Community Discussion > Flight Operations

Wild division tour, online legs discussion

<< < (6/14) > >>

EHM-0654 Murray:

--- Quote from: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 31, 2010, 12:48:52 am ---The last but not least of my problems is the plane's behaviour when under flaps. With 20 or 30 flaps (I know it doesnt need that much at landing), an increase in throttle will make it pitch down rather violently. It has a lot of lift even in slow speeds which makes it rather tricky to land, I go in to the landing with negative pitch which in every way you look at it, it's wrong. I don't know at which IAS the plane will fly on but I'm pretty sure the difference between too much lift and a stall is quite small. And then when you notice the danger of stalling, you advance the throttle, and as I said before, it pitches down on it's own.

--- End quote ---

Under full flaps (yes, I do land with full flaps), I'm generally mostly throttle idle from the moment I put on full flaps - maybe 900ft AGL, then I'm definitely idle from turning out on final to landing. She doesn't need a awful lot of power change under flaps for the attitude/altitude to change wildly. VREF is only 90kts or thereabouts (I'm in bed right now, don't have the data in front of me, working from memory), but she doesn't stall under full flaps for a long way under that - hence nice, soft landings.

The other thing to say (if we're using the X-Plane model as the "standard" by which we're comparing) is that when I change flap settings, if I don't throttle back before hand and scrub at least 30kts, I gain 500+ft in altitude in no time... so she's a hand-full in the approach phase to say the least; you can see why I prefer to fly at least one circuit ;)


--- Quote from: EHM-1465 Dominic on October 31, 2010, 01:53:31 am ---@ David - the loss of an engine must be down to failures being set. Do you fly with random failures set up? I know it's one of those features that PP was supposed to have but to be honest I'm not sure if its realised...

--- End quote ---

@David - I'm yet to have a leg without some "mechanical" problem or other. Blown tire on the first leg (reset, wasn't expecting any failures), engine fire in the second leg (which I recovered from correctly), and in the most recent leg, an engine "stall" just before take-off (which you either saw or didn't, I restarted it immediately). Fingers crossed for leg 4 ;)

EHM-2387 Eric-Jan:
I'll have some more time this evening to go dig around in this, but basically we ave quite a number of setups that do not necesrily coincide, performance wise:
we have 3 planes: PAD, Aerosoft, and the X-plane one (don't know what brand that is)
we have 3 sims: FS9, FSX, and X-plane
we have 3 weather engines (or more if addons are used); one per sim

each model will have (slightly) different flight characteristics, and each sim will interpret that performance and weather data (slightly) differently.
So we must be careful not to start comparing aplles with pears, 'cause I can predict where that goes...


One thing I noticed is the white arc on Murray's (X-plane) Twotter extends to at least 120 KIAS, where mine (Aerosoft/FSX) goes up to 95 KIAS. The white arc indicated the flaps operations range: no flaps above the white arc! This is a clear indication of a significantly different flight dynamics model of those two planes...
Details
(PS: weather is significant because IAS depends on density (determined from altitude and pressure), TAS on IAS and altitude, and GS on TAS and wind direction and magnitude, and in the end it is GS we are comparing, when in close formation)

EHM-2155 Mariano:
I understand, E-J

This is about the freeware, FS9 plane, available for download on the fleet page. I don't know which ever that is.
I do know that this is not realistic flying at all (all realism sliders are set to full)

Twotter

At about 1:40, I pull back on the stick and just hold it there, full throttle, no flaps.

Then I set the autopilot at 8,000 ft and just leave it full throttle just to see how fast it'll go. Please note not only the final speed but the acceleration.

Something else to note, the % of propeller (in this panel it's the second set of dials from the top) is just stuck at 100+%.

And then I just do some acrobatics, because it can :P

I hope it helps find the problems

EHM-0654 Murray:
E-J, any chance of a nice, clear shot of the engine instruments (like the one above, but just the centre console)? Again, for comparison...

Oh, and @Mariano, in landing config, stall speed is 58kts... I can walk faster than that ;D

E-J is flying the Aerosoft -300, the fleet model for Flight Sim is the PAD -300, and those of us in X-Plane are using Skycycle's -200 model. So, yes, y'all would be faster than those of us in X-Plane.

EHM-1997 Alexander:

--- Quote from: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on October 31, 2010, 07:48:09 am ---One thing I noticed is the white arc on Murray's (X-plane) Twotter extends to at least 120 KIAS, where mine (Aerosoft/FSX) goes up to 95 KIAS. The white arc indicated the flaps operations range: no flaps above the white arc! This is a clear indication of a significantly different flight dynamics model of those two planes...

--- End quote ---

The aerosoft aircraft is payware, the other two are freeware planes. I think the issue described is that the x-plane freeware and the aerosoft a/c perform similarly (accounting for sim/weather differences), and the PAD freeware performs outside expected performance differences.

The x-plane model is also a -200, with PT6A20 engines putting out 550hp, whereas the PAD model is a -300 with PT6A-27 engines putting out 620hp (flat rated).

Changing the engines modelled in x-plane is a simple fix in planemaker if we want to uprate that to a -300, open the aircraft in planemaker, standard->engine specs-> change maximum available power from 550 to 620.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page