Captainsim C-130 FSX released, whats it like??

[FTD1949 0]

The bottom line is the aircraft is a winner and a keeper. If you own it then you can say what you like about it. If you don't own it then any comments re: C130 FSX SP2 are irrelevant.Craig

[Guest Lith1um]

Doing a little googling,Approximate horsepower for an Allison T-56 is 4000hp @ the propeller. An additional 800lbs of thrust is developed by the exhaust of each engine.Propeller reduction ratio is 12.5 to 1. The engine runs @ a constant 13,820 rpm. That would mean a constant net propeller rpm of 1105.6 rpm.Max operating altitude for the engine is 55,000 ft.Weight 1610 lbs. Pretty nice power to weight if you ask me.

[Guest Akflyin]

>RPM always shows full RPM, even at idle power.Hello,Just for the record The C-130 has a constant speed propeller system. At Low speed ground Idle (LSGI) The prop Rpm is between 69 and 72 percent. At Normal Speed Ground Idle ( NSGI) The prop RPM is 98 to 102 percent and stays there for all flight and ground operations till the engineer puts the engines at LSGI just prior to engine shutdown.Some Technical Stuff:The prop turns at 1020 Rpm at the reduction gearbox shaft. The propshaft has a beta feedback gear that is splined to the number 1 prop blade. The other end of the beta feedback shaft is splined to the prop assembly valve housing that is mounted on top of the prop assembly pump housing. The pump housing contains 2 hydralic pressure pumps, one electrical standby pump and one scavange pump. The hydralic fluid that is contained in the pump housing ( approx 26 quarts ) is used by the assembly to change prop blade angle by way of the valve housing. The valve housing uses a speeder spring and flyweight assembly that rotates according to prop RPM. The valve housing is also attached to the throttle system mechanically. When the pilot move the throttles below the flight idle gate range( Alpha Range), he is mechanically changing the prop Rpm directly as the turbine engine speed is increased. When the throttles are moved down over the flight idle gate( Beta Range ), the prop blade control is now being done by the speeder spring and flyweight assembly. As the pilot increases power for take-off, the speeder spring and flyweight assembly sense the prop RPM increase and adjust a porting valve to send more hydralic fluid to the prop to increase pitch thus maintaining 100 percent RPM. Now, I know what your asking yourself, How does the prop assembly know when the proper amount of pitch has been applied to keep the RPM at approx 100 percent?Well, You remember the beta feedback gear that is splined to the number 1 prop blade? It sends a mechancally geared signal to the speeder spring and flyweight assembly to center the fluid porting valve back to the zero effect position so that the blade will stop at the present postion.This process is very effective in allowing the Aircraft to tke full advantage of instant power adjustments to get instant power tansfer to the prop blades while maintainng 100 percent RPM.Simple Huh :0)Now, I know you would like to know about the Prop assembly pitchlock regulator, but that can be covered in a later thread.My two cents WorthFly Safe :0)Dave

[Wothan 173]

HiI have found out that the Propeller gauge is reading correct.I have also managed to start the engines from the virtual cockpit, but not from the 2D panel (well sometimes it work, mostly not).What bugs are left is:- Torque gauges wrong reading- Hydraulic panel in VC, lights are mixed around between the engine 1+4 pumps and the suction boost pumps. The VC hydraulic panel also has to be "initialized" by bringing up the 2D panel for proper function in the VC.- Antiskid switch also is working different than in the 2D panel.- Bustie not working in 2D panel.Wothan

[Guest]

>An additional 800lbs of thrust is developed by the>exhaust of each engine.>I'm surprised its not more than that. Even the Merlin makes 600lb of exhaust thrust, which I found to be quite impressive.

[Guest zzmikezz]

A minor point. The engines are probably constant-speed Allisons, so going from zero thrust to full power requires only changing prop pitch, and RPM at idle would be the same as RPM at full thrust. This was done so there would be no engine spool-up/down time. So CS are probably realistic on this particular point.Edit: If I had read the entire thread before posting I would have seen that people far more knowledgable than I had already dealt with the RPM issue in exquisite detail. I will now see whether our cat Clawdette LaClaw would like to lick the egg from my face.Happy 2008 to all of us,Mike McCarthymike@pcgamecontrols.com

[Guest]

I've been reading about captain sim last couple days, and going through thier forum. Seems they are doing a pretty good job. People on various forums seem to be getting timely reponses to any purchase issues, despite the fact they are on vacation and state on their site all inquiries will be processed after jan 8. Seems the only exception is those who used paypal and have to wait the 4 or 5 days. I read those guys are ex-fighter pilots, which I find very cool, and they seem to be quite friendly on their forum, responding to most all questions, and giving thanks to pretty much every compliment.So I don't really understand all the captain sim bashing I've seen. Given the life experience of those guys, they seem like some of the most qualified developers out there, and their technical and artistic expertise is evident. They also have some of the highest rated products I have seen, and more awards than I have seen posted on any other developers page. Seems to me if they leave the methods employed with the 757 roll out in the past there will be much to look foward to with captain sim, especially that B-52!

[Guest Lith1um]

You know how it is Solar, One person on the net observe's two people on the net speaking disfavorably about a person, company, or object and the bad rep begins to grow. It quickly spreads like wildfire, feeding on itself.I started holding CS in disregard based soley on preconceptions based on the comments of others, I guess it's human nature to a certain extent.But I'm glad I did buy it. The real c130 is an awesome aircraft and there is so much you can do with it. It's really fun getting in and out of some of those short fields like Lukla. And having 4 props harmonizing in your ears is nice too. The flight model is awesome imo, especialy the landings. Cockpit visibility is awesome, it's a great vfr aircraft and it moves at a nice clip.Do you have the Shuttle? Look's pretty interesting. I know you have x-load. I've thought about buying both.

[Guest]

>>I started holding CS in disregard based soley on>preconceptions based on the comments of others, I guess it's>human nature to a certain extent.>I will admit the same. Thanks for sharing that, and you are totally right about the wildfire. The C130 looks to be one of the best add ons to be released for FSX, and I'm sure I'll have a ton of fun when I get it. Plus the captain sim guys seem pretty cool to me.I've got their Yak-3 for FS9, but not the shuttle.

[Guest thx1137]

There seems to be a few vendors that generate a fair amount of heat. I have seen pretty rabid stuff against FSD, Ariane and Captain Sim in particular. I have purchased at least one product from each of them and have had timely support when needed. The only 'problem' I have witnessed with 'Captain Sim' is their definition of 'soon' doesn't match mine. If a model that is all eye candy is block A and block b (saying released soon) has the decent avionics package then I expect to wait no more than a month or two. I learned from others mistakes here and did not buy some machines until all the blocks I wanted were available. I don't think they ever became available, I certainly stopped checking after 8 months or so. I did have their C130 for FS9 though and liked it a lot.I deleted a whole bunch of stuff about why some people get poor support. Suffice it to say that I don't think I have experienced an FS company yet that 'didn't care'. Abrupt? Yes, experienced that just recently but then I really should have look at the support menu a little better :-)Steven.

[Guest Lith1um]

I could see it being an issue if you buy the base package of an airliner, then the complex systems never arrive or take forever to do so.But then again, how long would it take to program those systems? One month, maybe two? After all they are complex systems. And how long should you beta test before release? Another month? Things take time sometimes. You may find some bugs and have to repeat the process. Should you hold your base model until everthing is done months later, or should you release a basic package that allows people to start flying their virtual passengers around the globe sooner? Both ways have advantages and disadvantages.One criticism I have is the xload F117. I think it's rather cheesy that it uses the F18 cockpit from acceleration. The exterior model looks great so I'm just guessing CS hates modeling cockpits? Goofy if you ask me.And I wasn't happy about paying $55usd, but I can't blame CS for an exhange rate that adds .4589 cents per dollar to their asking price. I guess I just feel that way because I paid that much for FSX Deluxe edition and it just feels proportionaly wrong spending that much on one aircraft. But I got what I paid for, every penny imo. I don't feel ripped off at all.One thing everone should realize about international transactions. You have to realize there may be delays due to language differences, timezones, holidays, customs, and international banking issues. I wan't it all and I want it now, but "you can't always get what choo wan't....." "But if you try sometimes, you get what you neeeed." Now if they would only update their F104 to FSX standard.

[Guest LtRob]

For those of you that have puchased the FSX C-130, how did they fix the engine start sequence? In the FS9 C-130 the engines are running at 100% within 5, maybe 10 seconds upon hitting the starter. In the real C-130 you have to be at 60% engine speed within 60 seconds of energizing the starter (70 seconds if hot/high). The CS C-130 FS9 model just cranks up WAY too fast to be real. It really bothers me that it seemed to be running so soon, which is not true to life. Of course that may be a limitation with the FS turboprop model. Also, does anyone know if the generators remain off-line when the engines are at low-speed ground idle (between 69%-74%)? The generators should not be on-line until about 95% engine speed, and below 95% you need to use the CTC/APU or ground power to have electrical power. The fact that the engines don't go into fuel correction between 800 and 840 degrees Turbine Inlet Temp I can live without, but before I buy the FSX version I have to see if they have the engine start and generators straightened out.Yes, I worked as a propulsion mechanic on C-130s for more than a dozen years, and still manage a squadron of C-130 mechanics. I guess I am a critical customer, but, at those prices, I want realism.If anyone has any questions on how the C-130 should operate, please don't hesitate to ask. Just don't expect me to know everything about the avionics. Even after working on them for more than 20 years, avionics is still MFM. (Those of you who know what that means, keep smiling!) :-lol

[Guest NYURDRMS]

Can somebody show me where the manuals are? I can't seem to find them on the Captainsim site. I can see the liveries, and repaint kit, and some abreviation search engine, but no manuals. What section of thier site are the manuals?By the way, I am very happy with this purchase, very deep looking, which I why I need the manuals.Thanks,Chad

[Guest Lith1um]

Sure man,The manuals can be found here, http://www.captainsim.com/products/c131/bp/manual.htmlAnd I found a pretty nice tutorial that covers everthing from startup and shutdown, to navigation.http://www.fsstation.com/tutorials/captain...kheed-c130.htmlTony

[Guest NYURDRMS]

Sweet, thanks. Nice tutorial as well, I will try it tonight.