Sign in to follow this  
Guest Ron Freimuth

DF Archer Update released...

Recommended Posts

If this has been posted already, mea culpa!Cheers,

Share this post


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

The takeoff is definitely smoother. However, it has picked up a new vice on my system. It pulls strongly to the left. The pre-patch version was very balanced, at least for me. Anyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,The patch works fine for me - as far as I can tell, the flight model is close to perfect.Indeed, the aircraft pulls to the left whenever full power is applied(i.e. take-off).This is not a vice - this is the way it should be (p-factor, propeller slipstream, torque).The Archer is the most realistic GA aircraft ever created for FS2K2 as far as I'm concerned.Cheers,Twister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try putting a passenger in.That will balance you out some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Archer is the most realistic GA aircraft ever created for FS2K2 as far as I'm concerned"I will echo, ditto, reiterate, say again, repeat and reinforce that statement.It is a delight to fly this aircraft!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rudder trim is your friend for the left roll tendency. Try burning off fuel from the left tank first. Also, check out the weight of passenger. I have several loadouts for each of my repaints with either just myself or with one passenger. I set the weights as they would be in real life. It aggrevates the left roll tendency, so I apply lots of right rudder trim. This is how it would be in real life, although some may feel it is slightly overdone in some ways. However, I would much prefer a plane that behaves like the Archer than one that is so perfectly balanced it needs no attention. From real world experience, I've yet to fly a plane that is as perfect as most of those in flight sims. With most planes, one never needs rudder or aileron trim. IMO, it's nice to have to pay attention to and use ALL the components of the plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A huge improvement to what was already a work of art! If only (oh boy, here he goes again...;-)) they could move the yoke in the VC view so it didn't block the tachometer. It sure would be nice to see the tach...but that's the only improvement I can think of.David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kathy,I'm glad you like the Archer as much as I do ! Just being curious, do you have any experience with real Archers ? I'm a Cessna driver and tough the flight model "just feels right" I'd like to get the opinion of pilots who are acquainted with this aircraft.Take careTwister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Twister:I have never flown an Archer. Pipers, Cessna, Beach's, et. al. in general yes, but not the Archer. However, I do not believe that my lack of experience in the real Archer discounts my opinion regarding the DreamFleet Archer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everything said and would add it is the first plane I've seen yet that actually slips and slides more or less like a real plane. Also,(here comes the shameless promotion again!) if you use TrackerIR with the virtual cockpit, the effect is stunning! You get a much better field of view than most models. You feel surrounded by clouds and sky rather than peering through a peephole at the world. Part of that is the low wing and curved windshield but the rest is difficult to put my finger on. I would love to see this kind of fidelity in something just a tad sexier - like a bonanza or even a light twin.David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the majority of my flight training, I used Archers. Liked the extra horsepower over the Warrior. And yes, I really like this Archer model. Flight dynamics seem very close & the 2D,VC,& exterior graphics really add to the illusion of more than just a computer screen!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>The takeoff is definitely smoother. However, it has picked >up a new vice on my system. It pulls strongly to the left. >The pre-patch version was very balanced, at least for me. >Anyone else? Try checking the 'alt' aircraft.cfg box in Config-O-Matic. That will set the aircraft.cfg file with the engine offset to balance some of the pull to the left as it was in the original release. Changing the throttle has about half the effect on trim that other SEL MS AC have. Those who had prop sliders to the left got a pull to the right with the original aircraft.cfg file since I had modeled the flight dynamics for 50% or higher 'Prop Sliders'. Also, just having the pilot in the AC will unbalance it to the left. Take along a buddy or fill the right tank more than the left to reduce the amount of rudder trim needed. There is no aileron trim, but the rudder trim can keep the AC flying straight with out enough slip to be a problem.Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Kathy,I agree with you 100% about the " flight model feel". You explained that in a very articulate and interesting manner.I'd like to know if the Archer is "right on the numbers" - does it stall (straight and level)at the right speed (clean and dirty configurations)? Are Vx and Vy properly modelled (adequate and realistic gain of altitude over time and over distance)?Is the fuel consumption realistic, etc, etc...Just being curious...Take careTwister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Twister.Although I have done a short stall series (I do that with any aircraft), I have not done a flight test against the published numbers. The numbers and graphs are in the documentation - perhaps you could run these as an exercise and discover them yourself. You seem to have the quest for the knowledge and I assume you have the skill set to do the tests. It could be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Kathy,Good idea, I might do that (if time permits...)- I always wanted to become a test pilot....Take careTwister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi David,I just downloaded the Archer last night, and agree with everything good being said here. Like Kathy and Twister, I fly the C172; and although different from the Archer in some respects, you can really get a feeling of real flying with this product. Kathy, I love your theory on "mentally filling in the blanks", that's so true with a flight model that affirms what we expect to see/hear in response to inputs.A question: You refer to "TrackerIR". I have no idea what this is, maybe a part of the Archer package that I have yet to discover (and I shamefully admit to not having read the manuals yet, and being at work right now the manual isn't accessible to me).Thanks. The creators of this aircraft should be very proud of this accomplishment (which I'm sure they are).Bruce.BJC, Jeffco, CO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the "alt" aircraft.cfg damps out the left pull? Is it, then, more like the original flight model, pre-patch? The description of it next to the Config-o-Matic check box made it sound like it was optimized for rudder pedal users, but your description makes it sound like that's not the case. Can you elaborate on the differences between the two new flight models? Thanks!Alan Ampolsk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried the "alt" flight model. That killed the left pull problem but the rotation problem was back, so it feels more like the pre-patch model. However, I'm having some luck with the rudder trim, although the slip seems to take a little speed off the top end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>A huge improvement to what was already a work of art! If >only (oh boy, here he goes again...;-)) they could move the >yoke in the VC view so it didn't block the tachometer. It >sure would be nice to see the tach...but that's the only >improvement I can think of. >David I was happy when I saw I could move the Virtual Panel so I could see at least the top of the Tach. I tend to set it so I'm near the middle, and the Yoke handle covers only the left side of the Tach. Once set, the VC comes back in the same place when you return to it. I don't know how it was done, but it sure helps! Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I tried the "alt" flight model. That killed the left pull >problem but the rotation problem was back, so it feels more >like the pre-patch model. However, I'm having some luck >with the rudder trim, although the slip seems to take a >little speed off the top end. Yes, the "ALT" setting is the original aircraft.cfg but with the LG strut distances set so the pitch on the runway is appropriate. Quite a bit more nose up, which significantly affects TO. The "non ALT" removes the engine offset so there is no compensation for "P=Factor". Which seems to have given people with the Prop Sliders set to zero some problems at times. It also has some different LG settings. I installed the official patch over my already 'fixed' configuration and checked the lines in aircraft.cfg. They changed appropriately, depending on whether the ALT or non ALT box was checked and the configuration saved with Config-O-Matic. Both versions took off nicely, but I think there were differences in Pitch trim. Now appropriate TO pitch and rudder trim will change, depending on the Prop Realism Sliders and the loading. It doesn't appear to take that much pitch trim: between the mid line and perhaps 1/4 up trim (which is down on the indicator). Seat loading has some effect (certainly it should), but this doesn't affect the pitch trim as much as one would think since an aft loading increases the pitch on the runway, thus the wing develops more lift for the heaver load. Fuel tanks are behind the CoG, and tend to automatically change CoG to correct for weight as fuel is burned. Thus, little change in pitch trim is required as fuel is burned on a long trip. I always work to set fuel tanks, payload stations, LG, etc. to the real mfg. distances. AC are designed to automatically balance out as much as possible, something I've noted as I've developed more FS aircraft. I experimented to find a good TO trim that doesn't take much pull to get off the runway around 60 kts. Then I watched the airspeed as I let the Archer climb with no JS input. The best trim for TO appears to be when it will climb at significant pitch and reach about 75 kts before starting to slow below that speed. That's the time to hold the nose down a bit and trim down a little to hold the best climb speed of 75 kts. Actually, 80 kts climb is near as fast in climb rate and lets the engine turn a bit faster to generate more HP. BTW, you only get the 180 HP you paid for when at 100 ft MSL and can get the RPM to 2700 RPM. Most of the time is is more like 165 HP or less, maximum. Also, 2650 RPM is the maximum continuous RPM, the short yellow arc starts at 2650. Ron

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