• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

PAD Releases KC-135R

D

dandee

Member
It's available at www.premaircraft.com

img0.gif
 
I see they made the oh-so-common mistake of installing reverse thrust. The civilian version of that engine may have reverse, but the only KC-135 to ever have reverse was the "E" model. It's still an easy fix in the aircraft.cfg though - minimum throttle goes to zero along with the reverse available line.
 
Well, I need all the landing help I can get

This model fills a niche for me in Recorder Module scenarios.
Thanks PAD, hours of play ahead.

I've also loved the B707 shape since I could remember, and it lives on here.

KC135F15.jpg


These planes are good for another 20 years, I think they should keep 'em.
 
Wing_Z said:
This model fills a niche for me in Recorder Module scenarios.
Thanks PAD, hours of play ahead.

I've also loved the B707 shape since I could remember, and it lives on here.

KC135F15.jpg


These planes are good for another 20 years, I think they should keep 'em.
Click to expand...

I was going to say almost the same thing and post almost the same picture....except they were going to be Phantoms hitting on the tanker. LOL.
 
Tom Clayton said:
I see they made the oh-so-common mistake of installing reverse thrust. The civilian version of that engine may have reverse, but the only KC-135 to ever have reverse was the "E" model. It's still an easy fix in the aircraft.cfg though - minimum throttle goes to zero along with the reverse available line.
Click to expand...

We seem to be stuck in a 'no win' situation with regard to reverse thrust. :frown: Our Do328Jet was modelled (correctly) with no reverse thrust and ever since release the support staff (me) has been receiving emails from users complaining that the reverse thrust does not work.
It didn't even occur to me that such a big and heavy aircraft like the KC-135 would not have engine assisted braking so when my design partner asked if he should build in reverse thrust I answered 'of course' without even checking.

I've decided to leave it as it is, those who want it, have it. Those who don't want it can ignore
it or alter the aircraft.cfg :wiggle:

Bob.
 
I like having a KC-135, been waiting for a while for a good freeware model and this one works fine. I don't mind having the reversers on the engines... it's saved me a couple times from running off the end of runway...:eek: My thanks to PAD for their hard work and effort!

BB686:USA-flag:
 
bobmay said:
We seem to be stuck in a 'no win' situation with regard to reverse thrust. :frown: Our Do328Jet was modelled (correctly) with no reverse thrust and ever since release the support staff (me) has been receiving emails from users complaining that the reverse thrust does not work.
It didn't even occur to me that such a big and heavy aircraft like the KC-135 would not have engine assisted braking so when my design partner asked if he should build in reverse thrust I answered 'of course' without even checking.

I've decided to leave it as it is, those who want it, have it. Those who don't want it can ignore
it or alter the aircraft.cfg :wiggle:

Bob.
Click to expand...

No big deal Bob!:wavey: I just happen to be one of the few people with an "inside track" on that airframe since I was ground crew on "A" models back in the 80's. The way I understand it, the reversers were omitted to save maint. costs. As for stopping, the missions are planned so that they land with minimal fuel on board, and runways at tanker bases are in the two-mile range anyway. Most pilots I knew liked to use most of the runway to keep the brakes from getting too hot.
 
stuartcox said:
Great to have this tanker in my fleet!
Just a shame having to sacrifice some of the positioning lights if installing Shockwave 3D landing lights.
View attachment 10993
Click to expand...

What's your [lights] section look like, then?
I've replaced the recognition lights with SW ones, and put red ones at the front (fx_shockwave_navred_nl)

Other question for Bob: it's really cool that the lights go out as you pan around.
Wouldn't it be possible to "turn" them so they are visible from behind and below, rather than the front?
 
Wing_Z said:
Other question for Bob: it's really cool that the lights go out as you pan around.
Wouldn't it be possible to "turn" them so they are visible from behind and below, rather than the front?
Click to expand...

The lights going out as you pan is an unintended effect ! Maybe if I lowered the lights an inch or two they would be more visible from behind. The lights are just default navigation lights that I designated as recognition lights, they are not directional. They are in approximately the right place for realism but I can't see how I'm ever going to achieve the real life effect of them changing color or switching on and off to indicate 'high' or 'low' approaches by the receiving aircraft. Nice idea, but ....

Anyhow, the [lights] section of the aircraft.cfg is one of the simpler bits to play with, maybe someone else can come up with something better.

Bob.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top