Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
rsrandazzo

[04JUN16] PMDG: Killing "Simmerisms" since 1997

31 posts in this topic

Carlos-

 

Yes!  To fly the 747-400 sim, you would think the airplane is unpleasant to fly by hand, which really isn't the case.

 

I recently completed qualification in a CE550 and the sim was so bad that I had to close my eyes and look down whenever starting or stopping motion, or it would make my inner ear rotate so badly that it would induce vertigo.

 

The FAA examiner griped at me during the checkride- so I had to pretend to sneeze or sniffle or wipe my nose right at that moment instead- just to keep him from making an issue of it. 

 

The 744 sim is quite a bit better, but it is very over sensitive in pitch and under-sensitive in roll...  I try to dismiss it as the manufacturers way of making the real airplane easier and more enjoyable to fly...

Ahh motion sickness, seen many people book off sick on their simulator assessment days because of it, for me the initial 30 minutes are always the worst part, as my body seems to be expecting different motions, and sometimes I even position my body in antecipation of a movement that doesn't come as expected. Eventually I adjust myself to it.

 

Hopefully your check ride was completed with no issues!

 

Thanks for the info on the 747 sim, interesting stuff! I was unware that the discrepancies were that accentuated in the aviation industry simulators!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

In the radial engine world- heat is the enemy.  Heat damages your engine by softening the various metals used and allowing the normal operating pressures and forces to damage things such as cylinders and rods at a faster rate than damage accrues at lower temperatures.

 

Cowl flaps? We don't need no steenking cowl flaps!

 

image.jpg

 

Taken this afternoon at KELM, where the EAA's 1929 Trimotor is visiting for the weekend. These are Pratt R-985s. Come to think of it, a PMDG Ford Trimotor would be a fun project. Definitely NOT a "complex aircraft" - at least not compared to the DC-6!

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running FL205 and cowl flaps closed. Engine temp ~200degree C. Is this too much? I thought off closing cowl flaps to gain speed if you are high enough where it's cold.

 

Cowl flaps aren't just used based on OAT, it has to do with airflow over the engine. When you're taxiing, the only airflow you really have over the engine is what comes off the prop - especially taxiing downwind. When you taxi you're also at a low power setting so the engine isn't generating a lot of heat. In fact, you may want to taxi with the cowl flaps closed on a really cold day to help warm up the engine and oil prior to takeoff. A common maneuver for pilots training towards a PPL or CPL is slow flight. In slow flight you're flying at very slow airspeeds with high power settings so even at altitude where it's cold, you may still need to open the cowl flaps to manage the CHTs. 

 

 

Taken this afternoon at KELM, where the EAA's 1929 Trimotor is visiting for the weekend. These are Pratt R-985s. Come to think of it, a PMDG Ford Trimotor would be a fun project. Definitely NOT a "complex aircraft" - at least not compared to the DC-6!

 

I think I saw a company somewhere in California that operates one of these for couples who want to join the mile high club.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in the DC-3 that we operate,

 

Robert,

 

I'm looking forward to PMDG developing the DC-3/C-47/R4-d. It will be a real test for PMDG to program all the bad habits it had/has. :smile:

 

Does your DC-3 have Wrights or Pratts?

 

blaustern

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Does your DC-3 have Wrights or Pratts?

 

Pratts.

 

11376256_946391755382334_1690555550_n.jp

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was very disappointed with the opening statement in this thread, calling the person's credentials into question right away without looking at the whole video to see if they could make the plane better. I saw the stream and the video that was posted as a result of the stream and he said several times he was trying to help make the product better and just wanted to make the issues known so that they could be addressed in future updates. I think it is wrong to make statements about someone that you don't know. Please learn to take constructive criticism and make your product better or you will lose customers very fast!

 

 

Totally understand where you are coming from but criticizing something for behaving incorrectly when in fact is isn't si detrimental. This gives potential customers a bad impression of the product. I saw several people in that stream declare they would not buy the DC-6 based solely on that one stream.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I was very disappointed with the opening statement in this thread, calling the person's credentials into question right away without looking at the whole video to see if they could make the plane better.

 

If it's the video I'm thinking about; I believe it had *tone* and *attitude*.

You also don't know if they viewed the video or not, however if an individual is truly interested in helping developers improve their product, it can be done without the under-current of ridicule; which I picked up a number of times throughout the presentation.

 

For those of us who seek to help I hope we can use civil communications with a keen eye to the feelings of all concerned. People also need to learn to GIVE productive criticism.

Just because PMDG (or any company/individual) sells a product doesn't mean the people in it don't have feelings. That's my opinion and believe me, we'll all get further that way!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what you saw in the stream that I didn't, but he never told anyone not to buy it but was just pointing out some things that needed work. I saw several people say they weren't buying it until the things were fixed and I don't remember anyone that based on that 1 stream in fact they were saying they were reading several other posts and had watched some other people stream it that had problems too. So like I said in my first post I was just disappointed that he was questioning his credibility and he doesn't even know him. That is what is wrong with this post!

Where did I write that he instructed people not to buy it? I know it's anecdotal but none of the users who proclaimed they where not buying it qualified their statement. I think constructive criticism is essential but the whole stream came off a bit aggressive for whatever reason even though he admitted to liking the -6.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just removed several posts. Signed posts are a requirement here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Robert for the simmerism. I am loving the DC6 so far after about 10 hours. Still lots to learn. What will the x-plane development group be turning their attention to next?

John.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr.RSrandazzo

      I do not really feel the need to mix my professional work life, and my hobby together. But since some users are unable to understand how thermodynamics works, I think it would be potentially valuable for the community if I offer my skills. I am a Mechanical Engineering who mostly looks at strengths of materials, but I have had to do a fair amount work on the life cycles of parts under thermodynamic loads. What I would like to do is a Computational Fluid Dynamic study of for the R-2800’s. In order to see what the equation the values should be based on the values that are used in the sim, vs the real numbers vs the CFD study. I know that we see very little if any difference between three. There is no one can argue with the numbers, so I think this will put a stop to the engine debate that people are having. I thought I once read claims of someone comparing your DC3 engines [i assume R-1830’s] to the engines in your simulated DC6. If this is the case, then I would like to try and get a CFD done on those to map the relative thermal similarity of the engine (at their hottest running conditions).

      I would not feel comfortable commenting on what I believe is happening or the misconception these people are “seeing” without being able to run the numbers through a couple different scenarios (prop-wash cowls closed, tail wind cowls closed with max/min prop wash).

      I only really fly x-plane so being part of Avsim community was not really a needed thing until I took a look at the forum to see what people were saying, and I could not believe it.

      I look forward to talking more in specific details, and working out a way to get this information to the masses.

 

Look Forward to Talking more,

Nick Paine

P.S. I cannot change the signature until 14 June. So that is why I signed here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen at least one video, very detailed, going through a through review of flaws in the dc-6 ( which I must point out I do not own... ) but, excluding the part I can't comment on regarding engine modeling, and an initial introduction to the limitations of using the "AFE" on some flights without a "single" cruise level, it's  filled with inaccuracies and misconcpetions regarding overall principles of flight, and x-plane modeling of some aspects of lift & drag...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


filled with inaccuracies and misconcpetions regarding overall principles of flight, and x-plane modeling of some aspects of lift & drag

 

Could you be a little more specific though? Where was he wrong on "principles of flight"?

 

Katrín Eiriksdóttir

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For instance the simple references to dihedral effect, when he exits the sideslip situation and coordinates the turn - the circumstance under which dihedral effect is... nill ...

 

The interpretation of the "lift" vectors when the "Visual Flight Model " is enabled, and he comments on why a given vector is shorter than the other, not to mention that he wrongly assumes CCW rotating props when the dc-6 actually has CW rotating props, and so on.. and, even if this was a flaw, it would be an X-Plane core FDM flaw, and not a PMDG dc-6 model flaw....

 

There are other points though over which I agree with him, although again I believe they're due to the limitation imposed by the underlaying X-Plane core FDM - such as, for instance, rudder authority at cruise speeds and yaw-roll coupling...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


There are other points though over which I agree with him, although again I believe they're due to the limitation imposed by the underlaying X-Plane core FDM - such as, for instance, rudder authority at cruise speeds and yaw-roll coupling...

 

Jose,

 

Are you type rated in the DC-6 or any other large radial airplane?

 

blaustern

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0