Blackburn Beverley Uploaded

[Catboat]

Re: Re A.E.n Hastings in Propliner article

Maybe not the place to post shots, but may be of interest.

I was working on the Hastings in 1958, and they didn't have an AEO on the flight crew. Pilot, co-pilot, navigator, engineer, and radio operator. Maybe they gave the radio man a fancy title?

Den.

Yes, I must admit I was a bit surprised by Mr. Price’s reference at the beginning of the Propliner article, but there is a photo of him in a Hastings, at the signallers position. At the end of the article, he mentions being posted to 230 O.T.U. at Finningley, for a course on the then new Vulcan 2s. Just as off subject comment, the same issue of Propliner, has other great articles e.g. Queen Charlotte Airlines featuring the post-war operations of their ex R.C.A.F. Stranraer, and another article of the ferrying of Bristol Freighter G-BISU, from New Zealand to Britain.

 

[BendyFlyer]

Quick question - Are the reverse pitch props modelled? Using F2 for some reason is not doing it for me and there is nothing in the checklist or notes that I can see. The Beverley was capable of landing and coming to a stop within 277 metres according to Wikipedia, I cannot achieve this with braking and full flap alone. I am still hunting for some more detailed gouge that may exist (well for free that is).

 

[ncooper]

Hello, yes, you can find the answer and more notes in the Readme file included in the download. Here is the section on reverse thrust: 3. Key assignment ctrl-W (or whichever key or button you have currently assigned for 'water-rudder') will first arm and then trigger engine reversing. In other words, it needs a double click. Use throttle for more/less braking action. No idea what is the problem with the forum, is seems to be ignoring paragraphs.

 

[mjahn]

As Nick says, it's in the readme.txt, there should be one copy of it in the root a/c folder, and one in DOC. Personally, I associate my center joystick button with the water rudder command, which makes reversing really easy to engage by a double click and a bit of throttle. Monitor also has a clickspot for it. Reverse is very powerful as on the real aircraft and really gets you that short field performance.

As for a possible BOOST gauge, here is the best clipped picture I have of it. I seem to see numbers 4, 8, 16 and 24, which conforms with the data listed by nagpaw. My guesswork draft of it is pasted on top. Not sure what the red arc is supposed to indicate...

A very basic paintkit is here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d8x6v6xro31omeq/Beverley_paintkit.zip?dl=0

--Manfred

 

[MajorMagee]

More great images like this can be seen here:
https://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads....beverley-in-the-middle-east-1960s#Post3885986

 

[Scianoir]

What an great new freeware gift! My sincere thanks to you Manfred and the team for giving us yet another excellent payware quality aircraft.

I have one minor issue which I cannot seem to be able to resolve however and which really seems to be related to the included AILA/GCA system rather than the Beverley itself: Although the first time I loaded and flew the Beverley there were no problems, on the second occasion I loaded it I kept hearing "on glidepath" being repeated every few seconds. I should point out that at this stage I was on the ground and I had never switched on or used the AILA/GCA system. Even when I started the GCA by clicking the relevant SET button, I could not find a way to stop the "on glidepath" sound and it continued being repeated throughout the flight even while other instructions were being given by the GCA! I uninstalled and reinstalled the Beverley hoping this might resolve the issue but it has persisted. I can stop this by deactivating the 'calls' folder in the Beverley panel/GCA folder, but I would prefer to be able to use the GCA facility if possible although it won't spoil my enjoyment of this lovely aircraft if I cannot!

Any advice would however be appreciated.
Many thanks,
Bill

 

[mjahn]

That is strange, I've never heard of that before. I take it you are using the default installation, not a tweaked one. Multiplayer? "On glidepath" belongs to the PAR controller's calls but apparently PAR hasn't even been turned on, nor should it give any calls when the Beverley is sitting on the runway. Could another instance of the GCA be running in the background? I would investigate along these lines.

Anyway, there are ways to test this. First, when this happens the next time make a screenshot of the Autopilot with the AILA gauge and the Monitor panel and post it here. We can then try readouts of suspect variables in the Monitor 'Test' window.

To temporarily disable the GCA stuff, comment out the following lines in the panel.cfg's [Window03], like so:

//gauge02=GCA_dsd_P3Dv4_xml_x64_sound!Sound, 1,1,1,1,/GCA/gcacalls.ini
//gauge03=GCA!PAR, 0,0,1,1
//gauge04=GCA!APC, 0,0,1,1

 

[stretch1365]

As Nick says, it's in the readme.txt, there should be one copy of it in the root a/c folder, and one in DOC. Personally, I associate my center joystick button with the water rudder command, which makes reversing really easy to engage by a double click and a bit of throttle. Monitor also has a clickspot for it. Reverse is very powerful as on the real aircraft and really gets you that short field performance.

As for a possible BOOST gauge, here is the best clipped picture I have of it. I seem to see numbers 4, 8, 16 and 24, which conforms with the data listed by nagpaw. My guesswork draft of it is pasted on top. Not sure what the red arc is supposed to indicate...

A very basic paintkit is here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d8x6v6xro31omeq/Beverley_paintkit.zip?dl=0

--Manfred

Hi all,

I really don't understand the fine points of these vintage aircraft, but looking at the picture of the boost gauge and Manfred saying he wasn't sure about the red arc and what it stood for, I had a thought. It's very like the boost gauge on my A2A Spitfire, and I recall something in the notes about not flying straight and level with the boost gauge in the red arc. I might be wrong but it was something like that, fine at zero boost or 8" boost but not between.

Someone here will know if I'm going off in totally the wrong direction here.

Best regards.

 

[stretch1365]

Stretch1365, Off topic but if folk are interested the reason the Court Line could not get a civilian registration is the same reason the ex RAF Belfasts really never went civil either (Except two and then one of those ended up in Cairns QLD with RP rego,the other was left in the UK for spares) bureaucratic intransigence and bloodymindedness. In short aircraft certified for the military had to be re-certified for civilian use that meant a brand new type certificate in short all the dramas and paperwork and testing etc etc as if it was a brand new aeroplane, a ruinous prospect for anybody. The second part of that Catch 22 was that the registering country then owned the responsibility for the type certificate and all that entails in terms of Airworthiness Directives and safety monitoring etc etc. How do I know I had the misfortune to be involved here in OZ with the dramas and fights over the Shorts Belfast which was originally rebuilt at considerable expense in the UK and they were fully airworthy when the CoA expired the UK CAA cancelled the type certificate. The people who owned them managed to get the poor buggers in Sierra Leone and then the Phillipines to accept the type (not they were going to comply with airworthiness issues) the aircraft were very well maintained and plied the world trade routes for years. But the Australian CAA/CASA absolutely refused to take up the type certificate. It was a long and protracted battle with the air safety and regulatory authorities that had nothing to do with air safety. In the end they won. An yep it was literally financially ruinous for the folk who owned them.

Thats another reason to love flight sim, you get to fly these weird and wonderful aircraft and you never never have to deal with the FAA, CAA and CASA. That in itself is well, priceless.

Hi Bendyflyer,

That's a really great story, and sure is a good reason to stick with sim flying and not get involved in the intricacies of the real thing. I love how all these priceless stories and anecdotes come to the surface when someone releases such an unusual aircraft to the community.

 

[nagpaw]

It took some digging, but I have a theory about the red arc on the boost gauge. Mind it's just a theory, since the Pilot's Notes are not all-inclusive.

The diagrams in the Notes show the red arc running from approximately +2 to +6 boost. The Bev's throttles were interconnected with the flaps for what appears to be "go around" protection. If the flaps were selected full down and the power was advanced beyond +6 boost, the flaps would progressively retract until reaching the 20 degree position at +12 boost. For this reason, it was impossible to extend the flaps fully down when the boost was above +6, the top of the red arc. So that's a possibility, although it doesn't explain the bottom of the arc

Thanks for the paintkit, MJ!

BTW, JanKees...that paint looks fantastic. Thanks so much!

 

[BendyFlyer]

NCooper and MJahn thank you - as they say when all else fails read the manual. I obviously glossed over that part of the ReadMe.

Re the red section on the boost gauge - this was because these type of superchargers were not geared but had a fixed gearing related to RPM which worked off the manifold pressure and throttle settings, there was probably a point where low throttle settings could have the supercharger delivering too much boost at particular throttle settings giving you a No No, that is low rpm and excessive or high MP, the red line area on the boost gauge. These British superchargers were different to the American ones and even the later Merlins (such as the Lancasters which had a HI-LO switch) which were controlled by a separate mechanism to change or control the supercharger HI-LO, that is the gearing or boost could be controlled separately if somewhat crudely. Even with this type as go up to HI you have to reduce the MP and RPM first so when the HI setting and supercharger is engaged and the addtional air pressure kicks in it does not overboost the engine and hence blow off the cylinders or damage the engine from excessive manifold and hence internal cylinder pressures. The difference is like a having only one gearing and then putting on a new gear box to give you two gears or gearing ratios. Selecting the HI gear was for when you passed the critical altitude or lower atmospheric pressure (generally about 10-13000 ft) so you changed the gear to then get the supercharger to keep delivering higher pressure into the manifolds. Supercharging and turbocharging (came later) was the only way you could overcome the problem of rapidly decreasing air pressure at higher altitudes and hence keep the engine developing good power. The fixed geared supercharger was a simple fix for engine power and in the types they were first fitted , single pilot fighters etc the complexity of gearing and boost settings was considered too difficult and inappropriate in a combat environment where you just needed to go go go. I well remember my first introduction to a geared turbocharged engine and you were taught to gently bring up the power to a certain MP let it stabilise and then slowly and carefully increase the throttle settings as the supercharge kicked in because if you slammed them open the supercharger would very rapidly overboost the engine because all that rotating metal takes a little time to spin up and increase its RPM (Crankshaft weight etc etc), overboost on take off guaranteed a catastrophic engine failure with cylinder literally being blown of the crankcase. Anyway best as I remember this stuff FWIW.

In the sim with these type of aircraft I still employ the same technique and even the Spit or similar i do not give them full or high boost until well away and climbing steadily they are already producing the power you need to get going anway besides the torque reaction is too hard to control otherwise.

The area of piston engine dynamics is one area where the folk who did the sim engine design did a very good job and I think were amazingly clever to capture these issues and factors - turbines not so much because turbines actually work very differently in terms of pressures temperatures, volumetric flow etc etc.

 

[BendyFlyer]

Ok got the hang of the reverse and amazing for an aeroplane this size to land and take off in these distances. A great deal of fun as well. Again well done Manfreed. This is a gem!

The Bev at RAF GAN in the Indian Ocean.

 

[jankees]

is there room in your hangar for another Beverley, XH123 of 47 Sqn ?

2020-5-31_9-25-1-777

2020-5-31_9-26-6-84

2020-5-31_9-26-41-151

I ask, because it is such a huge bird..

 

[BendyFlyer]

JK certainly is room in mine for another Bev. I have parked all the tubeliners in the desert hangar and gone back to pistons. Have not even started to have fun with this one into weird and wacky places, short and rough strips etc.

 

[mjahn]

Okay, after sexing up the boost gauge a bit I have tentatively put it in the engine 1 slot. The grey 9-16 arc I have seen on another picture of a Beverley cockpit. The actual boost value here is 9.2 and the rest you can read off from the Monitor. Anybody want to try it for the full 4 engine set? It only requires very few mods. Whether one can actually make it tally up with the necessary RPM etc. I don't know.

 

[BendyFlyer]

MJ - I would be happy to check out the Boost gauge set up, a little bit of panel config changes to replace the relevant panel config lines with the new gauge and the gauge (xml and bmps) would all that would be required. I have the time on my hands to also cross reference against the Beverley Manual since Covid arrived my real aviation days are now permanent retirement so I have the time and the interest.

 

[Scianoir]

That is strange, I've never heard of that before. I take it you are using the default installation, not a tweaked one. Multiplayer? "On glidepath" belongs to the PAR controller's calls but apparently PAR hasn't even been turned on, nor should it give any calls when the Beverley is sitting on the runway. Could another instance of the GCA be running in the background? I would investigate along these lines.

Anyway, there are ways to test this. First, when this happens the next time make a screenshot of the Autopilot with the AILA gauge and the Monitor panel and post it here. We can then try readouts of suspect variables in the Monitor 'Test' window.

To temporarily disable the GCA stuff, comment out the following lines in the panel.cfg's [Window03], like so:

//gauge02=GCA_dsd_P3Dv4_xml_x64_sound!Sound, 1,1,1,1,/GCA/gcacalls.ini
//gauge03=GCA!PAR, 0,0,1,1
//gauge04=GCA!APC, 0,0,1,1

Thank you for the very rapid reply, Manfred. Yes, I am using the default FSX-Acceleration with no tweaks apart from the usual highmemfix and not using multiplayer. As far as I am aware the only other GCA system that I have installed was in your C-47 and I have one entry in my airplanes folder related to this - Douglas C-47 GCA-MVC. I flew this GCA equipped model quite a few times to master this technique after first installing it a couple of years ago and there were no problems but haven't used it since then although I have flown the other (non-GCA) C-47s quite a lot in the interim with no unexpected voice callouts. I cannot see any obvious evidence of another instance of the GCA running in the background but perhaps I may be missing something.

I am attaching a screenshot as you requested - this is just after loading the aircraft on the active runway and I have selected the airport (EINN) on the AILA gauge but done nothing else. The intermittent "on glidepath" callout starts as soon as I load the Beverley and before I even open the AILA gauge and I can confirm that the callout voice is that from the GCA_onglidep.wav file in the panel/GCA/calls folder.

This isn't a huge issue for me and I am very happy to use the aircraft with the GCA stuff disabled if necessary, so, unless the solution is obvious, please don't feel you need to spend too much of your valuable time trying to solve this!
Thanks again,

Bill

 

[BendyFlyer]

If you're interested, the formula I have to convert from Boost to Hg" is (Boost x 2.036021)+29.92126. The question I have for someone else is whether that is only true with standard atmospheric pressure (29.92" Hg). Do with it what you will!

A

Nagpaw the boost values or MP are based on ISA standard pressure. All aircraft are calibrated to ISA standards which is why the various other performance charts have to be devised to show changes in either power settings or speeds etc for ISA deviations (+ and -). In effect the difference will only show with needing less boost or MP or more boost or MP dependant on the deviation from ISA generally in terms of temperature not pressure per se but the standard measurements are then applied either way (temp decreases by 2 degrees per thousand feet and pressure is the equivalent of 30 ft for every 1 Hpa but density changes is calculated at 120 ft difference for every 1 degreee) that is why they give you the charts so you do not have to plot the values for such variations mathematically all the time. It is tricky to get your head around and all newbie real pilots struggle with it at first especially the problem that IAS is not TAS (which is why jets get a Mach meter and only use the IAS at low altitudes, IAS is useless above about F150 to work out speed) after awhile they get the relationship, pressure decreases with height, temperature decreases with height because both temp and pressure mean a change in the relative density of air which has a significant impact on speed and power both. Where everyone comes to grief is when its hot (ISA +) so the air density is less or when its a pressure difference not a temperature difference which could take you the other way (Highs and Low Pressure systems). HUH? Yeah thats enough for today. Basically if the manual says use that power setting - use it! and FSX has already worked it out for you anyway, clever chaps - they really did their homework which is why it gets so real for us and when really clever folk like MJ do very good models they do what the real aeroplane did!

 

[Motormouse]

Thats another reason to love flight sim, you get to fly these weird and wonderful aircraft and you never never have to deal with the FAA, CAA and CASA. That in itself is well, priceless.

Or the overbloated paperwork factory that is EASA..

The 'Whistling tit' (AW Argosy) was lucky, the civilian one came first...

Ttfn

Pete

 

[Motormouse]

All aircraft are calibrated to ISA standards .....
It is tricky to get your head around and all newbie real pilots struggle with it at first

That made me giggle, the number of times I have to ask professional "drivers, airframe" of the current turboprop type I work on nowadays, if they have allowed for ISA variation when they moan about climb performance!

Ttfn

Pete