JS41 PFPX

[mas618 17]

The data collection is done (albeit we need cruise data for 100% condition), and as soon as Kyle gets time to compile the data into a profile (which is a one-man job afaik), then we can all test and tweak before the final profile is done...

 

If you want to do the cruise data for 100% condition, you are very welcome to fill in the numbers in the spreadsheet I've linked in previous posts. Let me know if you need help setting things up correctly..

 

Mas

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

which is a one-man job afaik

 

Yeah, there's no way I'm about to explain the math that I came up with to standardize the values to get a nice regression to fit it into the PFPX format.

 

 

 

I contract in my free time and in the last few weeks I've cut two videos (one to go to LVMH and another to Dior...random, but true), wrote some navdata and updated fixes manually (because there's no good source or tool that converts certain fixes into the format this group uses), designed a t-shirt (and multiple revisions thereof) for an upcoming group trip, and a couple other things I'm forgetting...busy busy...

 

Luckily, since I've shed those items from my list of things to tackle, I can get back to sim-related stuff.

[Serge 8]

Hi,

 

Any news to report on the progress of the JS41 PFPX performance file?

 

Cheers,

Serge

[sandpit147 0]

This seems to have gone quiet. Any word on the PFPX performance file?

 

:unsure:

[Craigt50 1]

Bump

[fakeflyer737 992]

BUMP!

[mas618 17]

Guys. Kyle is doing this FREE of charge in his spare time. I'm sure this is not forgotten, but since we haven't heard from Kyle, it's because he's busy with real life. So chill;-) have a smile and a coke, and enjoy everything else we got;-)

 

Mas

[flightwatch 68]

Any updates?

[Craigt50 1]

did the performance files get finished?

[flightwatch 68]

Apparently not or we would have heard something by now.  I don't get it though...why go through all of that work just to dump it so close to finishing it.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

It's not dumped. No worries. It's just sitting on my desktop because 33% of the data is...well...not exactly what I needed, though it's my own fault.

 

Anyone know any good simple functions to change IAS to TAS? Every function I've found is either some calculator online that doesn't show the method, or is some function that takes a degree in aero/fluid dynamics.

 

I want this as much (if not more) than a lot of you here. I just want to make sure a quality product comes out. I don't need people going diving for the scalars to adjust for poor data parsing.

[mas618 17]

It's not dumped. No worries. It's just sitting on my desktop because 33% of the data is...well...not exactly what I needed, though it's my own fault.

 

Anyone know any good simple functions to change IAS to TAS? Every function I've found is either some calculator online that doesn't show the method, or is some function that takes a degree in aero/fluid dynamics.

 

I want this as much (if not more) than a lot of you here. I just want to make sure a quality product comes out. I don't need people going diving for the scalars to adjust for poor data parsing.

Argh.. Hope I didn't screw anything up on the data collection? I can see why TAS might be more relevant than ias, but didn't think about when collecting data - duh! Anyways, it'll be a while before I have time to redo any of it - maybe a month or so... But let me know if it's needed. Although you should know I don't have fsx anymore and (and you should be able to give a valid answer to this now - lol ) I'm not sure it's ok to use the js4100 in p3d v2 using EMT?

 

happy holidays to all!

 

Mas

[qqwertz 781]

 

 

Anyone know any good simple functions to change IAS to TAS? Every function I've found is either some calculator online that doesn't show the method, or is some function that takes a degree in aero/fluid dynamics.

 

A reasonably good estimate is

 

TAS = IAS * (1 + 0.02 FL)

 

or in other words, add 2% for every 1000 feet of altitude, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_airspeed

 

Peter

[BlueStar 323]

A reasonably good estimate is

 

TAS = IAS * (1 + 0.02 FL)

 

or in other words, add 2% for every 1000 feet of altitude, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_airspeed

 

Peter

Kyle,

 

Actually it is about 1.5% below .3 M. If you like I can give you the formula. :-))

 

If you have Excel I will try to convert my assembly code for it to Excel. Once the speed gets above .3M than

there are other factors that come into play. Let me know.

 

Billy Bluestar

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Argh.. Hope I didn't screw anything up on the data collection? I can see why TAS might be more relevant than ias, but didn't think about when collecting data - duh! Anyways, it'll be a while before I have time to redo any of it - maybe a month or so... But let me know if it's needed. Although you should know I don't have fsx anymore and (and you should be able to give a valid answer to this now - lol ) I'm not sure it's ok to use the js4100 in p3d v2 using EMT?

 

happy holidays to all!

 

Mas

No. Please do not attempt to use *any* PMDG products in Prepar3D unless you own a P3D version (which nobody does).

 

As far as the data collection goes, that was my fault. I'll just convert it. No need to re-do it.

A reasonably good estimate is

 

TAS = IAS * (1 + 0.02 FL)

 

or in other words, add 2% for every 1000 feet of altitude, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_airspeed

 

Peter

Good rule of thumb. I'm hoping to be as precise as possible, but that might have to work. Thanks!

Kyle,

 

Actually it is about 1.5% below .3 M. If you like I can give you the formula. :-))

 

If you have Excel I will try to convert my assembly code for it to Excel. Once the speed gets above .3M than

there are other factors that come into play. Let me know.

 

Billy Bluestar

I can certainly parse it on my own if it's easier. My issue with the stuff on websites is that it usually involves all kinds of fields/data that I just don't have, or doesn't expose the formula.