Jump to content

twasono

Members
  • Content Count

    114
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About twasono

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

2,381 profile views
  1. Hi, You might try using FSX DX10 mode, since all the textures will now be offloaded into graphic memory directly. My FSX memory usage is sitting around 1.3 - 1.4GB flying with NGX. But, you should buy DX10 Fixer in order to get rid of many DX10 problems. Tri Nugroho
  2. Have you tried to disable G-effects in the FSX realism settings?
  3. Hi Marius,1) It is caused by skid friction coefficient within the FS9 itself. Fortunately, you can modify it. Just follow this link: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/304402-sim1dll-modification-for-fs91/2) Actually we did it by comparing and adjusting the current value with the indicated consumption (Fuel Flow) information from lower EWD. Others may test it by performing a full long haul flight and then calculate & compare the total fuel consumption with real life data.Best Regards.
  4. In real world, The nose wheel and rudder are moved by different controls. Nose wheel is moved by tiller and rudder by rudder pedal.In FS, both are controled using Z-axis.Mostly, rudder is used to make a heading correction when the plane is in high speed rolling. That's why the FS developers design the function of Z-axis like that. CMIIW.Best Regards.
  5. Hi Rick, This is the limitation within FS, which has no tiller. So, for turning the nose wheel on the ground, it uses rudder axis control instead. This is a bug on PSS panel because the T/D point is very late, which cause the plane to chase the descent path on extreme V/S. But after VNAV captured the descent path, it should be OK. I always use the V/S mode during initial descend, and then switch to VNAV after the path captured. For different engine thrust, you can modify the "static_thrust" in the "aircraft.cfg" file.If you know what you are doing, you may modify the .air file. Instead, just leave as it is. :)Best Regards.
  6. Hi kantk2008,Thanks for the kind words. :) I haven't met the condition aboveDid you use time acceleration? What motion is it? roll or yaw?It might be your "AP_control_coeffs.dat" file has been changed. It is in "FS9\PSS\BOEING777" folder.Just follow the following values from my folder:RollOnAilACC=3.4RollOnAilDECEL=3.4RollOnAilINPUTSTEP=2800RollOnAilMININPUT=1000RollOnAilMAXINPUT=31000PitchOnElevatorACC=1.3PitchOnElevatorDECEL=2.3PitchOnElevatorINPUTSTEP=50PitchOnElevatorMININPUT=-12384PitchOnElevatorMAXINPUT=14384VSonPitchACC=400VSonPitchDECEL=1000VSonPitchINPUTSTEP=0.9VSonPitchMININPUT=-15VSonPitchMAXINPUT=30SpeedOnElevatorMaxAcc=2SpeedOnElevatorDecArea=20 Could you provide a picture (screenshot) about what happened?I suspect it is related to the Posky panel merge files.Best Regards.
  7. Hi Jack,Very good source. Do you have the same table for all other variants?I'll try to adjust and find the correct fuel flow. Thanks.Best Regards.
  8. Hi All,I am quite overwhelming by the fuel burn rate of 777 series, because of the lack of information about this in the internet and people usualy make the answer without proper official sources.But, at last I've found this important information from other forum (http://www(dot)airliners(dot)net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/278677) From above post, we can calculate and assume that the fuel burn rate of each these models:- 777-300ER --> about 8,100 kg/hour- 777-200LR --> about 7,500 kg/hourAnd now, how about another models?For 777-300, I've also found this information from wikipedia Well, now I can calculate that -300 fuel burn rate is approximately about 8250 kg/hour, which mean that -300ER should have more efficient fuel burn than -300 at the same conditions (weight, altitude, speed).Using the same assumption as the -300 & -200ER above, the -200LR fuel consumption is more efficient than -200ER by 1.4 percent. (It's only my rough assumption)Thus, I can calculate the -200ER fuel burn rate is approximately about 7650 kg/hourHow about -200? I haven't found any information yet. But again, using assumption, the fuel burn rate of -200 is approximately at 7800 kg/hourFinally, I tried to tweak the fuel_flow_scalar in the aircraft.cfg file to at least produce the nearest results.First, I am doing the tests for -300ER and -200LR using the following conditions:- Weight: set the fuel to 60%- Cruising Altitude: FL350- Cruising Speed: Mach 0.84Then for other models, I just adjusted the fuel % so the gross weight should be similar to either -300ER (for -300) or -200LR (for -200 & -200ER).fuel_flow_scalar values:- [b]777-300ER[/b] --> 1.110- [b]777-300[/b] --> 1.150- [b]777-200LR[/b] --> 1.090- [b]777-200ER[/b] --> 1.070- [b]777-200[/b] --> 1.140 Please feel free to critize if my assumptions are not correct.Best Regards.Tri Wasono
  9. Hi Steinar,Please check your "AP_control_coeffs.dat" file in "FS9\PSS\Boeing777" folder.Make sure the contents is similar to my previous post (#69) above.Best Regards.
  10. I've just got home today. Here is the contents of my "AP_control_coeffs.dat" file: RollOnAilACC=3.4RollOnAilDECEL=3.4RollOnAilINPUTSTEP=2800RollOnAilMININPUT=1000RollOnAilMAXINPUT=31000PitchOnElevatorACC=1.3PitchOnElevatorDECEL=2.3PitchOnElevatorINPUTSTEP=50PitchOnElevatorMININPUT=-12384PitchOnElevatorMAXINPUT=14384VSonPitchACC=400VSonPitchDECEL=1000VSonPitchINPUTSTEP=0.9VSonPitchMININPUT=-15VSonPitchMAXINPUT=30SpeedOnElevatorMaxAcc=2SpeedOnElevatorDecArea=20 But, if you feel comfortable with your existing values, just leave it as it is...Best Regards.
  11. @Skybus2000: If you are used to edit a merge, you will find it easy to do this.Just use your existing PSS aircraft.cfg as a base. Then replace these sections with the ones from the package:- weight_and_balance- GeneralEngineData- TurbineEngineData- jet_engine- airplane_geometry- flight_tuning- autopilot- flaps (all) Then you should also modify the "sim=" parameter in your "fltsim.X" configuration to the follow the .air file name from the package. Of course you should copy the .air file first to the PSS aircraft folder.@Nandan: It is an additional autopilot configuration setting which is customized by PSS for their 777 autopilot handling profiles. @Alex: I'm really sorry, I am out of town until next week and the file is in my home PC. Maybe some other guys here can post it in the forum. If I'm not mistaken it's just a small text file, so you'll just have to copy and paste the content.@CCA032 Yes, of course. All planes can fly with full of fuel. But you must also adjust the payload (pax and cargo) to make sure that the total gross weight is not exceeded MTOW.Best Regards.
  12. It might be your "AP_control_coeffs.dat" file has been changed. It is in "FS9\PSS\BOEING777" folder.Please make sure the file is original. If you are not sure, just reinstall the PSS B777.Best Regards.
  13. Hi Alex,Have you correctly used the "Aircraft.cfg" parameters from the package? I think it has a problem with the autopilot section.Make sure you use the "aircraft.cfg" file from the package. After that you just need to edit the "fltsim" section.I've flown with this 773ER package and everything is fine. Is there any other guys had the same problem with the 773ER?@Clutch Cargo:I have no idea what's going wrong. Have you installed the PSS-777 patch? There is a patch, but I'm not sure it is related to this problem. But maybe you should try it.Best Regards.
  14. Hi Clutch Cargo,Please check the panel.cfg file. Go to the "" section in the bottom.Please look at the "night" parameter. What is the value?Best Regards.
  15. @waly87 & Jure: To make your own adjustment on fuel consumption, you could easily set and tweak the "fuel_flow_scalar" parameter on "Aircraft.cfg" to your desired value. Just try to set 0.020 notch up or down from existing value. Greater value mean more fuel will be burned.Jure, It's nice to hear that you've successfully managed the trim effectiveness. ;)And don't forget, RL Pilots do perform full autoland on a low visibility condition at the right runway (which has the CAT-III ILS).@Clutch Cargo: Could you post the screenshot which shows your problem?Best Regards.
×
×
  • Create New...