-
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
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Need help with O. Fischer's Bucker Jungmann
- Thread starter bkeske
- Start date
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.
falcon409
SOH-CM-2025
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:
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:
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.
falcon409
SOH-CM-2025
Just another example of why I enjoy playing in the SOH forum, lol:salute:
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.
txnetcop
Charter Member
I figured out my mistake. I had replaced the buki aircraft.cfg with the original. Oooops....all sorted now. Thanks
vora
Charter Member
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).
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).