metzgergva

In simpke terms it is the difference between direct mode ans slaved mode. In direct mode the you need to update the compass from time to time with the magnetic compass readings. In slaved mode it does that automatically and if the XO is shown centered all is good. Especially after starting up it is not and you nee to sync it manually by turning the bottom right knob into the direction of the symbol you see in the window top right.

The synchronization  should stay on and work during normal operations. But if you fly aerobatic maneuvers it cannot follow and you need to reset once you are back to level flight...

There is still alttle graphical think to resolve and the gyro will have it's two different modes.

Just a word on the radio. Primarily in the EU all radios had to be updated to 8.333 kHz steps as we were running out of frequencies. Very expensive for GA community, unless you föew totally local and your stations around did not use the  smaller steps.

Yes,  I know Andrey is working on a solution for that. Also for the multiplayer invisibility. Please be patient. We will let you know when available.

For all a correction from a mistake on my side:

The HSI is VOR and LOC only! The triangles are NOT an GS indication. It has none. The triangles are To/From indication in reference to your/their position and your direction.

Sorry for that!

The engine is good for 3000 RPM continous and the ATA in the green range. The given cruise sitting is a moderate one. Anything between 120 to 150 kts is good, just a matter of fuel consumption over speed.

It used to be a mixture in older versions, but now it us just ON/OFF fuel supply. 

On 12/28/2020 at 4:39 AM, jpe828 said:

4. The mixture seems like it is off or on. This is a major issue for me. You can lean, and nothing happens at all until the engine dies. Same with Carb heat, doesn't have an RPM drop at all. 

In case you stumbled over this. This specific engine has an automix functionality. No mixture procedure required. 

On 4/9/2019 at 1:48 PM, amollen said:

@metzgergva just curious, if 0 degrees is the minimal drag position, what is the use for the negative cowl flap positions? When would one use them?

Wenn it is very cold outside you can increase a bit the CHT, but it generates a bit more drag. But when it is cold that is less of a concern. 

You are looking for a real picture or a sim screenshot?

Hi, let's start with the footnote in the manual: Page 291 is definately using knots. The original handbook that I have is using miles/h and the values for the highest weight braket at 14000 ft are DIAS 218 and TAS 277. Converting the miles/hr to knots in the PMDG manual was done because the airspeed indicator in the aircraft is in knots. Unfortunately the footnote has not been corrected accordingly. My calculator converts 218 miles/hr to 189 knots and 277 miles/hr to 240 knots and that is corresponding with the chart.

Now why did you get only 160-165? Firstly, the cowling flaps position in cruise with minimal drag is not fully closed (-4°) but slightly open (0°). We have simulated drag from cowling flaps position. On top you were heavy and by that at the edge of performance and by being slow you were close to the bottom of the power/drag curve. The additional pitch required to stay level slowed you down a bit further.

Lastly, manuals of that time were always quite optimistic and you know the sim is not perfect either in simulating the athmosphere.

During the development of the aircraft, I have tested the aircraft from 4000 to 16000 ft with low blower and from 17000 to 21000 ft with high blower at standard weight choosen 90.000 lb and the deviation on IAS in knots is within 0  to -2%.

I hope this helps to relate the sim experiance to the manual and next time keep the cowling flaps at 0°.

Thank you for the hints. Sorry I have not flown the big birds for a while and restarted with the new versions. Probably had it set up differently on the previous versions.

I made the change to the rotary option and that works easy and reliable. Click on the outer ring to change units and mouse wheel for setting. Perfect!

I would like to take this a bit further. Any chance to save and later re-load a flight plan that was entered into the FMS?

Hi, just as the header indicates, I do not have a mouse wheel functionality on those settings. Only by left and right click I can change in single units and that takes ages to change things when you land in higher altitude mountains. It is the same on the B747 as on the B777. 

On all other dials the acceleration with mouse wheel works perfectly for me, just missing on those two parameters. Hope you can have a look and implement.

P3Dv4.3 is used here.

Dan, as said in my post I already deleted the PANC file from ORBX SAK.

Anyhow, deleting the  ARPT_RWY.dat file cured the issue!

Thanks for your help.

Well I ran into the same issue but cannot fix it. I have Cycle 1811 installed and the latest Version of PANC, which shows in P3Dv4 in the Airport Menu for PANC the RWY 15.

 When I load the B737 all is good.

 When I load the B747-8F I get an error on the DEP page in the FMS

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2tbelct9m09d2wh/PANC_RWY-empty.jpg?dl=0

I checked for double AFCAD and deleted the one for PANC in ORBX SAK.

Any idea to look out for?

I have discussed and experienced may approaches with the DC-3 and also the Connie (which flies similar to the DC-6), but have no RW DC-6 experience. But we had great discussions with the pilots from the Red Bull DC-6.

The Rule of Thumb "MP > RPM/100" certainly has a safety marging included for the fact that you may have a wind change or gust which would short term impact the actual speed over the props. I also learned that ist is more important to stick to it when you flying during the approach with higher speeds, then on final.

Actually there are a bit different philosophies among the DC-3 pilots and the european pilots use a bit a different profile to slow down than the US ones.

The difference is that we try to avoid RPM below 2000 as the engines get a bit rough there. So we stick with minimum 20/2000, while US pilots also fly 17/1700, if needed.

Also important is that the rule is more stricktly to be  imposed on high speeds resulting in more torque driving an engine and damaging the gear versus when you are on final with just 100 kts.

In any case, we plan with 300 ft/min for decent and 500 ft/min as maximum in case of tailwind. Also as this is more convinient for passengers for a non pressurised plane. 

The DC-3 has very low flaps limits and we apply 1/2 below 100 kts. That is a big difference to the DC-6 with a smaller first step allowed at 174 and you can follow with steps to 20 and 30 degrees quickly if needed. Plus the limit of 170 for the landing gear.

So in essence for an approach into an airport you just need to slow down to 170 on a few miles horizontal during the approach pattern, but you need to set flaps/gear to follow a 3 degree glide.

I can only talk about my RW flights on the DC-3, which has a similar descent profile. They key is in the diagram on an approach and you will see there that you slow down in the pattern early and use flaps and gear to accomodadate to descending. You can basically fly any VFR pattern used for larger GA aircraft like a Piper Chieftain.

Here is an extract from my DC-6 Flying Guide:

A good pattern speed with 20° flaps configuration would typically be 125 kts (Vref+35) for downwind and 105 kts (Vref+15) for base leg which you get by setting flaps to 30°. The engine settings are then similar to what you used during a shallow descent making it easy not to change engine setting too much. Best practice is in fact to keep the engines in a small window around 30 in for level flight down to 25 in during a descent with RPM at 2000. When you turn on final you drop the gear and increase RPM to 2300 1/min. Again vary MAP between 28 in for flaps 20° and 30 to 32 in for flaps 40 to 50° for matching final approach speed. Therefore, speed management during approach and landing should be managed by adding drag from lowering flaps and gear and not changing engine setting beyond those small adjustments.

Now when approaching larger airports like Zürich or Geneva in the DC-3, we use the VFR entry points or may get radar vectors to be established on the approach 3 miles out so that we can fly a 3° descent with 500 ft/min at 100 kts. We always need to remind the tower that we have an 80 kts final speed and that they need to keep enough space behind us. Also that they can alow aircrafts departing longer as we come in sooo slow. In the beginning of the DC-3 times in GVA , I have see two go arounds behind us and 5 planes at the holding points. Now all tower ATC know us well.

Not much difference for the Connie or the DC-6. Everything just 15 kts faster.

Now for the steep approach into Innsbruck via RTT and the LOC DME 08/26 EAST, you can only fly those 3.77° angle descent  with flaps 40° and gear down.

I have not come across an 80 BMP minimum. The important rule is to have MP equal or slightly above RPM/100. 

As for DC-3 or Connie descnt planning we are using only 300 ft/min, so you need to start out early from your destination.

If you have realistic behavior enabled then engine wear, resulting temperatures and oil consumption is modeled. The pop-up window on the engines gives an indication of the status.

I also have multiple TQ ( and yoke and stick) but I control the assignments all in one .ini. Just assigned to aircraft type and grouped like

single piston stick

single piston yoke

single turbo yoke

twin piston yoke

twin turbo yoke

twin jet yoke

etc.

.....

and a special one for the DC-6 on my 4 engine throttle so that the revers guard lever is assigned too.

Great destination with the Denali Mountain as sightseeing target.

You need to switch on in the overhead the power to electrical instruments. Otherwise you would not see for example fuel pressure.

On 3/17/2018 at 2:19 AM, JesC said:

I agree. But I don't think that you have addressed the sounds at lower power (mp) settings. When manifold pressure is reduced below cruise power settings I would also anticipate some sound reductions and rpm decreases.

BTW I have more than a few hours flying 310's and 320's myself. Nonetheless I don't think that makes me an expert.

I'm just trying to understand this better. I'm suspecting there may be some sim based limitations that result in the use of only rpm or mp influenced sounds. Hopefully at some point Milviz may offer some insight to their reasoning and  methodology. Given the depth of this simulation I am sure this is something they have given a great deal of thought, study and consideration.

At least I have established that this is not an anomaly of my install. Progress!! :-)

Jesse

 

Jesse, 

 I'm with you on this. Sure RPM change has a more noticable change, but MAP should have a noise change too as the engines are producing more power and exhaust noise and prop noise should vary- more in loudness than pitch. It is a basic limitiation in FS/P3D, but can be overcome, i.E. the ArezOnes soundpack does it.

No instrument is perfect. At least not on an old plane  ;-)

On 3/25/2018 at 10:14 PM, downscc said:

Many thanks Tim, I have to admit I've rarely used the charts on ppg 300-313 and they were not available during most of beta because these are company charts (from an operator) whereas the charts on ppg 290-293 are the original Douglas data where the power is set reference to BMEP without having MP tablulated.  Also have to admit I've only used either MP or BMEP but not both and agree that they should correspond since they are related.  Interesting.  I'm sure Alex already has this on his todo list.

I think both references are used at the same time. MAP/RPM clearly define the steps for power settings during climb. BMEP is just a limit there not too exceed. Once you are in cruise climb or cruise you optimize RPM and BMEP and MAP may differ a bit. If it is a couple of inch, ice may have developed or a ignition circuit has gone bust, etc.

Tim,

The team wanted to have a little variance by engine and also over time and use. What you see comes from this, plus that no real world MAP gauge is that precise. If you use BMEP you are better synchronizing the engines but RPM of course need to in sync too. The single step of the throttle in the sim shows sometimes small differences too.