b1bmsgt

That's great, but I don't see any documentation that directly addresses the Allison model. What is different? Is the Allison start procedure modeled? If there is documentation specifically for the Allison, where might we find it? Thank you!

As I said, it might just be the RR Nene procedure. The weird thing is that they modelled the Starting Fuel switch! It's on the left side of the cockpit just aft and outboard of the throttle. (Things that make you go "Hmmmmmm...")

Hi! I was a T-33 Crew Chief in the USAF way (WAY!!)back in the day. I was with the 49th Fighter Interceptor Squadron at Griffiss AFB, Rome, New York back in the mid 80's. We were an F-106 unit, but we had 8 T-33's that they used for things such as allowing the newer pilots to build time and for acting as simulated cruise missiles or bombers for the Sixes to practice intercepting. I have 10-12 hours of back-seat time, having been flown to several different bases to fix another T-33 that broke on a cross-country flight. I was also engine run and taxi qualified. Just took a few test flights in the Inibuilds T-33 out of my Test Center in Wendover, Utah, USA and thought I would share a couple of impressions: First of all, the sounds brought back a lot of memories right away. Sounds just the way I remember it. On going through the engine start checklist, I found that it is somewhat simplified from the real aircraft that I am familiar with. This could be due to the fact that the Ace Maker aircraft that they used as a model are actually Canadair CT-33's with the (admittedly superior) Rolls Royce Nene engine rather than the Allison J-33 that our T-Birds had. Ours utilized a separate Starting Fuel control that you would turn on at around 10%, as I remember. Then at a higher RPM you would bring the throttle out of cutoff (around the horn) to engage the main fuel control. This was where you would be very attentive for hot starts. Anyway, the sim T-33 doesn't have this procedure. I have never seen a CT-33 checklist, so this may be the Nene procedure. If anyone knows for sure about this, I'd be curious to know. During actual flight, from what I remember of my short amount of stick time, the flight controls are actually not as sensitive in the sim as the real thing. I remember the ailerons especially being almost impossible for me to keep stabilized. This was due to the aileron boost system. One of the pilots I was with turned it off for a little while and it became much easier to control, although very hard to move the stick more than a very small amount of course. You can't turn the boost off in the sim so I couldn't check it. Visually, the model is pretty accurate to my memories, although the wheel well details seem simplified. Overall, I would say the plane is great, and I would definitely recommend it!! Russ If you post any questions, I'll try to answer them to the best of my fading knowledge... 😁

I'm planning on posting a review when I get it, so stay tuned! PS: How does one go about finding the Mach Loop? Russ

As a former USAF T-33 Crew Chief (that's me in the middle) I am REALLY looking forward to this! I had Piglet's version back in FSX/P3D, and flew it all over the place. It was OK accuracy-wise, but I'm hoping this one will be more study level. I was engine run and taxi qualified, so I'm hoping to stir up some very old memories..

I love XP12, especially after the latest update. Get the free Sim Heaven scenery upgrade and it is pretty darn good. Smooth as silk, too!

Open up Nvidia control panel and see if you might have to do some fiddling around in there. Also, my tablets are Android and I have them connected to the PC via USB cables. That may be significant... Russ

Default CJ4 with MFD popout on tablet using Spacedesk...

I use Spacedesk to create a second screen on a tablet and then drag the GTN750 to it. Never tried it with a popout gauge, but it might work...

Fun fact: The Pilatus factory starred as the Auric Enterprises building in "Goldfinger"!

The thing that immediately came to mind when I first saw the DO-31 was the Razorcrest from the Mandalorian...

Yup. That's what they're supposed to say! If they just HAD to use a non-standard callout, at least they could have said "continue as FILED". How hard would that have been? Most of the other ATC programs do this to some extent as well. Maybe it's picky of me, but to me it shows that the devs of these programs weren't totally paying attention. It wouldn't have taken much effort to get it right and they didn't. Even something as simple as "climb and maintain" instead of "climb to" for instance. (I'm just talking US controllers BTW. I really don't fly anywhere else so I have no idea how silly the ICAO stuff might be...) If BATC has put in this extra effort, I will love them forever! (...or at least for another 10-15 years. I'm 72...) OK, rant over. Thanks for listening. Russ

True enough, Just saying that, for me and quite a few others, a subscription is a deal breaker for going any further than free...

As Peavy said in the Rocketeer: "Well, that's the end of that..."

Here ya go...