Need help with O. Fischer's Bucker Jungmann

kilo delta said:
An interesting read here..--> Bücker Flight Test<--

And CLICK ME TOO!
Click to expand...

Yea, I found that first one, but not the second. Thanks for that.

One thing is for sure, I think the engine characteristics are much truer modeled in the 'original' file per the comments made within those two articles. As the mod goes to 25,000+ easily, it also seems something is amiss there as well, the figures on that second link correspond to what I fond my range is for cruise. Especially interesting is it says max RPM is 23,000.

But....it terms of flight/axis characteristics, it seems to me the 'mod' file is probably closer per the comments made in both. I also watched about 3 landing video's of the real thing, and it seemed pretty harmless on approach/landing, and more 'typical' to what I would think should be realistic handling properties.

Perhaps there needs to be a marriage of the two. Go back to the original engine performance/characteristics while utilizing the improved handling characteristics of the modded version. But perhaps therein lies the problem.

Anyway....with Ant's Moth, my WACO's, Stearman, Piglets UPF-7, fantastic Lublin's, etc etc etc, perhaps I should just take it for what it is....I do have other choices, and it seems to me there may not be a great solution to this unfortunately. Or, perhaps I crank my 'realism' settings down when flying her....something I have not tried yet.
 
Great find KD. Interesting that in one description the author relates that an approach speed of no less than 60kts should be observed and the other claims an over the threshold speed of no more than 50kts (I found 60 to 65 was about right). Otherwise the only other observation was that the tail should pop up at about 25kts, which wasn't the case when I flew last evening. 45kts was the speed at which the tail came up when I flew.

Based on those two descriptions, I don't see any reason to alter the airfile from the original. To me, it reacts consistent to with documented flight tests.:salute:
 
falcon409 said:
Based on those two descriptions, I don't see any reason to alter the airfile from the original. To me, it reacts consistent to with documented flight tests.:salute:
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you only do sightseeing and shallow turns as you mentioned, the original file is sufficient...but once you get into aerobatics or real stall/spin/slip training you can't use the original file.

@bkeske. Check the HP in the cfg file. I think it's set to 150 or 180 to be able to do vertical maneuvering. If you reduce the HP to the original value you should experience a more 'original' performance.
 
sg38 said:
Yeah, if you only do sightseeing and shallow turns as you mentioned, the original file is sufficient...but once you get into aerobatics or real stall/spin/slip training you can't use the original file.
Click to expand...
Just another example of why I enjoy playing in the SOH forum, lol:salute:
 
sg38 said:
@bkeske. Check the HP in the cfg file. I think it's set to 150 or 180 to be able to do vertical maneuvering. If you reduce the HP to the original value you should experience a more 'original' performance.
Click to expand...

Excellent suggestion. I believe the original was 110 HP for the 'B' model, in the real world.

EDIT: Nope, (slapping head) the aircraft.cfg does not change with the use of the buki.air file vs. the default. That air file must change the power specs within it (?), regardless of what the .cfg says, which is 105 HP, with a max RPM set at 25,000. I guess I could use the buki.air file and lower the 105 to something else to simulate a 105 HP engine, and see what happens.
 
Everything in the cfg file overrides the airfile. So if you change the max power in the cfg to 110 or 105, that 'should' work.
Just checked; The max power in the cfg is 180 and the RPM 2700. Change that to 110 and e.g. 2300RPM
 
sg38 said:
Everything in the cfg file overrides the airfile. So if you change the max power in the cfg to 110 or 105, that 'should' work.
Just checked; The max power in the cfg is 180 and the RPM 2700. Change that to 110 and e.g. 2300RPM
Click to expand...

Wow what a difference a few little changes make! Thanks this baby is an aerobat now!
Ted
 
sg38 said:
Everything in the cfg file overrides the airfile. So if you change the max power in the cfg to 110 or 105, that 'should' work.
Just checked; The max power in the cfg is 180 and the RPM 2700. Change that to 110 and e.g. 2300RPM
Click to expand...


I figured out my mistake. I had replaced the buki aircraft.cfg with the original. Oooops....all sorted now. Thanks
 
More than 20 years ago I flew as a passenger on a Bueckers Jungmann (long before I made my PPL).
The most vivid recollection I have from this flight is the extreme slip angle the pilot used shortly before the landing in order to see the unmarked grass strip he was landing on at EDMT. So the rudder effectiveness must have been pretty good. The motor was not powerful enough for serious aerobatics, IIRC. In hindsight 105 hp sounds about right for me.
The pilot had an aerobatics licence but didn't use the Bueckers but another plane for aerobatics (in which he later fatally crashed).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top