Recommended Posts

Just noted on facebook there is a new version ..1.3

Fixes:
- The aircraft now is not moving if you release the brakes and throttles on idle....
- NAV, COM and ADF turns on with the avionics master instead of turning on individually.
- Barber pole corrected.
- Fixes an issue that was causing the Oxygen indication was always 0.
- Prop sync switch is working correctly now.
- Torque indicators adjusted.
- Minor bugs fixes.

 

bob

Share this post


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

20 minutes ago, dfeldman said:

The elevator trim indicator animation is reversed now with this update. Sigh.

Dave.

just this second noticed this...!!  edit  reversed it in FSuipc4.. will see how it goes..

wish it had an 'Alt arm ' to capture the desired Altitude.

bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, onebob said:

Fixes:
- The aircraft now is not moving if you release the brakes and throttles on idle....

Thanks for the heads up. Let's see if this thing taxies Ok with the new update.

Cheers, Ed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update.

The problem I have now is the throttles don't work correctly. Engine 1 moves ok, but engine 2 won't stay up...keeps returning to idle regardless of the throttle position.

So, yeah, doesn't move after starting but won't fly.

Blah. Back in the hangar for you!

More:

I realized that if I don't put the throttle(s) into reverse they work ok. So yea, it can be flown. There's some control logic going on with the reverse position. What it is escapes me. Just don't use the reverse position. Got it.

Edited by RichieFly
More Info:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's strange because after startup you shouldn't be able to advance the throttles at all. 

Alabeos/Carenados way of implementing the startlocks (in a strange way) and it does work with my version 1.3

Once the throttles have been briefly brought into reverse after start, you should be able to advance them normally. (also working with my v1.3)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I'll play around some more and see if I can get the hang of it.

I'm sure you're right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't the DME unit be able to switch between DME 1 and DME 2? At the moment both units show only DME1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

From people truly in the know - is the engine performance better or worse than it was before - re: uncontrollable taxi speeds ??? I've heard some dissenting opinions now stating 1.3 is less realistic than it was before...

Thanks...

Regards,
Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the individual user and what they think is realistic. The 'uncontrollable taxi speed is gone (which actually was never the case) but now she sits on the apron and doesn't move at all.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

Thanks for responding - yep - that's why I was looking for some feedback - was hoping someone had some experience in type... I would kind of think planes like King Air's - Cheyenne's - Conquest's - would need some brakes to keep from moving with those massive mills turning even at idle - so I was just wondering if we had made it less realistic ??? I don't have this plane yet - but I've considered it - so no reference on the before and after conditions... I've got no time on anything bigger than a Duchess - so it's out of my ballpark for real world reference as well... Just trying to avoid a lemon...

Regards,

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess that the variability of reports on this one is probably because many people are using a ground friction mod through FSUIPC and others aren't.

 

11 hours ago, scottb613 said:

Thanks for responding - yep - that's why I was looking for some feedback - was hoping someone had some experience in type... I would kind of think planes like King Air's - Cheyenne's - Conquest's - would need some brakes to keep from moving with those massive mills turning even at idle - so I was just wondering if we had made it less realistic ??? I don't have this plane yet - but I've considered it - so no reference on the before and after conditions

Based on RW experience with not-C441 turboprops, I imagine that the airplane would want to roll forward a little with the power levers at idle, but that's manageable because the real airplane has the beta range which gives you fine control over the prop pitch without changing the RPM.  So like, you'd give it a burst to get moving, but then you'd pull back and through the gates until you're just barely into the beta range to coast along.  In FS we have a reverse control that does two things at the same time, but independently: 1) sets a negative prop pitch relative to the reverser axis & 2) increases power relative to the reverser axis...That's why the props spin up quickly to high RPM without providing much stopping power when you only "crack" the reverse in FS (very fine pitch--low drag--plus increasing fuel flow). 

Sidebar: I change the min_throttle_limit in aircraft.cfg of most of my turboprops to something pretty small, like -0.1 or so...just enough to keep the engines from bogging down when you do go into reverse.  This fixes the excessive reverse spool problem (resulting in a pure beta control), but causes one to lose actual reverse--or the way it's modeled in FS anyway.  It's a tradeoff between a means to taxi realistically and having huge stopping power...I don't think reverse is effective enough in any FS turboprop (except the MJC Q400...different story though), so I don't care that I have to use the brakes on landing roll.

Sidebar sidebar: I made a number of tweaks to the old V1.2...I made an XML gauge that sets the FSX condition levers automatically relative to the C441's condition levers (which are really prop levers in this rendition).  If the condition levers are at TAXI, then you get the lowest condition lever setting where the engines will still run (has an added benefit of minimizing the power surge you get when starting an FSX turboprop), and if they're in FLIGHT you get condition levers all the way up.  This solved the original taxi issues for me, although there were tradeoffs.  I analyzed the V1.3 gauges, and I noticed that Alabeo had done something similar that restricts the condition levers to a max of 40%.  Unfortunately, I am one of said people with the ground friction mod, and my previous tweaks worked better for me so I'll probably just revert.  I also made some tweaks to the FDE that caused a much slower (but still not 100% real) start spool-up time.

All, PM me if interested in the above.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, C525B said:

1.I don't think reverse is effective enough in any FS turboprop (except the MJC Q400...different story though), so I don't care that I have to use the brakes on landing roll.

2.I also made some tweaks to the FDE that caused a much slower (but still not 100% real) start spool-up time.

1. Don't have any Carenado/Alabeo turboprop with unrealistic low reverse power. It's one of the easiest things to adjust in the cfg file.

2. Did you increase the spool time by adjusting the fuel_flow_gain ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

Another very interesting read...

I've heard the FSUIPC ground friction mentioned before - but never looked into it - worthwhile endeavor ???

Thanks...

Regards,
Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, J35OE said:

1. Don't have any Carenado/Alabeo turboprop with unrealistic low reverse power. It's one of the easiest things to adjust in the cfg file.

2. Did you increase the spool time by adjusting the fuel_flow_gain ? 

My RW experience is with B200 and B350 King Airs with large 4-bladed props that are known to have very effective reverse...per my expectations, I can not attain a realistic rollout distance with reverse alone in my Carenado turboprops in FS. Yes, there are adjustments available in FS, but the tradeoff I was alluding to is ground/taxi handling vs. stopping power on landing.  I can attain more stopping power by adjusting min_throttle_limit, fuel_flow_gain, minimum_reverse_beta, and prop_tc but I've found the by-product to be a loss of fine control and high RPMs + surging forward when I come out of reverse.  If I take some steps to "mellow out" the reverse, I can taxi leisurely and smoothly and I just have to use some wheel brakes when I land.  I guess that just comes down to a matter of perference.  I do use the DynamicFriction LUA available for FSUIPC, but the script is supposed to disable itself above 18 kts groundspeed to prevent an undue effect on takeoff/landing performance.

At one point I was turning up fuel_flow_gain on my Carenado turboprops, but I stopped because I thought the overshooting effect was more annoying than than slow power response.

I'm not trying to be definitive here...if you have some alternate suggestions, I really want to hear about them.

 

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