How to adjust nose attitude??

[ramprat 8]

Greetings,Does anyone know how I can tweak the cruise nose attitude? Is there an adjustment in the air file or something? I feel the RealAir SF-260 rides a little too high during cruise even at lower altitudes. In the real world it would be the angle of incidence I think. I can't find any such adjustment in FSX. Thanks for any help.Bill Worth

[GHarrall 494]

Bill,I don't own the SF-260 but it's generally regarded as one of THE best addons for FS9 or FSX.Knowing Real Air, I doubt the angle is incorrect. They are very good at producing 'on the numbers' air files.There are lots of guys in this forum who have this addon. Hopefully one of them will provide additional comments.On a side note, editing the air files for this kind of thing usually ends up breaking something else. It's a fine balancing act!

[Paladin 101]

How about adjusting your "seat height" to suit ??M.

[Spawntscuk1 0]

I know you can alter this in the aircraft.cfg. If I remember rightly you have to adjust the cruise scalar figure.

[yellowjack 28]

In RW the angle of incidence is a hardware measurement of the angle between the aircraft mainplanes and its rigging datum. What changes in flight is the angle of attack which varies with speed. I have the SF260 and it looks good to me although the nose does rise as one slows down but this is to be expected. Particularly so with the SF 260 which has a rather low airpseed in order to use the flaps. The Sf260 IIRC does have a laminar flow wing which may exacerbate the situation.

[LAdamson 240]

I don't have FSX running at the moment, but checked out the FS9 version. It seems okay when flying level, trimmed, and on auto-pilot. I'd just go with the seat height adjustment (shift/enter) which I often do for landings. Even though my FSX isn't running, the SF260 FSX version was used the most. I never noticed a difference in the longitudinal axis while in cruise.L.Adamson

[ramprat 8]

"In RW the angle of incidence is a hardware measurement of theangle between the aircraft mainplanes and its rigging datum.What changes in flight is the angle of attack which varieswith speed."Hi John, did they change the definition of the term??? I always thought the angle of incidence was the angle between the chord of the wing and the longitudinal axis of the airframe. But, I have been out of aviation for about twenty years. At any rate, the nose of the SF-260 rides a bit high in cruise for my taste. If I trim the SF-260 in level cruise at 3000' msl and note the distance between the top of the cowling and the horizon and then do the same with the mooney, the mooney looks lower and more in keeping with what I would expect from a high performance single. I have tried adjusting the seat hight up and still don't like it. I have great respect for Realair products (I own several) and believe they have rendered the airplane accurately. I just hoped there was a way to get that nose down to a level that is more comfortable. Old habits are hard to break and I never flew anything that rode that high in cruise. If I had, I would have been doing a lot of S-turns to make sure there was no traffic ahead. Jason, I will try your suggestion. Thanks. Again, no disrespect intended regarding Realair. They make excellent products.Thank you all for your help.Bill

[ramprat 8]

Hi Jason,Thanks! I changed the value of Cruise_Lift_Scaler and it did the trick. Best regards,Bill

[LAdamson 240]

> I have tried adjusting the seat>hight up and still don't like it. I have great respect for>Realair products (I own several) and believe they have>rendered the airplane accurately. I just hoped there was a>way to get that nose down to a level that is more comfortable.> Old habits are hard to break and I never flew anything that>rode that high in cruise. If I had, I would have been doing a>lot of S-turns to make sure there was no traffic ahead. >On numerous occasions, I've sat in cockpits and made mental comparisons to what we see in real life, versus the "compromised" single desktop monitor. I figure that we see at least six times the forward and peripheral vision in the real plane compared to the monitor. Three across and two down.While looking at the monitor, a section or the whole panel is visible and in focus. Yet in real life, whether flying or driving a car, the panel or dash is actually out of the way, if seats or pads are adjusted correctly; and not in focus unless you glance downward. For simming, to get the panel out of the way, you zoom in, but loose peripheral side vision. Zoom out for side vision, and get too much of the panel in the way. All in all, it's a compromised situation!Sometimes it's better to get rid of the panel altogether, but I don't prefer that option either. Other options are semi-transparent panels, or just raising the seat. In this case, I don't feel it's the SF260 as being the problem. I just feel that we're dealing with one monitor limitations! Besides, with the SF260 and it's sliding canopy, we actually get a lot more peripheral vision than in most other simulated airplanes. I have a Van's RV6A which is quite similar to the SF260 in cockpit size and side by seating, as well as the sliding canopy. This is what I made most of my cockpit comparisons from. I've also flown the Marchetti.L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

>Hi Jason,>>Thanks! I changed the value of Cruise_Lift_Scaler and it did>the trick. >What does that do to the external side view? Since I really don't know, but tend to fly from "spot" view a lot. :)L.Admason

[yellowjack 28]

Bill, Yes, your definition of angle of incidence is really the same as mine. I was a rigger as a young lad and describe it from that perspective. Its pretty hard to measure from the longitudinal axis in most aircraft so a rigging datum is used whichis measured from a specific point on the fuselage along with the correct rigging board. The real issue here is that the angle of incidence is fixed unlike the angle of attack which is not and depends on a variety of factors as you know. If you want a better view from the SF260 cockpit why not go into the aircraft config file and change the eyepoint statement, my 260 statement looks thus:[Views]eyepoint=-5.1, -0.9, 1.97Just make the last number bigger to permanently raise your eyepoint in the cockpit. That change won't affect the aircraft performance in any way. PS. Watch your head on the glass canopy. ;-)

[ramprat 8]

Hi L.Adamson,I envy you....in a respectable way. The Vans is a dandy. It would be my choice.And I totally agree with you regarding the compromise we live with in flightsim. In the RW the panel is in our peripheral view while with the desktop it is part of our main view. Such an arrangement is never going to totally fool our brains into thinking we are really there. But I keep trying. As age progresses I suspect it becomes easier. Kind of an inverse ratio thing.Regarding the effect of the tweak from the outside view, the nose does ride slightly lower and it looks more correct to me. The longitudinal axis is lined up with the horizon. But that's just me. Not saying it is more correct. The guys at Realair probably have it right on.Thanks for your help.Bill

[ramprat 8]

Thanks John, I will give the eyepoint a try.