DA 42 Twin Star

[CoolP 283]

Good point on the different sim. Well, if it helps, I recall the A2A C172 suffering from a similar problem. Don't ask me what the culprit and solution was, but I guess there are some threads in the A2A forums which might offer some food for though re: searching for possible issues.

 

It circled around too high friction and/or dragging brakes no matter what.

 

If nothing helps, Alabeo offers refunds with a short explanation given. Can vouch for that path to be operational.

[~Craig~ 10]

Hello again!

 

Latest tests ;-

 

• Removed all braking capability from the CFG
• Flew the aircraft with 5% fuel and no payload;  no better!

I'm pretty confident now that the issue isn't with my sim, but a P3D issue, based around the ground friction with this aircraft.    Power and RPM are fine on the displays so the FDE is doing what it is supposed to be doing, and I've ruled out controller and braking issues.

 

Definitely seems ground friction based.

 

Thanks for the Heads-up about the refund process.  Didn't really want to take that route if possible as it looks like it would be a nice add-on, if I could get it moving on the ground.  Just tried to take off at LGAV's looong runway.   I used up around 2/3 of it, just to get to 60kts!

 

:(

[CoolP 283]

If you are into experiments, you could grab the [contact_points] section from a default (and therefore working) plane, just to test if this triggers the problem. Or try a default air file while leaving the aircraft.cfg intact.

[~Craig~ 10]

If you are into experiments, you could grab the [contact_points] section from a default (and therefore working) plane, just to test if this triggers the problem. Or try a default air file while leaving the aircraft.cfg intact.

 

Good points.

 

I did experiment with the IRIS DA-42's .air. file but the airplane wouldn't initiate with it in place.

 

About to try a contact point experiment!

 

Have also send Alabeo an email about the issue. :smile:

[CoolP 283]

the airplane wouldn't initiate with it in place.

Mind the correct names. sim=DA42 means that the air file has to be labelled DA42.air, no matter what.

 

Have also send Alabeo an email about the issue.

Thumbs up for the constructive attitude, Craig.

[~Craig~ 10]

EDIT:   Just raised contact points, so that the aircraft was 10cm above the runway :smile: ... alas problem still existed.    To be honest, I think contact points only affects the visual aspect.

 

[sigh] ..... got me beat this one!

[CoolP 283]

I just saw that there's a [TailHook] section.

 

Well, the only items affecting and defining the interaction with the ground would be the aircraft.cfg and the air file. If both files would be borrowed from a default plane, it should work. Then you can exchange one item with a genuine DA42 one and check again.

 

The result should be an indicator as to where the problem, if it is plane-bound, is located. There's also a chance a wonky gauge causes a lack of acceleration or a braking force, but that's less likely than a wonky aircraft.cfg or air file parameter in my eyes.

[~Craig~ 10]

Well I haven't fixed it, but I've certainly fudged around it to make the plane flyable. :smile:

 

After dozens of failed experiments, I eventually reduced the Empty Weight in the [Weight_and_Balances] section of the CFG.   It was set at 2750 and by reducing this to 1750, I am able to get the aircraft moving, broadly at the power settings you quoted for taxi, etc.  

 

And on the take-off roll I'm now getting up to 60 kts at what seems like a more appropriate rate of acceleration.   With the default settings, I was literally using half a runway to even hit 40kts.

 

I'm not suggesting the "1750" value is anywhere near right, and perhaps I'll now see too high a cruise speed, but again, at least the aircraft is semi-flyable now. :smile:

[Joachim 6]

In the Checklist for Normal Operating Procedures what does MET mean in MET, NAV, mass and balance? Thank you for for any replies.

[~Craig~ 10]

In the Checklist for Normal Operating Procedures what does MET mean in MET, NAV, mass and balance? Thank you for for any replies.

 

I think it means that the weather has been checked (Met), along with Nav (VOR freqs, waypoints, etc), and weights checked.

[CoolP 283]

Off the top of my head, I'd opt for MET as being the meteorological part of the flight planning stage. Edited. Craig was quicker.

 

Craig, keep us posted on what Alabeo said about the issue. Fun workaround though, but that's not something to sell to people. If the P3D installation results in the issues you've described, it has to be fixed now.

 

Joachim, if I might ask, which sim are you running and how do you like her so far?

[Joachim 6]

Thanks guys, I thought METAR too, not sure if MET is the abbreviation of METAR. METAR is already such a short word.

I am using FSX mainly, but a little P3D too.

 

how do you like her so far

 

CoolP, I assume you mean the DA42 right? Thanks for asking. So far I am really liking it, the attention to detail in design and modern features that were introduced in this aircraft. And you?

[~Craig~ 10]

Craig, keep us posted on what Alabeo said about the issue. Fun workaround though, but that's not something to sell to people. If the P3D installation results in the issues you've described, it has to be fixed now.

 

Unfortunately, Alabeo responded just to say "it sounds like a faulty installation - try reinstalling, and ensure you have admin privileges".   I've actually tried 5 reinstalls (various tests such as installing the FSX 'version' manually into P3D, versus the P3D 'direct install', etc, etc).

 

I lose patience very quickly with this sort of 'dilluted' and very generalized type of support unfortunately.   I've replied to say that I have already tried many reinstalls, so we'll see what, if anything they come back with any way.

 

For now the aircraft is flying well, with my reduced empty weight mod, and is strangely close to the real numbers now.

 

Personally, I definately don't recommend the addon to others (yet), as it's lacking a lot of spark and buggy in some areas.  And well, with this P3D issue, I definitely wouldn't recommend it for that sim.     $34.95 is just too much for the usual Carenado/Alabeo sloppy standards and bugs.   I grow more tired of them with each release.    It's frustrating because they do really pick aircraft that I really want! ...... but the standards of quality (aside from the usual beautiful texturing) is poor on this addon IMHO.

[Joachim 6]

as it's lacking a lot of spark and buggy

 

Could you elaborate on this? Are you reporting these bugs to Alabeo?

Please feel free to share

[Caribpilot 56]

To those of you who have flown the DA42, can the Deicing pumps be heard when turned on?

 

 

Also, does the aircraft's autopilot have a Flight Director?