Trolling Through SimMarket P3D Took Longer

[Tim_Capps 474]

On 10/7/2021 at 10:55 AM, Patco Lch said:

I read recently on the Constellation the pilot rare to never touches the throttles but calls settings such as “increase one inch,back 1/2 inch” etc and the FE handles the setting.

Yeah, I noticed them doing that on Ice Pilots and you see the FE managing throttles even in early jets. Looks very strange these days and a bit awkward.

[Patco Lch 1,464]

36 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

Yeah, I noticed them doing that on Ice Pilots and you see the FE managing throttles even in early jets. Looks very strange these days and a bit awkward.

Defiantly need throttles ground handling the Connie. Limited nose wheel movement so like the DC3 differential braking and thrust essential. Takes a little practice to refine.

[DEHowie 269]

Some great value airports to be had in Colombia from Sierrasim. Most are very good quality and almost all challenging approaches and they are pretty much all cheap. Had some excellent flights into them.

[SimeonWilbury 220]

23 hours ago, Tim_Capps said:

It’s part of the MegaPack from Flight1 that has the excellent old steam gauge DC-9 and the above-mentioned “Classic” plus “Professional” (transitional glass like the Maddog) MD-80s, which are a bit more graphically dated inside but all of them are well done and lot of fun.

I might take a look at that for the DC9s potentially, I'm happy enough with the Leonardo Maddog that I'm not too interested in the MD80s, but the DC9 would be a nice addition for that navigation system alone.

23 hours ago, Tim_Capps said:

Captain Sim’s late lamented 707 did too

Of all the old CS classics have been neglected that is probably the one I'm saddest about never making it to x64. If there ever were a Conway-powered 707 released for v4/v5 I'd be certain to spend hours retreading a lot of BA/ BOAC's old 60s/70s intercontinental routes. For now I'll just settle for Just Flight hopefully one day finishing their 747 Classic (which in fairness is still probably my #1 most desired aircraft for P3D).

[cowpatz 243]

On 10/9/2021 at 12:22 AM, SimeonWilbury said:

If I remember rightly the name for that model of INS was the Delco Carousel (though I don't know of any nicknames per say)

On a slightly off-topic note, one navigation system I would be curious to see implemented in some form would be the old 'Omega' radio navigation system. It relied on 8 ground based aids globally and used very low frequency radio beams to judge the distance of the beacons to work out your position. It was I believe one of the contemporary alternatives to the Delco; the VC10 used by the Sultan of Oman as a private transport (and now on display at Brooklands in the UK) had at least 1 OMEGA unit (or similar) fitted in the flight deck when I visited.

I think the Soviet/Russian equivalent has been simulated on aircraft like the ProjectTupolev Tu-154 but my lack of aptitude in working the Russian-language flightdeck and lack of v4/v5 compatibility meant I never got round to learning it.

There was also the Litton INS unit from memory. The early DC8s (and possibly the 707s) used Doppler navigation until Loran and  Omega came along, however, I've never seen these systems modeled..
I certainly enjoyed using the CIVA INS in the Tin mouse 737 back in my FS9 days. For online flying its certainly more helpful with a good FMS although the controllers might prefer the opportunity to be able to vector the non RNP compliant aircraft around for the approach as opposed to just issuing a STAR and APP.

[Tim_Capps 474]

17 hours ago, cowpatz said:

Doppler navigation until Loran and  Omega came along, however, I've never seen these systems modeled.

 

LORAN is conspicuously absent, and I think it was more widely used than ONS. I think I have an F4 that uses TACAN, but to be honest haven't done more than take off and realize it doesn't handle like a DC-8 🙂 I think I'll have to be in the right mood.

Captain Sim 707 modeled the doppler system but is a no-go for P3Dv5.

Flight1 / Coolsky did model the Omega Navigation System for their Super 80 (again, you can only get the DC-9 in the Megapack with the ONS "Super80" and the later (with modern FMS like Leonardo's Maddog) "Super 80 Professional"). All these are fine in P3Dv5, but the DC-9 was developed later and shows it in (a) better VC e.g. 3D switches on the overhead; and (b) deeper systems modeling including extensive failures. The package is $59 (although there's a substantial discount if you bought the FSX version). If you want a DC-9, I think this one's a real peach and flies by the numbers. The alternative is the Skysim version, which is supported for v4 and I can't comment if it works in v5. It was a bit rougher in FSX, and harder to get into, but not bad. Their ad copy says it's been improved since then. It's $35 and maybe someone else can say if it works in v5. If you're not interested in anything but a v5 DC-9, it comes down to whether you're willing to pay $59 for a nice one. It has a lot of interesting features you can check out for yourself at Flight1. But while the "Super 80 Professional" is no Maddog, I have both and can say that for normal ops you're going to get a decent airplane that operates like you'd expect, but you're also getting a 2D overhead that is cleverly done, but is what it is. For my more casual polyairplanous lifestyle, I pass over the admittedly nicer Leonardo model for the admittedly lesser Flight1 / Coolsky. All of the Flight1 / Coolsky airplanes are very accessible with built-in training modules, setup, etc. and the DC-9 includes real-time schematics (also built-in) plus failures plus a radio navigation aid for those not up on that art. So, you're getting three airplanes representing three interesting periods in aviation for $59, sort of like a JustFlight pack without the usual JF problems. Definitely only comparing the variety, not the quality, because they're way better than anything I've ever seen from JF.

On 10/9/2021 at 10:15 AM, SimeonWilbury said:

For now I'll just settle for Just Flight hopefully one day finishing their 747 Classic (which in fairness is still probably my #1 most desired aircraft for P3D).

Roger that. Evidently Aeroplane Heaven is not involved (if that's what "in-house development means) which is encouraging. I'd be pretty forgiving when it came to a classic 747 in P3Dv5.

And, yes, if you do online flying you've got that to consider. I don't because I've finally reached a point in my life when I don't have to do anything anyone else tells me to do 🙂

 

[Tim_Capps 474]

On 10/8/2021 at 11:57 AM, Patco Lch said:

so like the DC3 differential braking and thrust essential

Funny you should mention that. Same day of post I happened to try my first taxi with differential throttles with the DC-3. Wow. What a difference! Still trying to get FSUICP to remember the axes of the all the airplanes I set up, but that's a different story. The Aerosoft DC-8 is solid and now I've finally got the CLS DC-10 dialed in, so it's my fault somewhere along the line. Liberal Arts Major syndrome when it comes to computers 🙂 I'll get it. I appreciate the genius of FSUIPC a lot more than I ever did before, when it was just something that other things needed to run.

[SimeonWilbury 220]

28 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

Roger that. Evidently Aeroplane Heaven is not involved (if that's what "in-house development means) which is encouraging. I'd be pretty forgiving when it came to a classic 747 in P3Dv5.

Yes, to their credit it does seem they really want to get this one right and as polished as possible. But so long as it is flyable I will buy and fly it given how long I've been waiting for a good 747 Classic to haul freight around in. Given the quality of Freeware scenery for Tblisi available I'll without a doubt be doing some Geo-Sky ops when I get the chance.

[Tim_Capps 474]

20 minutes ago, SimeonWilbury said:

Geo-Sky

Had to look that up. Probably not many 742 operators these days. So, someone else who likes to match airplanes to the real world? Yeah, me too. Except my real world is usually around 1975. I look around at all these weird futuristic airplanes taxiing around and shrug. If anyone knows of a historic AI pack that would work with JF Traffic Global without too much drama, I'd like to hear it. Nice thing about freight ops is that they keep the classics flying long after pax airlines have moved on.

[SimeonWilbury 220]

7 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

So, someone else who likes to match airplanes to the real world? Yeah, me too. Except my real world is usually around 1975

Similar case for me, though with the 747-400 and MD80 I usually go for around 1996! I do like to fly modern freight ops though partly because I struggle to find many historical schedules, one airline I would love to have schedules for is the late MK Airlines which flew Cargo DC8s and 742s. Though sadly one of their hubs (Manston Airport) is also no more.

My main golden rule is that in my Sim World Kai Tak never closed!

11 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

I look around at all these weird futuristic airplanes taxiing around and shrug.

I don't use AI traffic personally, though on the occasions when I fly on Vatsim I do enjoy the novelty of flying an older aircraft. I did an event at Heathrow around a month ago and alongside all these modern A320 neos, 787s and the such I couldn't help but chuckle at the thought of all these modern jets being joined by a battered old Maddog, I enjoy being out of place in that sense.

[Tim_Capps 474]

1 hour ago, SimeonWilbury said:

My main golden rule is that in my Sim World Kai Tak never closed!

Never! As for freight ops, I try to get the general departures and destinations right, but in my little mind you never know when Columbia is going to need fresh tulips from Amsterdam, or World (heh, ridden them) has some reason legit or otherwise for a trip, or that long flight to someplace in Africa isn't carrying Amazon deliveries. I could cite some very recent instances of curious freight but don't want to get political 🙂

[Patco Lch 1,464]

1 hour ago, Tim_Capps said:

Had to look that up. Probably not many 742 operators these days. So, someone else who likes to match airplanes to the real world? Yeah, me too. Except my real world is usually around 1975. I look around at all these weird futuristic airplanes taxiing around and shrug. If anyone knows of a historic AI pack that would work with JF Traffic Global without too much drama, I'd like to hear it. Nice thing about freight ops is that they keep the classics flying long after pax airlines have moved on.

Tim, I spent some time looking over the Aerosoft DC8 over the weekend watching some U-Tube Stuff but I have a couple of questions you seem to be the man who can answer. The DC8 was the first jet I ever rode on in 1964 and in put in many hours as a passenger in following years from 40 minute domestic hops to trans continental to trans pacific so a real nostalgic plane for me. 

There appears to be a very daunting learning curve for someone whos experience is mainly in PMDG and Leonardo glass jets. Does the AS DC8 come with panel states such a "Ready to Fly, Start, Taxi etc"? Any new aircraft I buy I like to take up and try out the flight dynamics and maybe a landing or two before diving into the books. I didn't see anything like panel states in the videos so do you have to learn the start up procedures from scratch before you ever get to fly her?

Also is there any help from a virtual FE with the FE panel such as the PMDG DC6 and A2A Constellation or do you have to keep jumping around and completely managing all crew stations yourself? That seems a bit much.😅

[Tim_Capps 474]

I filled a big three-ring binder with all the documentation, but a lot of that includes a thick CIVA section, and there is a very good tutorial. it's not a casual airplane like the JF. (DId I also make a cool-looking operations manual cover including the Douglas logo and the date 1962? Yes I did. I'm that much of a little kid.)

There are two popups for use on the ground that are really handy. One is a fuel-and-payload manager, sort of like you find on most Captain Sim airplanes. You can populate the seats with pax or, if you're using the freighter, cargo. (You can also add more limited cargo to pax airplanes.) But the fuel loader is really important considering the complex tank system of the DC-8. The fuel loader gets every drop into the right place just by entering the total needed. The airplane defaults to engines running, but the fuel-and-payload manager also includes a cold-and-dark button to give you the option. Same box also provides your fuel total, gross weight and CG, which you'll need to set your stabilizer for take-off. Yes, there are a few pages of charts I keep in sheet protectors at the front of my notebook. They're not hard to use--if I can do it anyone can do it, and it's fun to fly by the numbers. The only really mysterious one is the fuel planning calculator which I sort of get, but mainly use to double-check my own calculations. For operations, you'll want to use the rest for your trim (easy) EGT settings (not hard) and V-speeds (again, not hard).

Note: if you want to use GSX2, make sure you've got 4000 lbs cargo so you don't get cheated on animated pax. Then set it back after loading.

The other popup is ground services. You're going to need this for a cold-and-dark start, because there's no APU. So you can get either or both of electricity and air (sadly, no animations like the JF DC-8 has, but there's always the GSX apu). You can start all four at the stand, or (and this is more fun) start No. 3, disconnect, then crank up that baby enough on pushback to get sufficient pressure to start 4, then etc. That's quite a bit of system depth. It also has a button for "automatic flight engineer," but I have no idea what that does. Which also means being the flight engineer has never been too taxing.

You can definitely start it up on the active, give it two notches of flaps (to 15) and a bit of trim and firewall the throttles to give it a try.

The CIVA INS is pretty complicated, naturally, but the instructions are good, and there's always the option to feed in a nine-point flightplan automagically. (One gotcha: even though it starts with the correct initial position, you must still punch the numbers in again for both units. Seems a lot of people miss that.) I'll tell you that once I figured out that there were (and why) five places for latitude and six for longitude (okay, I'm an word not allowed) it got a whole lot simpler. In fact, I think it's easier to just punch in the numbers, especially since you can use the remote buttons (on both) and just input on one. You can generate a separate VOR-VOR flightplan and load it for DME updating, or just do it manually (Navigraph Charts is great for all of this) or not at all. Never had any navigational errors that were that significant.

Before getting to fuel management, which does deserve some discussion, I should mention that while this is not a hard airplane to fly, it's easy to crash. You can get task saturated / fixated if you're not careful, and there's no autothrottle to keep your speed up. And if you are pulling a really long haul with full fuel, it's probably a bad idea to go all the way to FL350 without burning a lot off first. I'm not saying that to scare you off, because most of the time it's a joy to fly. Just saying you have to pay attention.

Okay. Fuel management. Yes, it's crazy compared to anything else I've seen. But, unlike the JF model, it does work as advertised. It's also not as complicated as you might imagine. The cross-feed levers are for show only, and you don't need them for normal operations anyway. On a really long trip, you'll be using the center tank(s) to fill the mains as you go until, well, you just have to mark that page in the manual so you know the rules, but for simplicity's sake here, we'll say until the center tank is exhausted. The idea is that each engine pulls fuel from its own main, and each main is kept at the proper level by being fed by first the center tank (if needed) or it's own alternate tank. The good part is that most of this is automated. Set your main tanks to fill and that's mostly all (except for occasionally monitoring things). What's cool is you can set bugs so the process has an automated component. It's all part of Douglas' design to keep the airframe from getting stressed because weights aren't distributed properly.

I know the above paragraph sounds really complicated and you're probably deciding no thanks, but while it does take some basic comprehension of what's going on and some babysitting, it's not like you're there for a lot of the time fiddling with stuff. Set it up per the manual, follow the excellent extended checklist fuel section, and it's mostly an occasional check to make sure it's not time to do something pretty simple. There is an excellent tutorial. CP flight from PHNL to CYVR (still no v5 PHNL scenery) that covers everything you heed to know on "simple mode." Believe it nor, you don't even need the center tank for that flight, so you have to learn that on your own. But otherwise it's fine, and since it's a scenario, it starts out with payload, fuel and wx, and you have the option to just skip to the runway and take up the tutorial from there if you want. By the same token, although the flightplan is loaded, you have the option to consult the INS part of the manual and punch in the numbers. Everything you need is there. Aerosoft does well on this sort of thing.

If you can handle the airplanes you mentioned, I am confident  you'd find this easier. It is a jet, after all, which is inherently less complicated. After takeoff, the automation works just fine, but of course there's no safety net. After all, that's why we like these old airplanes, right?

The only other caveat I can think of is that it is a v4 airplane, and unlike other v4 airplanes I've used, I did do that hack from YouTube to fool the installer. Maybe I could have fiddled around with stuff to make everything happy, but that was the easiest for me. Again, if I can do it, anybody can do it. I'll spare you the usual lecture about the sin of altering the Sacred Registry. It's not like we're ever going to see a v5 model from Aerosoft anyway, and it did not cause any problems for me.

One or two other little gotchas--not problems, just things that are easy to miss--come to mind, but if you decide to try it out, I'll be here to help.

The alternative is the JustFlight DC-8s which (in two packs) represent the whole history of the DC-8, which is nice, have a better sound set, in my opinion, and look nicer on the inside. But the fuel system can't be operated as advertised, which means ctl-E starts and unrealistic operation unless you want to correctly start and REALLY do some voodoo back at the engineer's station! But if you just want a DC-8 to hack around in for fun, the JF model is fine. I even managed to London to New York flight and arrived with the correct fuel levels and under max gross landing weight. But I don't think I could explain to anyone else how I did it. With a ctl-E start, the JF should burn from the center first, then others evenly. Otherwise, you have to fight the thing from merrily burning fuel from right to left across  your panel!

At first, I was underwhelmed with the Aerosoft DC-8 compared to JF's. Nothing exactly bad about; it just wasn't as sexy. But after a lot of frustration with the JF fuel system, I gave it another chance. Well, the fuel system works, and it actually has an INS, rather than JF's just... some mystery magical invisible thing following the flightplan. Once I got into it, I have not flown anything since. You don't get much more old school in a jet. And I'm just really impressed with the way everything works like you'd expect from a top developer. Too bad it's been relegated to the virtual boneyard.

[Patco Lch 1,464]

 

51 minutes ago, Tim_Capps said:

At first, I was underwhelmed with the Aerosoft DC-8 compared to JF's. Nothing exactly bad about; it just wasn't as sexy. But after a lot of frustration with the JF fuel system, I gave it another chance. Well, the fuel system works, and it actually has an INS, rather than JF's just... some mystery magical invisible thing following the flightplan. Once I got into it, I have not flown anything since. You don't get much more old school in a jet. And I'm just really impressed with the way everything works like you'd expect from a top developer. Too bad it's been relegated to the virtual boneyard.

WOW, thanks Tim for that extensive review. Sounds like a real education to master this jet but I've done it before and it's really not budget busting expensive.  I may take a dive in this, one of my fav aircraft back in the day. I tend to jump around so much between planes I'm kind of a jack of many trades but master of none:) Thanks for taking the time to answer me. 

[Tim_Capps 474]

1 hour ago, Patco Lch said:

I may take a dive in this

Oh, I can pretty much guarantee you will until you get used to it 😉

1 hour ago, Patco Lch said:

I tend to jump around so much between planes I'm kind of a jack of many trades but master of none

That's me, too, which is why I avoid anything I've got to get married to. Honestly, it sounds harder than it is. I would compare it to Captain Sim in terms of complexity, maybe a little less than the L1011. I don't know how the Connie engineer's panel is, but this does not involve much more than setting things up, then checking the fuel levels once in a while and performing a few simple tasks at the proper time according to the gouge. The INS is optional--if you start with a flight plan it loads it automatically. If  you felt comfortable with simple registry adjustment (not saying I did before I watched the video a couple of times), there's probably worse places to spend some bucks. Again, if you want to just hack around in a DC-8, you can get the pack -10 through the -40 from JustFlight for about the same price. still have a blast and it's a lot more atmospheric. Those are the more interesting DC-8s IMO anyway. (Aerosoft's is a -50, but still old school.) It's fun to play around with the JF's "ejectors" (to cut down on the noise during takeoff if you're considerate) and they implement the infamous "reverse thrust spoilers" better (although Aerosoft does let you use a pair of reversers in-flight.) Yup. They really did that. I guess there's a difference between what I'm willing to admit to liking and what I will recommend. I gave JF three stars on SimMarket and explained that I had five stars worth of fun out of it, but couldn't go better, and for some people, it would be one star. You know what ticks your boxes.

This is just mesmerizing. (This guy has some other very interesting videos, too!)