Search the Community

Hi All, Let me start by saying how much I love the Majestic Dash 8. The combination of fidelity, performance and the challenging short-haul sectors flown by the real thing makes it the best airliner sim for FSX in my book. My thanks go to all those involved in its development. There's one area of the flight dynamics which does trouble me though, as I posted in the thread: 'Help with Q400'. However, I think this subject is a bit off-topic for that thread, hence the new one. I've now had the opportunity to do some more testing: this time with a fully-loaded Q400. I've posted a series of screenshots below showing what I experienced. I'd like to emphasize now that I'm in no way a real-world pilot (let alone a Q400 driver) so I'd appreciate the input of other Q400 users on this issue. Here's the weight and balance sheet for the test flight. Close to max take-off mass with a 29000kg aircraft (including 4000kg of fuel). Here's confirmation of the aircraft weight and fuel quantity in the sim prior to engine start. Following take-off from EGTE I set the condition levers to 900rpm (MCL) and climbed at 200 kts using the IAS AFCS mode. Needless-to-say vertical speed and deck angles were pretty extreme during the first part of the climb. Lucky this was a test flight! Here we are just over 15 mins after take-off passing FL250. By this point V/S has decayed to +600fpm so you could be forgiven for thinking she hasn't got much climb left in her. However, after this shot was taken, I reduced the commanded IAS to 180kts which allowed the rate of climb to increase to +800fpm. 12 minutes later we're climbing through FL300: still at 180kts and +800fpm. A further 10 minutes into the flight sees us still climbing at +800fpm at 180kts: now we're passing through FL460! However, a few minutes later V/S does start to drop rather suddenly. An hour into the flight, we're passing through FL522, and V/S has dropped to 'only' +300fpm but we're still climbing steadily. I've also reduced the IAS to 158kts (Vclmb for out T/O weight) where it'll stay for the rest of the climb. You may notice the engine rpm starting to creep away from the FADEC commanded setting of 900rpm at this point. After another hour in the air*, we've finally reached what seem to be the absolute ceiling for the aircraft at this weight: FL636! (We've also burned about half of the fuel on board by now.) I could have traded a bit of airspeed for more altitude as I did in the previous test when I flew right up to stick-shaker activation. RPM is clearly over-speeding at this point. Wonder what would happen in the forthcoming pro version which I think has failures? (*I'll own up to using time compression for this bit, although I hadn't previously in the flight.) Here's the final portion of the flight see through the FSX 'flight analysis tool'. In posting this, I just wanted to provoke a bit of discussion about what's causing this odd ability to reach excessive altitudes in a flight model which otherwise seems so accurate. Any input from the developers would be very welcome, although I realise the Majestic forum is probably the best place to get this... (I know - I should register there!) All the best, Nick

I have launched my MD-80 project here: http://forums.x-plan...&showfile=19518 --PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS FILE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED IN ABOUT A YEAR! IT IS NOT THE MOST CURRENT VERSION, I HAVE ADDED MANY IMPROVEMENTS AND AM WAITING TO RELEASE A MORE UP TO DATE VERSION-- 5/30/14 Currently it is a developmental stage. It has parts of a virtual cockpit so far and a simple 2D cockpit. The fuselage is completely modeled in Blender. I will continue to use the 0.X version numbers until the following minimum requirements are met: -Complete 3D Cockpit Enclosure -Realistic 2D Panel -More Realistic Flight Dynamics -At Least 2 Real World Liveries (Currently I supply a rough Delta livery and a Basic Livery I use for Modeling) What my goals are for the project as a whole are (regardless of version number, just where I hope to take the program before I'm through): -Fully Immersive 3D Cockpit -Photo Real 2D Panel -Photo Real Liveries (I have something of the sort currently with my Delta Livery. If synthetic proves to work better for me as far as quality, then replace "photo real" with "synthetic" ) -Extremely Realistic Flight Dynamics -Complete Interior Build These are just a few things I had in mind when I started this project a while back. Any of these things can show up at any time. I do have a list of priorities, but that doesn't mean that the Photo Real 2D panel won't come in the next 0.X update (no promises, just an example) or that it has to come before extremely realistic flight dynamics. I'll be sure to inform everyone the best I can of all the new toys that come with each release. I am currently a one man team, so you will have to bare with me and understand that flaws and glitches will arise. My goal is to get a new version done here and get it to you ASAP. That's why I released a 0.X version. I want you guys to help shape my project along the way and help me test it out! Just PLEASE do NOT edit my files at your computer! I have already put some serious time into it (even if it doesn't seem that way) and I couldn't bare to see it stolen from me If you are interested in coming on the team as a beta tester, please just let me know. Contact me here or send me a message on Skype: pilotmanchase. I need people to do extensive flight tests and such on the aircraft before it is released. PLUS it comes with a cool banner like mine! B) -IMPORTANT- While I do encourage people to make repaints for my aircraft... DON'T! The current set up for how the plane will read the textures is not the one that will be used in the future. And even then, it definitely is not optimized for ease... at all. Leave the headaches to me... seriously. You will find yourself in a world of hurt if you try to repaint it. Just sayin' -Release Thoughts- Here is a copy of a post I made in the X-Plane forums recently: Hello, everyone once again! I just wanted to hop in here to share some very exciting news! While preparing the MD-80 for it's next release, I entered a world of developmental opportunities. I decided to walk right on through these newly opened doors and am pleased to announce that I have made a significant leap forward in the developmental process. I will try to post pictures later. I was looking forward to pushing out a v0.3 release very soon, but I am now considering the option of waiting until it is v1.0 ready. I say this because it doesn't seem right to me that I release a product that is lost so deeply in the middle of not having advanced features and having so many advanced features that incompleteness makes it hardly usable. I will continue to consider a v0.3 release, but I am thinking that I will wait until the plane is finished. Here is a list of some of the big improvements: --FLIGHT DYNAMICS!!! (This was one of the most exciting things. I made the plane fly a lot more realistically, though I feel there is still a long way to go before I get the perfect MD-80 feel) --Animated 3D Cockpit (This is one of those things that is incomplete right now. It's coming along nicely though. I'll post pictures) --Stall Warning Horn Fixed (No more stall warning after rotation) --Center of Gravity Fix (I guess this is a flight dynamic, but this fix deserves it's own category. It isn't perfect, but it's better than the nose-smashing start that you guys are experiencing LOL ) --Custom Textured Cockpit (This is one of the cooler features. I am currently making good looking synthetic cockpit textures. I'll replicate the process for repaints in the future) --Optimized Cockpit (Not sure if it helps frames that much, but I cleaned up a lot of extra vertices) Still on tap: --I need to redo the bender model. I don't like it at all. Better than Plane Maker models, but still awful. (Not really terrible, but I need to fix the number of windows at least) --Cabin (I will die if I have to look straight through this plane much longer) --Plus much, much more that I can't think of at 4:00 in the morning.

Hi guys, I'm desperately trying to fix (what I think is) a FDE problem in Prepar3d V3.1. I'll just explain what happened: I've just bought the Milviz MD530F helicopter and experienced a weird behaviour regarding the yaw axis: When I apply right rudder, the helicopter turns about 20°, then stops. After a second it turns again for a few degrees and stops again. Sometimes the helicopter doesn't move around the yaw axis for a couple of seconds, just to turn for 180° in the next second... I would describe it as lagging. That makes it unflyable. I thought it was a helicopter-specific problem (same problem with the standard R22), but then I found out that the Alabeo Extra 300s - and all other aircraft - have the same problem: When I pull the nose up for about 30°, turn the Extra into the knife-edge position and let go of the controls, the nose should drop. The nose drops, but stops after a few degrees. A second later, the nose drops until it "locks" again. I guess something is blocking the aircraft from moving around freely, especially around the yaw axis. It has nothing to do with the controls. The pedals move as they should when I apply rudder, and the problem even occurs when I unplug all my controllers and fly with the keyboard. I've disabled all my addons (Accufeel for example), double checked the assignments and calibrated all my controllers. Has anyone experienced something like that or even has a solution? Thank you very much! Regards, Ben

Since I got my hands on MFS I couldn't resist "exploring" it's ".CFG" files, following the work of many modders contributing to make them more realistic / plausible according to data on their RW counterparts and trying to glimpse what's new in the "Modern" FDM... One of the things stumped me when looking into some of the "flight_model.cfg" files, like those of the Extra 300 and the C172 was a value of "-1" set as fuselage_length ??? Indeed, if you open those files you'll find: fuselage_length = -1 Setting this value to realistic real world data certainly makes a difference in the flight dynamics, and laying with any values away from it, in this and other parameters in that same file, like for instance "fuselage_width" does make a difference, and can actually be easily observed in the size of that orange cylinder that represents the fuselage in the Modern flight model and can be visualized, together with other shapes used for the wings, engine(s), landing gear(s), etc... when we enable "Dev Mode" in the sim. But I really wonder why some aircraft have this "-1" for their length ? Any ideas ?

Hi guys. I have a ppl license almost 25 years now, just to clarify my aviation education. I have a Aerosoft Diamond Katana 4x , general aviation plane which has, in my opinion, best in depth systems simulation for such a little plane. It is a PMDG in general aviation in terms of graphich and systems simulated. Many FSX user consider it to be among best aircrafts ever released for FSX. It is a marvel in the payware section of FSX, no doubt. BUT, yaw axe and rudder behaviour is what concerns me about this aircraft. Every real life pilot must perfect steep turns, in order to get Private Pilot license, everybody knew that. It is a moderately hard maneuver but it IT IS NOT IMPOSIBLE. It is a hard but routine maneuver for ppl pilot. But in 99% of payware planes (general aviation) yaw axe is very, very poorly modeled. I cant get Katana 4X to do a COORDINATED steep turn at 45 degrees. I tried so many times and inclinometer wobbles all around. I calibrated yoke with latest and registered FSUIPC, set sensitivity in slope function of this software, set dead zones etc. I tried everything. Any oppinions? Thanks in advance !!!

Hello!For quite a while now, I've been trying to create a formula for fuel flow. However, no matter what formulas I use it just won't work.I've searched the Avsim forums, FSDeveloper forums, all sorts of websites and also gone through the documents at http://www.aero.sors.fr/afsd.html.The formulas I have for now, are:TBL1506 = (q * S * CD) / (F_STATIC * delta2 * F_SCALAR)CD = CD0 + ((CL^2) / (pi * e* (b^2 / S)))CL = W / (q * S)FG = TBL1506 * F_STATIC * delta2 * F_SCALARFR = TBL1507* A_INLET * delta2 / (theta2^0.5) * v_TAS * 1.68781 / gFF = TSFC*(FG-FR)Could someone tell me what I'm doing wrong here?