edpatino

Taxiing the C441 Conquest

Recommended Posts

Hi, have you the same experience that taxiing this plane is quite difficult?. It leaves the parking position like a rocket, without applying any power, and you should apply a lot of braking to get the wild horse under control, if any?.

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


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

I don't have any experience with the Alabeo version, but with the Flysimware C441 I have to make sure to set the condition levers to START AND TAXI, and even then barely leave the beta range with the power levers. You could slow down by using reversers, but I don't know if one would do that in real world operations during taxi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Applying reversers does help in reducing the taxi speed, I've tried and it works, but it's still difficult and I don't think either they, the reversers, are used in real world operations.

BTW, there's an interesting freeware application that can be downloaded at Avsim today, and has to do with controlling taxispeed and pushback (the name is GroundAssist 1.2 and can be found under FSX Utilities). Regretfully it works very well with any of my aircraft fleet, except the C441, which still looks uncontrollable.

Thanks, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed

 

Try pulling you prop levers all the way back.

 

Greg

 

I think Greg refers to the Condition levers. But yes, they're pulled all the way back (on Taxi detent), and to make things more interesting, when the levers are in the upper position (Take Off detent) the aircraft taxies at a little lower speed!.

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Greg refers to the Condition levers. But yes, they're pulled all the way back (on Taxi detent), and to make things more interesting, when the levers are in the upper position (Take Off detent) the aircraft taxies at a little lower speed!.

Huh? When I move them up in the Flysimware C441, it behaves exactly as you describe in the first post: like a rocket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a proper load out (pax in each seat), the speeds are less dramatic.

 

I'll try that. It makes sense. Otherwise I'll park the damn aircraft at the maintenance hangar. Already sent a ticket to Alabeo and they answered they'll look into this...

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try that. It makes sense. Otherwise I'll park the damn aircraft at the maintenance hangar. Already sent a ticket to Alabeo and they answered they'll look into this...

Cheers, Ed

 

Reporting back: Even with a total payload + fuel above the maximum fuel weight, the aircraft speed during taxiing goes well above 35 knots, which is far unrealistic, unless you apply a lot of braking that turns the plane almost uncontrolable. There's absolutely something wrong with the dynamics. Hopefully Alabeo, as a responsible developer, could investigate into this issue.

Cheers, Ed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not alone. What I have learned to do is:

I noticed that if the condition levers are all of the way forward with the C441 at MGTOW, the engines start normally and it taxis within controllable parameters with my toes on the brakes. When I want to speed up a bit while taxiing I bring the cond levers closer to the start & taxi position, but once I get passed 15 kts it not longer matters and I have to really apply brake pressure because at that point the plane is "ice skating" on a straight ahead taxi and it is worst on turning while taxiing.

If I start the engines with the cond levers in the start and taxi position where they are supposed to be, the C441 begins to spin on the side of the engine I'm starting and it almost does a complete 360. Parking brakes don't work for me when this happens.

So in this case I do everything opposite in the way any airplane should function regarding engine start and taxi.

Above operating descriptions on my part learning thru trial and error with the C441 because Alabeo has very little support. Above procedures always have the throttles at idle.

My support ticket on this taxiing and startup issue came back with a, We will consider these with next update. In other words no guarantees on fixing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


My support ticket on this taxiing and startup issue came back with a, We will consider these with next update. In other words no guarantees on fixing it.

 

Posted the question on how to taxi to the aircraft's reviewer Andrew Godden at mutley's hangar.com. Will revert back here if there's something.

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to share with those interested, the best way (but probably not the most realistic for sure) I've found to taxi this aircraft in a controlled way, is: (1) with the start-lock system ON, (2) with propellers at the Take-Off detent, that way torque is being reduced when rpm are at the maximum setting, (3) no throttle at all (haven't tried yet with different payloads), (4) applying a certain amount of braking.

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the opposite problem with the FlySimware C441, the start locks absolutely refuse to disengage, so it won't even move. I've literally not even managed to taxi it even an inch lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to share with those interested, the best way (but probably not the most realistic for sure) I've found to taxi this aircraft in a controlled way, is: (1) with the start-lock system ON, (2) with propellers at the Take-Off detent, that way torque is being reduced when rpm are at the maximum setting, (3) no throttle at all (haven't tried yet with different payloads), (4) applying a certain amount of braking.

Cheers, Ed

 

That is how I have to taxi it and perform engine start.

 

I wonder how many cases Alabeo ignores and provides zero help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I wonder how many cases Alabeo ignores and provides zero help?

 

I agree, zero words from Alabeo. Just to take into account for future purchases!.

Cheers, Ed

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I can't understand, is how it could have been even remotely beta tested and still be like that; I mean seriously, you crank it up, release the brakes and it sets off across the airfield like the Bell X-1 being dropped from the belly of a B-29 over Edwards for a crack at breaking Mach 1 when Yeager lit up the rockets, and the beta testers go: 'yup, seems fine to me, it taxis exactly like the real Cessna Conquest does when the throttles are retarded.' Seems to me that it was the beta testers and not the throttles which were retarded lol

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I can't understand, is how it could have been even remotely beta tested and still be like that; I mean seriously, you crank it up, release the brakes and it sets off across the airfield like the Bell X-1 being dropped from the belly of a B-29 over Edwards for a crack at breaking Mach 1 when Yeager lit up the rockets, and the beta testers go: 'yup, seems fine to me, it taxis exactly like the real Cessna Conquest does when the throttles are retarded.' Seems to me that it was the beta testers and not the throttles which were retarded lol

 

IMO, those reviewer reports are biased in favor of the developers, we should not pay attention to them.

Cheers, Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the C441's website Alabeo says, Realistic behavior. Really? Based on what comparison??? What is realistic about it with the exception of the exterior visual model?

 

I heard that they will be releasing another new airplane very soon. A Tri-Pacer I think. So before releasing another new plane, why can't they concentrate and deliver on what they said they would do, and that is fix the C441's existing problems that have been reported by us, their customer's? Do they think that we will just go away if we eventually just shut our mouths?

 

It appears that the beta testers are also the developers because if not then they would be focusing on fixing the numerous problems with the C441 before putting their effort into a new release airplane. Customer service: Where?

 

What purpose does their Avidyne MFD serve? Noticed it is in many of their planes, both Cessnas and Pipers. Traffic does not show up on mine. The route does not even show up.

 

Aerosoft's Piper Cheyenne from how many years ago have more active instruments than this Alabeo C441?

 

They ignore you after 4 e-mails and from there on out all I get in my inbox is: "Thank you for your feedback, we are going to consider these issues to fix it for the next version." Does anyone think that they will fix what they claim they will address? Their key phrase is: we are going to consider...

 

The bottom line is: Will they fix a list of things, many of which are small things to be fixed, that they sent in a back and forth e-mail exchange with me and other customers or will they ignore and move on to another airplane model.

 

As for me: Never buying another Alabeo airplane.

 

If enough customers stand up here and echo it in their support tickets then maybe something will change with customer support and fixing things.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


As for me: Never buying another Alabeo airplane.

 

I'll second that!.

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not own a Carenado airplane. They are like sister companies, but are they better than Alabeo?

 

The flight instruments on both of their websites look identical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not own a Carenado airplane. They are like sister companies, but are they better than Alabeo?

 

The flight instruments on both of their websites look identical.

Alabeo is part of Carenado.  Originally, the Alabeo brand was to be less expensive and have less features than Carenado releases.  In the past few years, the Alabeo releases have been of the same quality (or lack thereof) as Carenado.  I have the Carenado Seneca II, Baron 58, and Navajo.  From Alabeo I have the Chieftain.  All of them have issues with systems modeling or missing night lighting or some other malady.  It's a pattern of behavior from Carenado/Alabeo and it remains unchanged.  I think their aircraft are stunning to look at, but when it comes to flying them, they always fall a little short.

 

By the way, Alabeo and Carenado do have beta testers.  I'm convinced they have thousands of them.  When you buy their products, find the flaws, send an email (which may be ignored) you are one of their beta testers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


By the way, Alabeo and Carenado do have beta testers.  I'm convinced they have thousands of them.  When you buy their products, find the flaws, send an email (which may be ignored) you are one of their beta testers.

 

I was actually going to say the very same thing you said here. We the customer are their beta testers.

 

Thank you for your answer. But speaking of answers in this forum is that I responded to another post on this forum where someone asked if the Alabeo C441 was a good buy. I just looked at that the thread and my post has disappeared. I wonder what happened to it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I was testing the taxi behaviour for the Do 228 I re-installed the C441 as well and as mentioned in the Do 228 taxi thread, Alabeo missed to reduce the fuel flow with the condition levers in the 'start and taxi' position.

(Maybe it is impossible to combine the prop and condition levers if one stays within standard FSX SDK)

 

Tested the C411 at different weights and found it to be very nice to taxi with the condition levers in the 'take off climb and landing' position.

No need to keep the throttles at the start locks!

At very low weight (2 pilots + 50% fuel) taxi speed doesn't get any higher than a perfectly suitable 20kts and at MTOW the speed at idle is only 14kts.   

 

@Chock, but even with the condition levers in the 'start and taxi' position the speed at low weight doesn't get higher than 40kts. I don't think Chuck Yeager would have become famous at that speed :wink: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I can't understand, is how it could have been even remotely beta tested and still be like that; I mean seriously, you crank it up, release the brakes and it sets off across the airfield like the Bell X-1 being dropped from the belly of a B-29 over Edwards for a crack at breaking Mach 1 when Yeager lit up the rockets, and the beta testers go: 'yup, seems fine to me, it taxis exactly like the real Cessna Conquest does when the throttles are retarded.' Seems to me that it was the beta testers and not the throttles which were retarded lol

It might be worth mentioning that not everyone shares your experience with fast taxi speeds. I don't know why though. I have not had a problem with keeping it to a reasonable 10 to 15 kts with Condition levers in the Start/Taxi position and occasional dabs on the brake.

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