Mythbusters new thread, airliners and passengers at the controls

[RFields5421 1]

One question to ask flight simmers is what are the crash tolerance settings on your aircraft you fly.It's in the aircraft.cfg contact_points section.point.0 = 1, -25.0, 0.0, -17.5, 1000.0, 0, 2.0, 70.0, 0.5, 3.5, 0.900, 9.0, 8.0, 0, 220, 250point.1 = 1, -114.0, -18.0, -21.3, 2000.0, 1, 2.0, 13.0, 3.0, 2.5, 0.900, 11.0, 9.0, 2, 220, 250point.2 = 1, -114.0, 18.0, -21.3, 2000.0, 2, 2.0, 13.0, 3.0, 2.5, 0.900, 11.0, 9.0, 3, 220, 250This is from the default B744. It has tolerances for 2,000 FPM on the mains and 1,000 FPM on the nose gear.A recent Airbus report on the Quito A340-600 overrun/crash says the data shows the aircrft touched down at 1,100 FPM - which was a 3G impact and resulted in:- Breakage of the lower articulation link of both Main Landing Gear (MLG);- Abrupt derotation of both bogie beams;- Burst at impact of all 4 MLG front wheels;- And damage of the wiring looms of RH and LH boogie proximity sensors that are used to detect the GROUND condition hence allowing engine thrust reversers deployment.As a consequence of the 4 MLG front wheels burst, the AUTO BRAKE function was lost.I'm not interested in an Airbus/Boeing debate - just a note that a landing which FS shows we survive with maybe a small bounce is going to seriously damage a real aircraft.If you want to show you are really, really good with your complex addon aircraft - change your damage settings. See if you can make landings at less than 300 FPM consistently. Yes, it can be done - I know a fellow who flies on-line who can consistently - 19 out of 20 times - land any FS aircraft with the wheels up and not have a 'crash'Which requires a landing at less than 25 fpm descent.

[tunnelcat 1]

To John Bower above, LUCKY STIFF!Question for RF. What numbers would you put in your aircraft.cfg file (in all three point fields) to get a more realistic crash damage in FS? Around 1000 for all three points?Kim

[RFields5421 1]

Bring them down slowly - start with 1000If you've followed the threads - the FSX Acceleration Carrier Landing Mission has been causing a lot of people problems because the contact with the carrier deck has to be 400FPM or less to pass the mission (the aircraft numbers are 1600).I know carrier planes slam into the deck - been in almost 50 of them. But I don't think we ever hit anywhere close to 3G (1100 FPM), maybe 1.5 at the highest. However, I don't know the real world numbers on carrier landings.I have been told by a real flight instructor that one reason he hates students with MSFS experience is that they think 200 FPM landings are great - and many of those often will quickly lead to failure of a C-172 gear structure.I'm survivable in my C-172 in FSX at 300 FPM - still working on getting down to 200.

[jagabom 21]

I won't do a missed approach and if I hit the brakes and all the tires blew, who cares. As long as we all live, I'd be getting drunk that night. Fully automatic landing, autobrakes and with someone on the radio in the tower who flies the 747.JimCYWG

[tunnelcat 1]

Thanks RF. I always try for butter smooth landings, but it's difficult when you don't have tactile feedback (no sense of G-force, motion or control feedback) in a simulation. I'll see if lowering the contact point numbers will make a mess of my landings. I have landed actual small aircraft many times without breaking anything.I gather that you have to change these numbers for each aircraft.cfg in FS.I have to confess to watching the movie "Snakes on a Plane" since it starred a 747-400. Give me a break! Talk about a stretch of imagination. Kim