Scott - A2A

I haven’t tested the Aerostar in heavy turbulence yet, but it’s on my to-do list. If anything feels off or isn’t behaving as it should, you can expect it to be addressed in the next update or shortly after. Capturing the authentic feel of flight, including turbulence, is a big reason we built our own flight modeling physics engine years ago for the Comanche. And you don’t need to be a pilot to sense when something feels right. Scott

The Aerostar doesn’t require a lot of right rudder during takeoff, but it does need some correction. Line up the airplane, advance to full throttle, and don’t touch your rudder pedals. The airplane should definitely veer to the left. If it doesn’t, let me know, that would indicate something’s not right. Thanks to StearmanDriver for his post mentioning the rudder authority. It turns out there was a typo, my fault, that made the tail (including the rudder) much larger than it should be. This has been corrected in version 0.9.2. One of the beautiful things about Accu-Sim is that you build the airplane visually, and the flight model is generated from those visuals. After reading Stearman’s post, I did a quick test flight and agreed the rudder was way too powerful. I then opened the dev tools and saw this huge tail 🙂. Honestly, I was happy to see that, easy fix. After scaling it back in, the rudder authority and directional stability felt much more in line with the real airplane. I still have a final flight test to do, so there may be some minor adjustments ahead. Also, since the Aerostar’s engines are mounted close to the fuselage, it requires less rudder than most twins during single-engine performance. Scott

Thanks for the feedback regarding the cockpit condition. The aircraft we modeled is based on the actual Aerostar I owned and operated for several years. Our approach has always been to focus on a single, real-world airplane and recreate it as faithfully as possible, wear and all. This was a "working" airplane for sure. That said, I completely understand that some users prefer a cleaner, more pristine look, and I’ll speak with our modelers to explore what might be possible in that regard. This is still a pre-release version, so if you notice anything you'd like to see improved, don’t like, or believe is a bug, please feel free to post here or on our forums. We log all feedback in an internal spreadsheet that we review and work from daily. Thanks again for your interest and support of the Aerostar. Scott

Someone back a few pages asked about spark plug fouling, so just some context first. I purchased a 1959 Comanche 6229P back in 2012. It came with standard “massive” type spark plugs which are prone to fouling. If this engine was ever left at low idle for any length of time, plugs would foul.... quickly. It became almost part of my checklist to run the engine at high power for some time or so to clear them out prior to takeoff. Especially when operating out of large airports with a lot of taxiing (they don’t let you taxi fast). I was told by many “lean on the ground” and I did, aggressively. Leaning mixture does help, but only relative to the amount of fuel being used. IOW, they just foul at a slower rate which was still pretty bad. I later learned that heat is what scavenges the lead from plugs so to avoid fouling, you need to raise your idle. On my Comanche, idling at 1000RPM fixed the issue. Then a few years later we got a sponsorship from Champion that included all new “fine wire” style plugs, and since that change, plug fouling is a thing of the past. With fine wires, I just idle at any RPM without issue. We clean the plugs at annual once a year and that's it. So we support both plugs and their behavior. Using massives promotes good habits. Fine wires eliminate the problem but as a result, you can get lazy idling at 600RPM all day (that's an option you have flying for real so it's here too). Bottom line is this: Massive plus: Keep your idle at 1,000RPM or higher. If they foul, run the engine at full power until they clear. It can sometimes take a LONG time. Fine wires: No fouling worries. Scott

Can you post on our tech forum all the info about your unit? This way it will be on our list and the team will look into it. Our trim should be very slow and easy to tune just right. Scott

There are trim sensitivity sliders in the tablet Controls / Advanced Options. Weight and balance is almost everything to an airplane and is a large part of this aerodynamics engine. Scott.

Hi Len, Our flight model aerodynamics are 100% outside MSFS including wind physics (we read the weather conditions reported by the simulator). This is why the airplane feels different as it flies through the air. We started developing this system three years ago, and this has been a dream of ours for some time so I hope everyone enjoys it. It should feel very fluid and natural. Scott

For me personally, I don't use FSUIPC and don't have a need or desire to have a curve for a controller, as we tune these airplanes with a direct connect. But if someone wants to use a controller curve, whether it be through FSUIPC or some other controller software, I think this is personal preference - meaning, no curve is necessarily "right." Since, the plane will perform the same with both high and low values being the same, stall, glide, trim, etc. Scott.

This is why a curve is a personal choice, as the extremes are unaffected, so I don't think it matters what a person chooses. I think we've turned a nice corner with the sensitivity sliders in FSX. Now at least we can finally all be on the same page. Having some with this slider left, others right, was just a recipe for trouble. RIGHT = direct response, no delay, then it's up to the user what curve they prefer. It seems, based on the responses in this thread, FSX has gotten better for many with this understanding. Scott.

Just to dispel any confusion, because this is a critically important issue, I made this quick video (using a default MS airplane) to demonstrate the sensitivity slider adds delay, something that has no place being inserted between your controller and your control surfaces: Scott.

KingGhidorah, I agree this is a very important discussion. Keep in mind, I believe most developers have been "bitten" by this revelation. For clarity, anyone interested, on any plane, go to the external view so you can see the elevator and try moving it fast, from one extreme to the other with the sensitivity slider full left, then full right. You will see what this is doing. Clearly, NOBODY intentionally would want this. So what I think has happened is, developers have compensated for what amounts to be a very lousy slider. Fortunately, from a developers point of view, this is quite simple to fix, since it's just a delay, and not directly affecting the absolute values of the controller. I would think, as a user for now, you could put this sensitivity slider full right, and for any plane that is too sensitive, use a proper sensitivity curve. But keep in mind, from our point of view, livening up a flight control to compensate for a lousy delay in a flight control is a bad idea, period. Things must be calibrated, proper, and in this case, no delays because, delays don't exist in the real world. This is just plain odd and unfortunate that some Microsoft programmer, long ago, made this choice when the sensitivity should have clearly been a curve or scalar or a combination of the two. But again, this is all quite easy to fix when compared to other things. Scott.

Ryan, I meant all of your planes, not just A2A. I am very curious to hear what you think of your other addons without this delay. Scott.

You may be pleasantly surprised to find out all of our aircraft fly better without that lousy delay between you and your airplane. Scott.

On the real Comanche (and the sim), with flaps and gear full down, me (180lbs) and about 50 lbs in the baggage, just after turning final I trim for 100ias with roughly 15" power and about a 6-700fpm descent. Then as some point, before short final as I slow, I give one more pull of the trim. This gives just the right amount of elevator authority for landing. After landing, the trim in both the real Comanche (and the sim) is around 1.5 notches back, nothing massive. The 1965 Cherokee we modeled, both in real life and Accu-Sim needs massive amounts, meaning 80-100%. You can run out of elevator on an old Cherokee. The Comanche, is about 50% back. Scott.

King, yes, if you have been keeping it in the center, then you have had a delay inserted between your yoke and control surfaces on all planes. It's not a control curve like you are thinking, it's a delay. You will become a better sim pilot once it's on the right, as this means your yoke is directly connected and not going through some odd delay system. All airplanes will not just be more responsive, but their response will be direct and better. Scott.

Just do your own tests and see exactly what that sensitivity slider does. If it was sensitivity, that would be great, but it's not, its a delay. Who wants a delay between the controls and the control surfaces? When you move this slider left, you will forever be behind the plane, forever seeking it. This slider is a bad thing for every plane, not just A2A. Scott.

Rob I watched the video. I can say, two days and maybe 100 people, we didn't see any landings with that much over control so something is up here. First, check your CONTROLLER AXIS SENSITIVITIES in the OPTIONS, and make sure they are FULL RIGHT, and null zone is FULL LEFT. It is counter intuitive, but making the controls less sensitive actually puts a delay in there, that just messes everything up - no help to anyone. I have a feeling the above is the issue. If not, remember a landing flare is nothing more than flying level just a foot or so above the ground. Practice flying down the runway, at 65 mph full flaps, gear down (if heavy, add 5-10 mph). Just do that and get a feel. It's very hard to not over control aircraft on flare. Just keep it level and let the speed bleed off and just SLOWLY pull the yoke back if needed. Lastly, if none of the above gets you where you want, I will guess you don't use a CH yoke? I'm not a CH marketer, but the yoke is just SO important to get a good flare. This is also true in real planes. My old Warrior's yoke tended to stick, and when it did, it was impossible to make a nice landing. I kept silicone in the baggage, and after spraying the yoke shaft, it was so nice. Scott.

Keep in mind, we spent two full days at FlightSimCon watching (and studying) lines of customers flying and landing the Comanche, and as an owner and operator of the airplane, I continued to see the exact same behavior seen in the real plane when people land. It was uncanny. While it's a pretty easy airplane to land in general, it's challenging to land really well, but you must understand you have a 38 foot wingspan with tip tanks, which creates a lot of ground effect. And real pilot's do tend to complain about landing the Comanche. It has this reputation, because of this long, low wing (note how short the landing gear is). It's also the laminar flow wing, that it floats floats floats, then can drop not unlike a Cherokee. This is the way it is – real wings don’t behave like smooth simulations – they have personalities of which we spend a lot of time capturing. If you are having trouble landing the Accu-Sim Comanche, either: 1. You would have the same trouble landing the real Comanche 2. Controller or controller setup issues To speak a bit about controllers, from our experience, the CH products yokes are better to the Saitek counterpart in that, there is no centering spring and, the spring tension increases properly with deflection. Saitek's spring tension is too flat which makes it easy to over control (up and down) during landing. OTOH, we largely prefer Saitek rudder pedals and all throttles, over CH, and love the Saitek trim wheel. As for roll rate, again, the Accu-Sim Comanche is exact to the real one. We layered actual video over the simulation, at 80, 120, and 180 mph ias. Slow trim - our system does differ here, being slower so there is an adjustment, but in the Comanche you should only need to make minor trim adjustments (we highly recommend the Saitek trim wheel here as it is 1:1 perfect: http://www.amazon.com/Saitek-CES432110002-06-Flight-Cessna/dp/B0058FAFI4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1434809420&sr=8-1&keywords=saitek+trim). The smoke effect - this may be a P3D thing, as I've never experienced any framerate loss ever, using FSX. One of our testers is looking into this now, and I will be trying to reproduce this on our P3DV2.5 setup this week. As for idling, I only wish I could show you how our actual Comanche behaves with massive style spark plugs. Unless we idle at 1,200 RPM, the engine will almost certainly foul by the time we get to the runway. Since we know of other Comanche's that are not so prone to fouling, we actually made the sim more "foul friendly" than our actual airplane. Once we switched to fine wire plugs, the fouling issue disappeared completely. We can even idle at 600RPM, and won't foul the plugs. The same applies to the Accu-Sim Comanche, so just go into your maintenance hangar and install fine wire plugs. Scott.

I think both the Saitek and CH pedals are good for the price, however, I use the Saitek Combat Pedals, due to their higher resistance and width. I also have them bolted into the floor, so they are solid. They have gotten a LOT of use, and so far, haven't had a single hiccup. BTW, the Saitek elevator trim is a great product for $50. I also prefer Saitek throttles due to much better resolution to CH, but for the yoke, I definitely prefer the CH Products. Scott.

During our week long display at Air Venture (Oshkosh) last year, it was very interesting watching all different people, ranging from casual flight simmers to high time pilots and instructors fly using different hardware. Each person comes to the table with their own experiences and therefore, preferences. Some people fly clenching the yoke with a fist, pulling it hard (almost taking the table with it) and others fly with their fingertips. We added a slider in our 2d pop up, CONTROLS menu in the lower left, that dynamically adjusts the controller sensitivity. This slider can be adjusted anywhere from 0 to 100, without compromising performance. It is only the way the controller is interpreted. Regarding the trim wheel sensitivity, here is a video Peter (Frooglesim) made that explains how to configure it for those using FSUIPC: Scott.

Make sure you are running the latest update here. Something must be amiss. Take a look at this video, from one of our forum members who is a CFI. He demonstrates some good fundamental landing tips here: Scott.

If an engine just quits, the vast majority of times it will be fuel delivery. And the vast majority of these times, it will be the selected tank just ran out of fuel. So, your almost immediate reaction if your engine quits is to "switch tanks" and establish a proper glide speed You can then pull out your checklist, which will include things like putting on your electric fuel pump (if the mechanical fuel pump failed). Also, if the engine quits it should continue to windmill at a slow speed, so while you go through your checklist, you can take a peek at your fuel pressure too. Assuming you ran a tank dry, once you select a tank with fuel, it should startup in under 10 seconds. Scott.

Changing this will cut your trim to 1/5th of it's effectiveness, which is not something you want to do. Froogle posted a video that can help FSUIPC users adjust their trim with A2A products: http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=121&t=42941 BTW, the Saitek trim wheel is great. Well worth the investment. Scott.

In the CONTROLS menu (SHIFT-3). Click on the word "Default." Scott.

Our model is based on a measured C182T with the longer, sleeker cowling with the Lycoming engine and not the older stubbier Skylanes with the Continental. The two cowlings are completely different. We placed the eyepoint where it is in the 182T we flew for a 5' 10" pilot. The view out over the nose should be exact. Scott.