A new Cessna 421C skin uploaded.

[Hornit 3]

I left the panel and vc stuff alone as it runs fine on my system actually, i did just the exterior textures.Hornit

[Guest]

Eric knows the right person to talk about this with is me and this isn't the right venue.First of all, as Eric might have realised, thre are reasons it is where it is and despite what Eric may think I actually do know what I am doing. This is a workaround to a screw-up in the simulator. The smoke generation point as defined by MS is the same as the thrust point in the simulator. It is not a variable : it is tied to thrust points and it can't be turned off. Dynamic workarounds to multi-engine highlight this : having the startup smoke generation point the same as the thrust point is, of course, patently absurd and it was flagged as yet another anomaly during the FS2002 beta testing process and blown off, along with asymmetric flight and yaw response on multi-engine a/c. Don't believe me ? > "Steve Small" wrote in message> news:O2gGx#dMBHA.2072@...> Track ID: 275174433> Area Aircraft> Sub Area Beech Baron> Sub Component Flight Model> Build CURRENT BUILD> Beta ID > Name Steve Small> E-mail steve.small@bigpond.com> Phone > Problem Type 2 - Functionality impaired> Is the Problem Reproducible? Always> Bug Title ASYMMETRIC FLIGHT> Detailed Description of the Problem:SS COMMENTS :> The torque effect on this and presumably all multi-engine prop a/c is> just plain wrong. A multi-engine prop a/c should not be leaping left > towards the bushes when both engines are operative on take-off. Similarly, > slow speed flight towards VMC with one engine caged is unrealistic. > Previously bugged and commented on. To all intents and purposes this is a> single engine a/c which anyone who's type rated on a Baron - as I AM -> should observe. Pull an engine after takeoff is a non event : little > impact except on climb rates.>> Asymmetric effect on prop flight models needs a lot of work.> Steps to Reproduce CONSISTENT> Changed Date 8/26/2001 3:06:04 PM> Status Active> Closed Date 8/22/2001 9:20:10 AMSS NOTE : THIS IS THE FUNNY BIT : MICROSOFT'S ANSWER >>> Resolution Unable to reproduce the bug>> Comments -------------------- From : BetaID -----------------------> Submitted: Aug 26 2001 3:06PMSS COMMENTS :>> In a prop twin (contra rotating props or not) such as a B58, on power-up> at takeoff there is virtually no yaw response of significance. Changing > slider settings had no impact. By your theory .... 50% realism settings > should produce pretty much no need for rudder input but presently you need > almost full rudder input. The a/c is effectively uncontrollable at> Published crosswind component. Suggest you re-think your response. Maybe> you should try flying a similar a/c. You have made great improvements > to the physics model but I wish you'd just take the time to listen a > bit more to folks like myself who actually know what the hell> they are talking about. Do you need to see a copy of my log book ? 1000> Hrs + in the B58 alone.>> -------------------- From : MS Product Group --------------------> Submitted : Aug 22 2001 9:20AM>> Make sure Aircraft > Realism settings are set as desired.>SS COMMENTS :> Seminole, or Navajo - it really doesn't matter which type), with no> crosswind component and with both engines producing normal relative power,> there is no pronounced yaw effect to the left that dictates large rudder> input. The a/c tend to go straight ahead with not a lot of rudder activity> and certainly no need for a constant bootfull of right rudder.>> Anyone who has had any flight time in multi-engine a/c I would imagine> will recognise the phenomenon I am describing and will recognise these two> separate issues.>> So, long after submitting the Bugs, I later found them closed with the> comment :>> "Make sure Aircraft > Realism settings are set as desired. ">> Well, unfortunately this response is not appropriate and highlights> what I guess can only be a communications failure or that the phenomenon> associated with multi-engine flight are not understood.>> The point is that the above recommended solution simply is not viable> for two valid reasons :>> 1. To achieve the normal, negligible yaw effect on a normal take-off> in a normally functioning multi-engine a/c, the sliders have to be all the> way left (to zero effect) which ... is clearly inappropriate. But, in that> position, you do see what a normal take-off with two good engines should be.> A paradox. The solution to this problem should be to use full realism slider> settings but of course this makes the problem worse :(>> 2. Using the minimum realism setting, which I can only presume what> the recommended approach was, makes the second issue - the already weak> modelling of asymmetric - even weaker.>> The Bug is presently re-opened but unless I can be assured I am> explaining myself adequately I suspect it will be closed again with the same> answer, and the Bug will continue unaddressed to Production.>> Is the phenomenon I am describing understood, and will it be> addressed ?>> Thanks in advance for clarification.>> Rgds,> .....> Steve Small> Canberra, Australia>> ----------Well, the bug report was closed off again and at that point I realsied Microsoft weren't interested in plausible munti-engine behaviour. So, after banging my heasd against the wall, I quit the Beta process and devised all the workarounds they either didn't want to implement, or that they didn't understand.

[LAdamson 240]

>>>Well, the bug report was closed off again and at that point >I realsied Microsoft weren't interested in plausible >munti-engine behaviour. So, after banging my heasd against >the wall, I quit the Beta process and devised all the >workarounds they either didn't want to implement, or that >they didn't understand. In all seriousness, I don't believe Microsoft has the time or will to implement all the changes you, Ron Freimuth, & others desired. Too much to worry about, let alone making FS2002 a completely accurate multi-engine sim, or totally accurate aerobatic simulation........ for that matter! Just to MANY directions to go, with what is basically an entertainment sim for the masses.Which IS the reason I didn't support the Steve Small/Ron Freimuth versus Microsoft "war" to begin with! :)But BTW------ love the C421 & Cheyenne flight models---- good work!L.Adamson

[Guest]

G'day Larry,Oh heck it wasn't a war, just frustration having some MS clerk telling qualified folks they "Cannot Reproduce" or "Check Realism Settings" ... vacuous replies to everything submitted of substance does annoy and we all have limits. Hopefully there are more than a few at MS that "Cannot Reproduce" :-lol Thanks indeed for the feedback, I do appreciate it. Especially from another driver (who 'can reproduce'). Best,