Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Flight dynamics discovery

Recommended Posts

I uploaded a 172 R or SP panel last Fall and intended to put together an airfile package for it. Ron Freimuth and I kicked files back and forth for a while and Ron did some great things with the engine. I never could get the plane to feel right however. I compared all the numbers with the FS2K one which flies beautifully and is a very good model of my real plane. No matter what I did, the FS2000 plane just sucked dead toads. It would remain stuck to the runway and not lift off until 75 or 80 knots. It wouldn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hi, Roger. Many thanks for all your effort. I can not wait to give it a try. Where and When? TV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RogerYour friendly, free and knowledgable contributions make this forum a very pleasant place to visit.Thank youBenNB: Not to mention your AIR files for downloading :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Roger Long:>I uploaded a 172 R or SP panel last Fall and intended to put >together an airfile package for it. Ron Freimuth and I >kicked files back and forth for a while and Ron did some >great things with the engine. I never could get the plane >to feel right however. I compared all the numbers with the >FS2K one which flies beautifully and is a very good model of >my real plane. No matter what I did, the FS2000 plane just >sucked dead toads. It would remain stuck to the runway and >not lift off until 75 or 80 knots. It wouldn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,Thanks for expanding. I'm sure you did have it right in your version. Those little "-" are very hard to see and, when trying to merge features of your files and mine, I overlooked it. Changing the two angles together so that the difference is kept constant seems to tip the visual model without effecting performance in the air. On the ground, there is a tremendoud performance difference because the landing gear determines the wing angle of attack. My plane was rolling at negatative attack angle with the tail holding the nose down until it gained enough speed for the elevators to overpower everything. Then, it popped into the air.I should have looked for this simple thing first. I thought it was just way nose heavy due to a weight datum point reference.I hadn't thought that the cfg file might just reverse what ever is in the air file. I'll have to go back and look. I've been doing all this tweaking without changing the air file. Nice to hear from you. I hope you'll reconsider getting back into MSFS. This sim can still provide a lot of reality. I think you've taken the state of the art way beyond anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, I don't know if you remember me emailing you to ask about excessive use of trim about a year and a half ago as I trained in a 1979 172N , with a follow up email of excitement about my first solo, but your original 172 with the bugs program in FS2k (don't remember the name), helped me out immensely!!! I was always concerned that I was relying too heavily on the trim wheel, instead of using the proper procedure, pitch, power, trim. This was mainly b/c my CFI kept suggesting that I was too "fidgety". Well, after firing him for wasting my time....(he was going through a divorce and it took us over 3 months to log 20 hours in the evenings after he got off of work), I began with a new instructor who, as best I can describe it, was all business. He recognized instantaneously that I was more than ready for my cross countrys, etc. And we proceeded to crank out the remainder of my license in under 3 weeks. I got my PPL in 40.9 hours and I can honestly say that flying around your flight model saved me A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY!!!!! Furthermore, for those of you who read Geofa's posts (one of which he talked about the fact that he needed to brush up on the 182 for the CAP, and FS2k2 really saved him time and money) and want to plunge into real aviation, it is true. Years of flying the simulator saved me thousands of dollars!!! And that's coming from my CFI! I flew Roger's flight model over and over during my PPL training, and sure enough, last July I got my PPL in .9 over the minimum 40 hours and soloed at 8 hours at a Part 61 school (so it wasn't a "crank you out with minimum time" school -141, it was a get your certificate when you have proficiency school). I am now working on the Instrument, Multi(at the end of this month), and commercial. To anyone that is looking for a great airfile, Ron's for FS2k2 is great!, But, keep an eye out for Roger's, if it can be integrated into the FS2k2 VC!!! B/c the only downside that I saw in 2k was the lack of peripheral vision, which of course we have solved now with the VC!!! I refuse to fly the 2d panels anymore, except for IFR work occasionally. Although, the clarity of my panels seems more than acceptable to use them for IFR work. So, in conclusion, we will have the best training file out there plus realistic landing and pattern perspectives in the VC!!!!Roger you have a done a great deal to advance the training realm of the hobby. I don't just like flying around in eye candy! And you ahve solved that, along with the great Rob Young and Ron Freimuth.Thanks again!!!Christopher BraunP4 1.8768 ram 80 gig hardriveVisiontek Ti4 4600CH yoke/pedals19" inch monitor-Soundblaster PCI 512Win XPPrivate PilotAOPALawyerPilots Bar AssociationNTSB Bar AsssociationPIC- Warrior, Archer, 172N-SP, Aztec, Seneca, Malibu SIC (rarely!)- Conquest, 421 Ram, King Air c90"Men without dreams are never free, twas thus this way and thus will ever be."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about that typo, had panels on my mind apparently.CMB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger,Ironically, I just found this out a couple weeks ago. Annoying, isn't it? ;-)One other thing I've seen with 2K2 is that all the trims reset when loading another aircraft or reloading the current one. This makes it really easy to fix broken aircraft.cfg files. I load up a model - say a 767 - then trim it to level flight, ten reload it, and BAM! nose dive. I change the aircraft.cfg file to fix the horizontal stabilizer, reload, and it now flies right.I originally thought having the trims all reset was a problem until I realized the potential to fix things. ;-) Then I saw the negative negative. ;-) Makes life a lot easier now to get things flying right. I just automatically change the HS incidence when I convert from 2K to 2K2.But then again, I still to this day have problems knowing whether to use plus or minus for wing incidence and twist! :-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm -- I am a little mystified why you would want to change aircraft in mid-flight anyway? Is this a common practice amongst flight simmers? -- and why?Thanks Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very common among aircraft tweakers. You switch to another aircraft, minimize the window, make your changes to the cfg, air file, or panel, go back to FS and reselect your airplane. The changes will now be incorporated without having to wait for FS to restart. Now that the situations take long enought to go out for a bite to eat while the textures and elevations are loading, this is especially useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say, you're right. Each degree of incidence change makes a 2.76 knot change in speed for the 172; even when the relative angle between wing and tail remains the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> To anyone that is >looking for a great airfile, Ron's for FS2k2 is great!, Is there a "Ron's" airfile out there? I hear nearly everybody want's one !! I also heard the same over at Flightsim com. Wouldn't be that 172 file that's "temporarily" not available ( but I have) would it? :)Sure would be nice to tell everybody where to get it.......... instead of they CAN'T have it!! Ron??????????L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto.If I'm only testing air file tweaks, I change FS to a window, make the fixes, then I just click Select Aircraft/OK in FS and it reloads instantly and I'm set for testing.That forever and a day thing to load textures over and over and over is ridiculous, so I avoid it like the plague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... 40.9 hours! That's awesome... You must have been flying every day with the new instructor. I've never met anyone who did it that fast. I've got 76 hours am I'm STILL not there! :) Of course, 9/11 and B-class shelf area/winter had a lot to do with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Roger, >>Ironically, I just found this out a couple weeks ago. >Annoying, isn't it? ;-) >>One other thing I've seen with 2K2 is that all the trims >reset when loading another aircraft or reloading the current >one. This makes it really easy to fix broken aircraft.cfg >files. I load up a model - say a 767 - then trim it to >level flight, ten reload it, and BAM! nose dive. I change >the aircraft.cfg file to fix the horizontal stabilizer, >reload, and it now flies right. I suspect MS figured some obscure formula to set the pitch trim when an AC is loaded. Often it's way off the the correct cruise value when I have about 2 degrees of H. Stab angle which forces the tail down. Maybe they assume the H. Stab moment is zero, as most of their FS2K2 AIR files have, but I always set it in proportion to the elevator moment. That is, I use about the same ratio of Elevator_Lift/Elevator_Moment as H_Stab_Lift/H_Stab_Moment. And, make the H. Stab about 3X the values for the elevator, depending on the area ratio. Sometimes an AC will load with the trim not being far from cruise value, other times it's several degrees negative. In any case, Aileron and Rudder trim are not saved, so they also have to be adjusted (many AC don't have Aileron Trim). >I originally thought having the trims all reset was a >problem until I realized the potential to fix things. ;-) >Then I saw the negative negative. ;-) Makes life a lot >easier now to get things flying right. I just automatically >change the HS incidence when I convert from 2K to 2K2. I had the impression the H. Stab angle was set from the AIR file on the first run. So, a good FS2K AIR file should come out correct in FS2K2. But for the Oswald Efficiency, which appears to be set based on Aspect Ratio and Taper. And, who knows what else. I always set it to a reasonable value, such as 0.80 for big jets and possibly higher for SEL's. To make it consistent with the Induced Drag Constant set in the AIR file (but, not used in setting that Oswald Efficiency in aircraft.cfg).>But then again, I still to this day have problems knowing >whether to use plus or minus for wing incidence and twist! >:-lol As I mentioned to Roger, and he verified: Changing either in aircraft.cfg without resetting that SEC 1101 parameter messes up the Induced Drag. Roger stated the effect per degree. When the SEC 1101 parameter is reset after changing Wing Incidence, Twist, or TBL 401 there is no change. I'd estimate that CFS people spent 1000 hours over a long time to figure out that SEC 1101:50 parameter.Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ron, >>I don't know if you remember me emailing you to ask about >excessive use of trim about a year and a half ago as I >trained in a 1979 172N , with a follow up email of >excitement about my first solo, but your original 172 with >the bugs program in FS2k (don't remember the name), helped >me out immensely!!!Christopher, I'm going to save your testimonial. >evenings after he got off of work), I began with a new >instructor who, as best I can describe it, was all business. >He recognized instantaneously that I was more than ready for >my cross countrys, etc. And we proceeded to crank out the >remainder of my license in under 3 weeks. I got my PPL in >40.9 hours and I can honestly say that flying around your >flight model saved me A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY!!!!! Took me 51 hours in a C172 to get my PPL. Back in 1964. ;)>dollars!!! And that's coming from my CFI! I flew Roger's >flight model over and over during my PPL training, and sure >enough, last July I got my PPL in .9 over the minimum 40 >hours and soloed at 8 hours at a Part 61 school (so it >wasn't a "crank you out with minimum time" school -141, it >was a get your certificate when you have proficiency >school). I am now working on the Instrument, Multi(at the >end of this month), and commercial. To anyone that is >looking for a great airfile, Ron's for FS2k2 is great!, But, >keep an eye out for Roger's, if it can be integrated into >the FS2k2 VC!!! I have a C172N version that I use with Roger's C172 panel. I don't remember if I offset the engine yet. That reduces the need for rudder trim, similar to what is done in real AC. Setting the engine location in aircraft.cfg to about -0.2 ft laterally (normally 0.0) works well for small AC and one then needs to adjust the rudder less with power setting. However, the prop sliders should be at 50% or higher so the offset has something to compensate for. It's partly Roger's fault that I got so much into doing MS Flight dynamics. While I had been doing AIR files since FS98, Roger and I spent a lot of time on the C172 about three years ago. Seems I got to working more and more on flight dynamics after that.>Roger you have a done a great deal to advance the training >realm of the hobby. I don't just like flying around in eye >candy! And you ahve solved that, along with the great Rob >Young and Ron Freimuth. >Thanks again!!! >Christopher Braun There is a big organization that is very interested in using MSFS for training. I won't say more now, but I did the flight dynamics for a particular trainer that appears to have met the requirements. However, any future contributations depend a lot on MS patching FS2K2. There are some serious bugs that make it impossible to get appropriate autopilot control. Mainly for jets.Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> To anyone that is >>looking for a great airfile, Ron's for FS2k2 is great!, >>Is there a "Ron's" airfile out there? I hear nearly >everybody want's one !! I also heard the same over at >Flightsim com. Wouldn't be that 172 file that's >"temporarily" not available ( but I have) would it? :) Funny how the value of something increases when it's hard to get. ;) You probably already have my FS2K2 C172SP 'fix'. Feel free to share (but not UL) it. I should offset the engine, something I thought of a couple of months ago. Too bad I didn't think of that for FS2K, which had really excessive "P-Factor". Actually, it was the 'prop helix effect' that was too strong. That can be reduced in the AIR file. Something else I only thought of recently.>Sure would be nice to tell everybody where to get >it.......... instead of they CAN'T have it!! >Ron?????????? >L.Adamson I think I just did. ;) Let me know if you don't have my C172SP. A lot of people have the few AC files I took off AVSIM's library. I still email many of my AC to people I know. Including an improved C208 amphibian. Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ron, I'll keep that all in mind as I fidget with this stuff.BTW -- I am currently woring on ACLoader 4.0. If you'd like a preview copy, please em me and let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,You're right. I just did a glide test on the C172R model and it is now way, way off. I ended up at 5000 feet when I should have been at 0 (Starting from 10,000). This is a big setback as the this took alone time to get right, the test takes a long time, and has been the stable baseline for my 172 aircraft since the first FS2K upload.Later:Ron, I've really got to hand it to you. I just did the glide test on the last SP air / cfg combination you sent me last fall and it is perfect, didn't stray out of the wide shaded line on the Cessna graph once. I'm going to go back to those as a base for just tweaking the handling, deck angles, and views to be a little closer to what I see in the real plane. The best contribution to the FD part of the hobby I can think of at this point would be a comprehensive listing of which air file variables are not superceeded by the cfg file. It's much easier to fiddle with the cfg as letting the air file rewrite things has all sorts of unexpected effects. Perhaps and AirEdit ini file with the vital fields tagged and a template cfg file showing what should be there. I notice that not all fields are copied unless you start with a really blank cfg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Ron............ & I do have the SP file.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ron, >>You're right. I just did a glide test on the C172R model >and it is now way, way off. I ended up at 5000 feet when I >should have been at 0 (Starting from 10,000). This is a big >setback as the this took alone time to get right, the test >takes a long time, and has been the stable baseline for my >172 aircraft since the first FS2K upload. Did you change the wing incidence or twist? Or, was that after the H. Stab incidence was set to give the flight model you had in FS2000? Your FS2K C172 should be identical in FS2K2 but for the autopilot and LG effects. Assuming you let FS2K2 set aircraft.cfg. THEN: adjust the LG, if necessary. AND, reset the Oswald Efficiency to be the same that was included in the Induced Drag Constant in the AIR file. I think you said the prop type also required a change for your AIR file. FS2K2 probably set it for CS since some of your AIR file settings were for CS.>Later: >>Ron, I've really got to hand it to you. I just did the >glide test on the last SP air / cfg combination you sent me >last fall and it is perfect, didn't stray out of the wide >shaded line on the Cessna graph once. That C172SP I fixed? Or, the one based on my version of the C172N done a couple of years ago? The H. Stab incidence has more effect on drag at lower speeds. Since it increases the force on the wing, Induced Drag is more critical at 'best glide' speed and below. But, as you found, also has a significant effect on top speed. All these things became more clear to me by using Herve Sors' FS Test App. Which shows all these drags during flight tests. Now the H. Stab is set for a down force on the tail to improve static pitch stability. It's a matter of the effective Angle of Attack of the Wing minus the AoA of the H. Stab. There is a French word for this that I can never remember. I have found that setting the H. Stab at 2 degrees (to produce a down force) is about right, but due to the effect on drag, I've not always made it as large as it might be. I think it's 3 degrees or more in the MS Cessna 182's. Flight Dynamics I think they got some years ago -- probably from someone else. Since the 182's have pretty good flight dynamics. Then, MS screwed up the C172SP -- apparently 'good flight dynamics' weren't considered appropriate for FS2K2 AC so they messed up the 172SP. Maybe they didn't know it's the same airframe as the 182 uses. Or, that the 182 is the 172 airframe (with limited changes). ;) > I'm going to go back >to those as a base for just tweaking the handling, deck >angles, and views to be a little closer to what I see in the >real plane. My C172N (which I use with your panel) is about my best AC. I haven't tested it in detail for some time, but this is the one that had a rather good match to the PoH engine tables. > I notice that not all fields are copied unless you start >with a really blank cfg. I comment out the 'wing_apex_location', or anything else I want to be reset after a change in the Reference_Datum, etc. Then, see what FS2K2 sets there after it is again loaded. Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the air file dated 10-23-01 and October 2001 cfg file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this