I'm starting this new thread in hopes that someone at Carenado will read it and look at the darn screen shot. I tried to contact them directly but they are afraid to open the attached screenshot. I'm mearly tring to point out that someone lost a dimension in the model file. The port side flap is larger than the starboard side when viewed from behind. When the port flap extends it actually takes part of the wing with it. see screenshot. It's a minor point for such a nice airplane. Why not make it perfect?http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/135349.jpg

You're correct, try e-mailing them and linking to this page so they can see the picture if they think they'll get a virus from opening an attachment or something.

They are software developers - they should be aware that you can't get a virus from an attached jpg file since it's not an executable.

wow! WOW!!;-)

Actually its a pretty large model gaff, Im sure they will fix it.Hornit

>Actually its a pretty large model gaff, Im sure they will fix>it.>>HornitI wouldn't write to them at all, unless you want to look like an idiot:This from a Cessna 206 flight test:"The cargo door aft of the right flap allows easy entry for rear-seat passengers. Club seating, which used to be optional, is not available for the new 206 although it might be offered in the future. The forward cargo door opens just enough with flaps down to allow the rear door to be opened, thanks to a larger gap between the fuselage and the edge of the right flap compared with the left flap-fuselage gap. If the cargo door is open, the flaps can

"Instead of criticising, we should be praising an incredible piece of detailing."AMEN!!!

yep Alcot you were aware of this fact, but not all of us. I didn't this, but I would not reackon myself an idiot. So let's just help each other to learn the details in a nice and polite manner...:) Words without context are often too blunt...Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Flying.gif"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick back harder"

Perhaps a more civil manner of pointing out that this is a feature of the real A/C which has been correctly modeled would have been in order. Try to imagine yourself talking to a stranger face to face when writing your posts. I would hope you wouldn't actually speak to someone like that.Dave

AllcottI'm a little confused by your remarks. Was this an attempt to be humorous?The Cargo doors are on the same side where the flap (size/texture) is correct. By correct, I mean the parting line on the textures of the flap and the wing structure is ok. No clearance problem there.On the opposite side where there is no cargo door considerations, the flap parting line and the wing's structure ARE NOT correct according to the textures or size, if the wing root is used for a reference point. The flap is larger because it takes part of the wing structure with it when it extends, according to the textures. Did Cessna explain how they got away, aerodynamically, with two different flap sizes if these are correct? A lot of time is spent in designing flap systems that prevent asymmetrical deployment of the flaps. I would think someone at Cessna would have to acknowledge that both flaps should be the same size if they are worried about keeping the flaps, that provide extra lift for the wings, equal on both sides. I like the airplane and this is a constructive piece of criticism.

"Instead of criticising, we should be praising an incredible piece of detailing."Indeed. HOWEVER, the *texturing* is still wrong. While the actual model shows this kind of detail, the textures do not. You can clearly see on the port side the flap extends past the flap texture, causing the textured gap and actual gap to not be aligned. Probably, the guy who did that 3D model didn't communicate to the texturing/paint guy that the port flap is longer. If it was done by the same guy, he probably forgot about it :-lol

>>Allcott>>I'm a little confused by your remarks. Was this an attempt to>be humorous?>>The Cargo doors are on the same side where the flap>(size/texture) is correct. By correct, I mean the parting line>on the textures of the flap and the wing structure is ok. No>clearance problem there.>>On the opposite side where there is no cargo door>considerations, the flap parting line and the wing's structure>ARE NOT correct according to the textures or size, if the wing>root is used for a reference point. The flap is larger because>it takes part of the wing structure with it when it extends,>according to the textures. >>Did Cessna explain how they got away, aerodynamically, with>two different flap sizes if these are correct? A lot of time>is spent in designing flap systems that prevent asymmetrical>deployment of the flaps. I would think someone at Cessna would>have to acknowledge that both flaps should be the same size if>they are worried about keeping the flaps, that provide extra>lift for the wings, equal on both sides. >>I like the airplane and this is a constructive piece of>criticism. Daryll, it was a piece of advice, not intended to be humorous. You would have looked like an idiot if you had posted about the odd flaps only to have found out that the real plane is designed that way. The Cessna's I fly do not have Fowler flaps, but then they don't have large cargo doors either. it is perfectly possible to adjust the flaps so that the asymmetric lift caused by different size is offset by different extension angles, or degrees of Fowler flap deployment. Burt Rutan built entire airplanes which are not symmetrical about its centreline axes and they fly just fine.http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/tr...on/1289166.htmlhttp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...rcraft/ares.htmSo if you do want to criticise, constructive or not, then you might want to research this a little more carefully. We all look forward to your definitive conclusions!Allcott

Allcott, were you a beta tester on this airplane? I'm trying to figure out why I'm taking so much crap on this and being called an idiot to boot because I pointed out that the textures on this great airplane don't match a major aircraft component.####, I just won't bother next time.

>>Allcott, were you a beta tester on this airplane? I'm trying>to figure out why I'm taking so much crap on this and being>called an idiot to boot because I pointed out that the>textures on this great airplane don't match a major aircraft>component.>>####, I just won't bother next time.Now you know how I feel about the FSUIPC thread. I won't bother next time either. And I have no idea why being a beta tester has any relevance at all. I wasn't, but as a real pilot I was aware there was something asymmetric about C206 flaps because of the cargo door. You simply jogged my memory, is all.If what you are saying is that you are going to forget about it, then why did you raise the issue in the first place - TWICE? If it wasn't important to you, why would you think it would be important to anyone else either? And if it is important to you, why not take the half hour it would take to verify it and then show us - and Carenado - that it is an error?Seems you want to turn on the furnace, but are not prepared to stoke the fire. Can't see the logic of raising a second thread for the same issue, then backing down when asked to justify it.Allcott

Alcott does not understand the problem and is speaking without thinking. The original poster is correct in that there is a problem with flap deployment as that it takes part of what should be static aircraft with it on the left side, when viewing from the back. I have not checked all the the Stationair models but the others I did check do not have the same problem. Seems when they programmed the animation they took a little too much with flap deployment.As for Carenado themselves, I have never got a response from them after sending an email. I swore I would never buy from them again but alas, I have been wanting a Stationair for a long time so I bought it. So far so good and personally I dont really care if some of the modeling is off a bit as I always fly inside the cockpit. However, I can understand how this may bother some folks especially if they like watching the plane work while flying.Scott Edit: Looked at it again, the modeling is correct, but the flap texture does not go far enough over toward the cabin.