on rails to me...and it "flies" as well as I could imagine it might not having any real time in one....as stupid as that comes across.

 

Tom K

I wish I could input here with the new file but I won't be able to get to my flightsim computer for 5 days.

 

Interesting approach Muskoka and again one I advocate-look at what others have done-get ideas (legally) and improve (though without testing I am not necessarily claiming an improvement has happened!). B)

You know Geofa, a regular problem for working with flight models for aircraft for which one has no experience (which is WAY to common a situation)....is you initially go with technically correct values in plane-maker for the control surfaces and inevitably they end up being too much. So you start making changes, scale back usually to tweak one area of performance...but in doing so potentially compromise another so it is like being on a see-saw. I have always advocated going outside the bounds of "matching numbers" if it makes the aircraft perform closer to the real thing, I'm glad to see Muskoka tweak it till he likes it. I'll be interested to get your input one day also.

 

Tom K

By the way-perhaps this would be interesting. I took this video a few years ago from the backseat while my flying partner flew (mostly to show my new fangled samsung tablet). I have lots more videos but one can get a good sense of how stable (and perhaps more rail like!) a Baron is in a variety of flight situations.

 

Go to you tube-geofa , rnav27 approach

 

A couple observations as he was hand flying. Notice the yoke is constantly moving, the day is turbulent, and look at the motion out on the nose/instruments which is very little if not motionless . Now open the xplane Baron to the same viewpoint with the yoke visible, move the yoke back and forth a similar amount in similar flight parameters. What does that kind of yoke movement do in xplane, the nose position and the instruments? Also notice the stability of the instruments-especially the altimeter and vsi-very stable. Also notice the movement on the yoke when it becomes greater at landing-and how little it effects the nose and its position relative to yoke movement-very stable. My flying partner is moving the yoke quite a bit at all times-to keep the airplane motionless...

 

Also notice landing rwy 27L wind 290 at 15. How bad is the turbulence/20 degree xwind?

 

Now open the Carenado Vtail-try duplicating the same...

Thanks Tom for spending some time here, listening. I feel better about the changes, whether there "by the book" or not I have no idea. It gets off the ground, feels good in flight, and gets back down on the ground, can't be too bad.

 

It might now have that "train on rails" feeling to some, although not that bad, but I find it feels "heavier" now and a little less "bouncy" with input, if that makes sense.

 

Geof, I'm trying to send you a PM, the system won't let me??

 

About the Crash screen, anyone experience this?

 

Glen

I think my mailbox is full-deleting...

You know Geofa, a regular problem for working with flight models for aircraft for which one has no experience (which is WAY to common a situation)....is you initially go with technically correct values in plane-maker for the control surfaces and inevitably they end up being too much. So you start making changes, scale back usually to tweak one area of performance...but in doing so potentially compromise another so it is like being on a see-saw. I have always advocated going outside the bounds of "matching numbers" if it makes the aircraft perform closer to the real thing, I'm glad to see Muskoka tweak it till he likes it. I'll be interested to get your input one day also.

 

Tom K

 

Hi Tom,

I just got home and tried your file. It does convey much better the "heavyness" and general "control feel" of the Baron.

 

I'd be curious from an engineering standpoint if what I proposed in the video above can be done in the sim.

 

Fsx did stability pretty well though in the pitch access it was still too all over the place vs. reality.

 

Is it, will it ever to be possible to accomplish what the video shows e.g. the pilot in moderate turbulence is anticipating the aircraft movement and using aircraft momentum-making minute but rapid control inputs after a trim (which right now in xplane for the most part would create deviations/oscillations ) with the end result being the nose does not yaw, pitch much at all, and the instruments (altitude and heading indicator) look like they are glued on e.g. smooth flight even in non smooth conditions-the hallmark of a commercial pilot. It actually is not that hard to do rw-in the sim it is 100 times harder.

I also have these issues with X-Plane 10. Never had a problem flying under FSX. I've tried some of these workarounds mentioned in here but I still have this weird unlevel rolling and pulling during takeoff. I have to use my rudder to keep it straight everytime. Not sure what's wrong. It happens in every plane. Kind of frustrating and makes flying a whole lot less fun and more work.

 

Does anyone know how to get the plane to go down the runway straight and not pull to one side? And also how to get the plane to level once you've reached your desired altitude? Seems no matter what I do on my joystick it keeps wanting to nose dive to the ground when i let off the controls. I'm constantly having to keep pulling back or holding it in a certain spot in order to level the plane out.

I also have these issues with X-Plane 10. Never had a problem flying under FSX. I've tried some of these workarounds mentioned in here but I still have this weird unlevel rolling and pulling during takeoff. I have to use my rudder to keep it straight everytime. Not sure what's wrong. It happens in every plane. Kind of frustrating and makes flying a whole lot less fun and more work.

 

Does anyone know how to get the plane to go down the runway straight and not pull to one side? And also how to get the plane to level once you've reached your desired altitude? Seems no matter what I do on my joystick it keeps wanting to nose dive to the ground when i let off the controls. I'm constantly having to keep pulling back or holding it in a certain spot in order to level the plane out.

 

It's like I told my daughter on her first flight lesson. If you don't start pushing that right rudder pedal after you give it throttle, then you're going to run over those left side runway lights. Most single engine airplanes will pull to the left. If the realism settings are high, and you're not using auto rudder in FSX, they'll do it too. Once off the ground, you'll still need right rudder to head straight on that runway path. If you don't you'll be drifting left of the runway. As airspeed picks up, this effect disminishes. It shouldn't really want to roll during the takeoff & initial climb. Just pull to the left (if prop is spinning clockwise from the cockpit view).

 

For the dive, it seems you're out of trim. Just barely release a little pressure on the stick, and then use up trim, until it stays level, or stays at a wanted climb attitude. I have elevator trim mapped to two buttons on my joystick. I always just slightly release stick pressure to see what trim is needed.

 

Note: If the throttle is applied to quickly on takeoff, or too much in a go-around..............with high horsepower engines on small airplanes, there can be a tendency to roll. Use a bit of opposite aileron to counter this. Some airplanes will roll right on their back, if done incorrectly. In those cases, full power on a go-around is not used. An example is a P-51 Mustang.

 

If the roll is constant...............then it's the subject of this thread. It shouldn't remain. In the meantime, you can use some aileron trim to counteract it. I've also mapped roll trim to two other buttons on my four way hat switch (Saitek X-52 joystick)

 

L.Adamson