690B Discrepancy List

[MartinRex007 390]

I haven't bought the aircraft yet, but will it be possible to boost the performance to match the -10 in the aircraft.cfg file? Odd, they included a EGT gauge replacement for the ITT which is done with the -10, but appear to have model the performance of the -5?

 

Cheers

Martin

[C525B 86]

48 minutes ago, MartinRex007 said:

I haven't bought the aircraft yet, but will it be possible to boost the performance to match the -10 in the aircraft.cfg file? Odd, they included a EGT gauge replacement for the ITT which is done with the -10, but appear to have model the performance of the -5?

 

Cheers

Martin

You could increase the power_scalar value under [turboprop_engine].  That's not the right way to do it, but it will get you in the neighborhood.

[torque2 24]

44 minutes ago, C525B said:

You could increase the power_scalar value under [turboprop_engine].  That's not the right way to do it, but it will get you in the neighborhood.

Simulating derated turboprop engine performance in Flight Simulator is very difficult to do realistically, if not impossible.  Sure you can play around with power settings in the aircraft.cfg file or the torque curves in the .air file to get high power at altitude but then you have to set the fuel flow scalar low to give you correct fuel burn (low) at high power settings at altitude.  FSX (and I presume P3D) link fuel flow to power.  Set 1500 ftlbs of torque and 2000 rpm at 5,000' in your favourite Carenado turboprop and note your fuel flow.  Do the same at 20,000'.  I'll bet you'll see fuel flows exactly the same.  FSX does not model decreasing fuel flow with altitude in turboprops unless power also drops.  That's why I prefer turboprop models without derated engines, such as the -5 here, or the KingAir C90B over the C90Gtx.  As you climb, power available drops and so does your fuel flow (like the real aircraft).  The -5 powered aircraft is still plenty fast!

If you don't care about unrealistically low fuel flows at low altitude, in climb, or at less than maximum cruise then fine.  But it's not for me.

If P3D does better in this regard I would like to know!

Cheers,

David

 

[whamil77 183]

2 hours ago, MartinRex007 said:

A coupe of performance numbers for the Dash 10, also I notice that with the Honeywell TPE 331-10T, the ITT gauges are replaced with an EGT system.

Speed: 300+ KTAS
Climb: 717.5 shaft horsepower to 16,000 feet. 3,500+ fpm through 20,000 feet.

http://twincommander.com/custom-kits-modifications/dash-10/

 

I think that is an error on the website.  It doesn't make sense that the airplane would continue to climb like that above 16,000' when the engine is essentially losing power.  Elsewhere on the same site is this statement:

"300+ KTAS 

Full power to 16,000 feet

3,500 fpm initial rate of climb/Greater than 2000 fpm to FL200

12 minutes to FL290

Increased fuel efficiencies

Increased range"

This makes much more sense. 

 

[whamil77 183]

3 hours ago, bobby456gt said:

Sorry, what problem did you found?

Anything with ESHP output.?

The N1 vs torque curve was a little shallow.  I was able to adjust it along with the torque vs density curve and get the results I wanted.  The fuel flows never match at all altitudes but that is a simulator limitation.  I adjusted the fuel flow scalar to correspond to a middle altitude but the simulator doesn't scale it correctly at lower and higher altitudes.  I wish they would allow a curve for fuel flow and EGT/ITT.  Then we could program them to act correctly. 

[RobertBernardK 7]

In this case my big "no go"  item for the purchase it's the FATAL ERROR in the instruments. Like said here if it's a Commander with TPE331-5 need to have their respective ITT instrument. 

If is a Commander with the TPE331-10 it's OK and match with the EGT instruments in the plane. 

Can't be a 690B with the stock -5 Garrett and have a EGT instrument or a with the Dash Ten engine and have the performance of the original -5 engine.

That's my big complain, if carenado it's packing a SP hope for God sake fix this. I can help them have material etc to do the plane more realistic. 

At least have my Shrike Commander 100% real like the real one.

[MartinRex007 390]

This is what I sent Carenado a couple of hours ago. If others could send them a support ticket perhaps they will model the -10 engines with realistic performance?

"There is some confusion with the online community regarding which engine is modeled in you new AC 690B, the TPE 331-5 or the TPE 331-10T? The emblem for the -10T is on the side of the aircraft, and has EGT instead of ITT gauges, however the performance doesn't seem to match the -10T any chance to mod the aircraft to meet the performance specs on the -10T?"  Thank you!

[RobertBernardK 7]

2 hours ago, MartinRex007 said:

This is what I sent Carenado a couple of hours ago. If others could send them a support ticket perhaps they will model the -10 engines with realistic performance?

"There is some confusion with the online community regarding which engine is modeled in you new AC 690B, the TPE 331-5 or the TPE 331-10T? The emblem for the -10T is on the side of the aircraft, and has EGT instead of ITT gauges, however the performance doesn't seem to match the -10T any chance to mod the aircraft to meet the performance specs on the -10T?"  Thank you!

Good Martin, that's is the point and the major complain, the ITT/EGT instruments, the engines and the performance!!!  

If they can explain and solve this thing in concrete the plane worth the money, if not........  Another pretty plane without soul. 

Bad instruments, bad engines bad performance!!  

Even the exhausts on the engine are typical dash ten engines, the exhausts on the -5 are different! 

More people need to keep pushing carenado team to fix the problems 

[Tenpin 3]

I Hope you folks forwarded this onto Carenado so they can make the necessary corrections and publish a fix for us.

 

 

[N405GJ 36]

I really wanted to buy this one. But I guess I will be passing on yet another pretty airplane. Thanks to those who paid to be "beta testers" of more Carenado shovelware. You saved me another $40.

[MartinRex007 390]

Matt, don't lose hope, Carenado is actually pretty good at fixing these things if they are made aware of them shortly after release....stay turned!

Cheers

Martin

[JIMJAM 12]

"Made aware"

How could you miss the lighting issue? The problem is literally lit up and illuminated. In the big picture no biggie just deal with it or don't fly at night and wait for someone to deal with it. Waited to long for a TC which I flew 99.9% at night freight ops to get upset over it just don't understand how these things go unnoticed or unresolved before releases. Great flyer/looker with ok systems if you squint and have a hell of a imagination which I do. $40 worth of temp suspension of reality. Yes.

[MartinRex007 390]

Evidently according to their business model (Google "Carenado Mayo 2013") they have a 45 day completion cycle, at least they did in 2013.  I know it's hard to believe, but I suspect that is way these things don't get fixed before release....I'm hoping if enough folks open a support ticket these things will be addressed.

[expat 4]

I am a massive TC fan and also Carenado supporter, but will wait first to see if a proper - 10 spec model can be devised either by the dev or someone here. Would like to have a 300 IAS TC, yes! 

My Carenado collection continues to grow.  They do beautiful work (the B200 and PC-12 get a lot of time) but also this community (see the Avsim PC-12 forum here as an example) adds to the fun by coming up with lots of helpful, necessary or just fun to have mods to improve upon the dev's "kit" (or beta . .).  Thanks to all for communicating with Carenado on this. 

[FDEdev 955]

1 hour ago, expat said:

Would like to have a 300 IAS TC, yes! 

Not with -10 engines ;)