lcseale53

John,What happens when you turn the landing lights on at night on either the runway or taxiway? I take a 5 FPS hit with the DF 727. This only occurs at night (I'm using Chris Willis' reduced intensity lighting) with the landing lights, but not the taxi lights. Other less complex a/c maintain the frames. I'm locked at 20 and I'll drop to 15 or slightly less - on a P4 2.8 system with 1 gig ram.Thanks,Leon

Hi Nevin,My U206B has a Continental IO-520-F rated at 300 hp. The full 300 hp is delivered at 2850 rpm and is limited to five minutes. I normally start pulling it back as soon as I have climb speed established though, so I may be at max output for only 30 seconds - give or take. A continuous 285 hp, however, is allowed at 2700 rpm. Fuel burn at that setting is above 20 gph, though, so for both recreational flying and traveling I pull the prop back to 2350 rpm and 23.5 inches of manifold pressure. That gives me around 65% power at a fuel burn of a little less than 13 gph. As noted in a previous post, however, the 206 is not a speed demon so those settings show me 145 mph TAS at 5,500 ft. If I want to burn a little more fuel and cruise at a little higher altitude, TAS goes up to around 160. The next step up - sort of - was the 207. This is essentially a stretched 206 with a 7th and optionally 8th seat. I don't think the capacity or performance numbers varied much - except that the 207 is probably heavier, reducing the payload. Someone else may know more about the specs on the 207. Then came the Caravan.BTW - I miss the little penguin warrior but the smiley with the headset makes a nice replacement.Best,Leon

It appears that we're getting some pretty good GA coverage now with the top-rated producers, and I'm really anxious to 'fly' the new 206. Carenado was fairly close to performance expectations with the 210 (at least compared to my limited 210 experience). But I'm a little more tuned in to the 206, so I'll probably be a little more critical.I must admit though, I'm somewhat intrigued by the procedural demands of the heavy stuff. I enjoy the planning and execution of a flight - I just keep it to an hour or so.Regards,Leon

None taken Peter,I very much enjoy your posts in this forum - always learning something. Yes, the new 206 is 300-400 pounds heavier than the older model and this likely shows up in a loaded airplane. And you are correct about the take-off torque. If one is not leading the power application with some heavy right foot, one will find themselves standing on that rudder pedal in short order to stay out of the ditch.Regards,Leon

Hi Peter,I must disagree -passionately- with your assessment of the 206. I have owned mine since 1978 and find it to be one incredible airplane. It may not be the fastest GA airplane on the market (but will cruise at 160 mph TAS at 8,000), but there are very, I repeat very few GA singles that will do what the Cessna 206 does best. It is a full six place airplane WITH full extended fuel. At a gross weight of 3600 pounds, and an empty weight of 1900 pounds, I can carry 84 gallons of fuel and six 200 pound souls. On one occasion we had six adults in seats, two children on the rear baggage bench (approved) and a baby in one of the passenger's lap...9 people on board. CERTAINLY NOT STODGY.Additionally, and according to the operators manual, at STP with 700 pounds of payload, a 20 knot headwind, and using 20 degrees of flaps, the 206 is airborn in 155 feet (page 6-3, Figure 6-3 of the 1971 Stationair Owner's Manual). CERTAINLY NOT LIFELESS.Now I personally have never tried that, but my wife and I, with full fuel fuel and baggage routinely depart my Dad's grass strip with about a 500' ground roll. The 206 has very impressive short field landing qualities as well...over the 80' tree line with full fuel and 2 - 4 onboard, and stopped in about 1500' with an OAT of 98 degrees F. I'm not sure about the 'plodder' comment, but according to Webster's second definition, it is, in fact, a 'steady worker'. Incidentally, the 206 has appreciated 450-500 percent during the time we've had the pleasure of using and enjoying one of the finest GA aircraft ever built.Best,Leon

No problems here with the 77.77 drivers and a GeForce 5600XT.Leon

For Jon Murchison's BAE 146 (and others)... no VC howeverhttp://arnz.myhost.co.nzFor Matthias Lieberecht's panelhttp://www.baepanelproject.com/Leon

Bill,I've got the 727 gauge source files that he included in his last update - 6/27/05 - if you want them as well (4.9 MB though).Leon

He didn't refer to his work. The indication was FS only. I had contacted him about doing some graphics work (very minor - but in the spirit of helping out) on his 737 overhead panel about a week ago. He graciously replied, but stated his intent to move on. Sad, but understandable, particularly if he deals with simulations on a professional level daily. I wish him the best, and I will certainly enjoy his contributions for some time to come.Leon

Nope - according to Richard, as I noted above, he's no longer involved in the hobby - including the removal of FS from his system. He's claiming total retirement at this point, but let's hope for a reprieve.Leon

Richard has retired from FS development. He did not indicate his plans with respect to the disposition of his work, but his last 727 panel release did include his gauge source code.His only other comment was that after ten years of FS he has decided to move on. Let's hope he finds his way back to this community after some R&R.Leon

One of the very few GA singles that will do this is the Cessna 206. With an empty weight of 1900 lbs. and a gross of 3600 lbs. I have capacity for full fuel (84 gallons w/extended tanks) at 504 lbs. and six 200 lb. adults. Leon

Johan,You might want to check out Fantasy of Flight. It's about 20 minutes or so west of Orlando on I-4 toward Tampa.http://www.orlandoattractions.com/content/...tasy_of_flight/Enjoy your trip,Leon

Greetings,My name is Leon Seale and I'll be 52 in a couple of months. I'm a graduate of the University of Alabama (ROLL TIDE!) with a mining engineering degree, and I've lived in Lakeland, Florida for 23 years. I am blessed with a wonderful (and tolerant) wife of nearly 32 years, two beautiful daughters, and two incredible granddaughters. I work for a large phosphate mining company and spend my work time alternating between plant management and process engineering. I'm often asked what phosphate is used for, so for the inquisitive among you - the very short version is that the elemental phosphorus in the phosphate particle is concentrated by acidulation with sulfuric acid to produce a granular component of fertilizer. It's the 'P' in the 'NPK' description of fertilizer.As a military dependent for the first 16 years of my life I lived in a host of states, as well the orient. My father was an Air Force fighter pilot (and is still flying) with combat tours in Korea and Viet Nam, so I grew up surrounded by all things aviation.I currently own and fly a Cessna 120 (an heirloom Dad purchased 49 years ago) and a Cessna 206, which we used for mapping photography a number of years ago.I've been in the Flight Safety simulators a couple of times, and I can assure you that we are privilege to something special with Microsoft's flight simulator efforts. Let's hope they continue.Leon

It's only a 0-G arc. The same thing I, and every other kid in the neighborhood begged for when my dad was flying us...and now the same thing my kids and granddaughter beg for when I take them flying. Okay, maybe a little less extreme and for a shorter duration, but still a roller coaster ride.Leon

>But, I don't really feel much of anything. With a heavy wing>loaded small airplane, you can even get the feeling that the>floor is about to fall to the ground; and it can, if you don't>watch it! :DI'm with you on that one. That sudden departure from what was, just a split-second ago, a perfect set-up for a great touchdown, will sure get your attention. You may only be a foot or two off the ground when the bottom falls out, but it will still cause a red face and a load of excuses to your passengers :-lol .Leon

In my experience much of the 'float' one experiences during the flare has as much to do with approach speed as any 'ground' effect. On final approach in my Cessna 206 I use about 70 knots if I'm light, and 75 if I'm on the heavy side. I carry about 18 inchs of manifold pressure all the way to the threshold, and generally 35-40 degrees of flaps. The nosedown attitude is fairly pronounced because of the very large flaps, so the transition to 'flare' is significant. The 206 will not float if the airspeed is managed correctly.On the other end of the spectrum I also fly a Cessna 120. The 120 has no flaps, which results in a near level approach attitude at an approach speed of about 60 knots. If you need to increase the rate of sink, you pitch the nose up just a little (as long as you continue to manage the power and airspeed obviously). You can actually approach, with a little power, at or near the three-point touchdown attitude. Since I have no landing lights on the 120, I use this technique for night landings. Arresting the rate of descent at touchdown by adding a touch of power, usually results in a near greaser, again with no tendency to float at all. Having said that, though, if you mismanage the airspeed and attitude down final, you will fly into the next county when you begin the 'roundout'.However, to avoid confusion with respect to what I've just said, there is a transition phase from the initiation of the flare (when the angle of attach is increased) to touchdown, as the stored energy dissipates. I wouldn't refer to this as 'floating' though. Just my two cents,Leon

Which panel are you using? If it's the Tinmouse 737 you may be hearing the standby altimeter vibrator, which is supposed to be there.Leon

Sorry Guys,I did in fact leave out the data files. I'll upload the fix later tonight, and probably include a panel.cfg using the default King Air radios as well (in case anyone has any further trouble).Leon

Don't know if any of you saw it, but after I uploaded the FS9 version of Paul's MD80 panel, I uploaded two updates. The first was at the request of a poster on the forum here, and resurrects the orange on red autopilot display (gauge and new bitmap included). The second update is a panel config file that removes an errant epr gauge (if I remember right) sharing space with the fuel quantity gauge. FYI.gsmd80_9u.zipgsmd80_u2.zipRegards,Leon

Ron (BTW, thanks for the input),Absolutely, when you disturb a balanced aerodynamic system, you induce couples all over the place. The effect you noted above is very pronounced in the 120. Unlike the 206, which allows you to fly rather well with your feet on the floor, - the 120 allows you to fly with your hands in your lap (assuming calm air). The roll response with the application of rudder is sufficient (albeit in gentle amounts) to establish a nicely/nearly coordinated turn with neutral ailerons (as known by those of you who have flown single channel - rudder only - R/C models). Concurrent with a wing that exhibits nice roll couple, as you previously noted, is the presence of adverse yaw with the application of aileron (1946 vintage with a constant chord non-tapered lightly loaded wing...and aileron travel 20 degrees both up and down). With respect to the 206, adverse yaw is pretty well countered by the differential aileron travel...21 degrees up and 14 degrees down. And at the higher airspeeds and higher wing loading (among a host of other differences), the 206 does not exhibit the same degree of roll couple. Anyway, I just wanted to acknowledge your quote above, having spent many hours kicking the wings back level and/or following a heading with rudder alone in the grand ole 120.Thanks,Leon

A great deal depends on the airplane, but first let's simplify this thing a bit and reduce it to some basic trigonometry. The lift vector is the vertical component of a two-part resultant vector (the other being the horizontal component), which acts perpendicular to the wing. When the wing is level the lift vector is vertical with no horizontal component (we'll omit the effects of vortices, p-factor, etc. for this argument). When the wing banks (tilts) the 'resultant' vector tilts with it. The vector now has two components - one vertical and the other lateral. The vertical component, which is the portion 'supporting' the aircraft is now reduced in magnitude (in essence it's the 'adjacent' side of a right triangle with the 'resultant' vector as the hypotenuse), thus, an angle of attack increase is necessary to maintain altitude. So you apply back pressure. The horizontal component of the vector, while in the bank attitude(described as the 'opposite' side of our right triangle is applying a lateral force to the aircraft, inducing a 'slide' or skid in the direction of the component vector. The aircraft is indeed changing direction, but not in a coordinated fashion. Inducing a coordinated turn at this point requires one of two things (keeping it simple) - rudder input to align the tail with the nose throughout this direction change, or something inducing drag on the 'inside' wing causing a slight decrease in airspeed (at that inside wing), resulting in a slight rotational (yaw) effect to compliment the bank induced skid as the turn is initiated and maintained.This induced drag may be created by the application of differential aileron movement. In this case the aileron travel upward is greater than the travel downward. The aileron on the outside of a turn is down, relative to the wing, and the inside is deflected upward. The inside/upward deflection is greater than the outside/downward deflection, the result being more drag on the lowered wing, and less need for rudder input as the turn is initiated and maintained.How does that help once the bank is established and the ailerons are neutralized - in typical bank attitudes a slight aileron input is necessary to counter the inherent stability created by dihedral, airfoil, etc. That is until a critical angle is established, at which point the bank may tend to tighten.I own a Cessna 206, which uses differential aileron travel, and most flying can be done reasonably coordinated with both feet on the floor, but I also have a Cessna 120, with essentially no differential aileron travel - as well as a lower wing loading...different airfoil...etc., and you WILL keep both feet firmly planted on the rudder pedals both into and throughout any turn. The physics are really pretty simple, rudder (or something inducing drag to the inside of the turn) is necessary to keep a turn coordinated (ball centered and coffee in cup). In theory the above generally applies to all aircraft, but very high performance aircraft have different thresholds with respect to just about everything noted above.Just my training and experience - yours may vary.Leon

Thank you Gabriel. I was looking for the same information.Regards,Leon

You are very welcome Dave.Hi Paul,I'll go ahead and color up the Concorde gauges. While I'm at it I'll put the red back in the main panel autopilot display windows so the whole thing will look like it should (more or less). May be a few days or so as I'm working on a Citation panel as well.Best,Leon

Dave,My updates of Paul's panels do,in fact, use the Concorde autopilot display gauges. A couple of things (but not many) were not compatible with the FS versions subsequent to FS2000. The autopilot displays were among the few things that did not work, thus a substitute was needed. The Concorde displays (not the controls) were a very good fit and were used. The only difference, in essence, is the display color.My hope was/is that we would have a useful panel to mate with Eric's, and others, aircraft. I agree that my update is only an approximation of Paul's legendary original, given the substitutions where necessary, but it's free and it works...even if it looks a bit 'hokey'. Anyway, there's nothing to 'not get', it's just a matter of substituting something that works for something that doesn't.Regards,Leon