• 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.

SOH Team Project - Grumman Tracker, Trader, Tracer

S-2 Turbo variants

I've been researching information and pics of the turbo prop variants for awhile. There appear to be basically three main turboprop variants.

1. The Marsh/IAI version Milton has done, which was used by the Argentine Navy. (the only military user of this variant) This version retained the vibration damper on the left horizontal stab and was converted from the long fuselage and long stabilizer S-2E/G Tracker. In my previous post, I included a pic of the prototype in USN markings still.

2. The Marsh tanker conversion used by the CDF, most of which appear to be converted S-2E/G Trackers. Notably, the CDF birds do not have the vibration damper on the left stab. This would be a de-militarized version of Milton's bird with a more pointy nose cap and pointy chromed spinners. Marsh also converted a few S-2A's to Turbo Tracker configuration as tankers, which retained the S-2A stabilizers.

3. The Grumman conversion used by the Taiwanese forces, which used the same engine (Garrett) as the Marsh conversions but had a 4 bladed prop and different exhausts. The nacelle is similar to the Marsh conversion. Notably, these didn't retain the searchlight.

4. The Conair conversions which used the PT-6 engines with 5 bladed props. This engine has exhausts on both side of the nacelle near the front (due to the PT6 being a reverse flow engine, inlet at the aft end and exhaust at the front). These were conversions of CS2F's and S-2A's with short fuselages and stabilisers. These appear to have retained the vibration dampers on the stabilizer. These also have the more pointed nose cap.

Just putting this out there to help clarify versions and available color schemes, especially for the version Milton has produced. Information is good!

Dave
 
fliger747 said:
Milton:

In attempting arested landings in FSX (accel) I get no hook engagement, I don't see any significant erros or omissions as compared to say the F7F in the cfg file.

Any ideas?

T
Click to expand...

I see that you got this corrected. :)

p3aewguy said:
Milton,

Here are a couple of prop pics. Don't know if they'll help.

Dave
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave; I used a prop from your first picture originally but it is too small for any clarity.

p3aewguy said:
I've been researching information and pics of the turbo prop variants for awhile. There appear to be basically three main turboprop variants.

1. The Marsh/IAI version Milton has done, which was used by the Argentine Navy. (the only military user of this variant) This version retained the vibration damper on the left horizontal stab and was converted from the long fuselage and long stabilizer S-2E/G Tracker. In my previous post, I included a pic of the prototype in USN markings still.

2. The Marsh tanker conversion used by the CDF, most of which appear to be converted S-2E/G Trackers. Notably, the CDF birds do not have the vibration damper on the left stab. This would be a de-militarized version of Milton's bird with a more pointy nose cap and pointy chromed spinners. Marsh also converted a few S-2A's to Turbo Tracker configuration as tankers, which retained the S-2A stabilizers.

3. The Grumman conversion used by the Taiwanese forces, which used the same engine (Garrett) as the Marsh conversions but had a 4 bladed prop and different exhausts. The nacelle is similar to the Marsh conversion. Notably, these didn't retain the searchlight.

4. The Conair conversions which used the PT-6 engines with 5 bladed props. This engine has exhausts on both side of the nacelle near the front (due to the PT6 being a reverse flow engine, inlet at the aft end and exhaust at the front). These were conversions of CS2F's and S-2A's with short fuselages and stabilisers. These appear to have retained the vibration dampers on the stabilizer. These also have the more pointed nose cap.

Just putting this out there to help clarify versions and available color schemes, especially for the version Milton has produced. Information is good!

Dave
Click to expand...

Thank you Dave; great stuff here. I appreciate all your efforts in research. :)

I plan to do the first and second versions, maybe the fourth. The first military conversion looked easiest to do so that is the start for me.
 
Wing Fold Operation Question

Based on videos I have seen, the wing fold ops are very slow. When I mimmick this in the sim, it makes the folding ops jerky.

1. Does anyone know how to improve this with gmax animation changes?

2. If you want to smooth out the folding ops, you can speed up the process by changing these parameters in the aircraft.cfg:

[folding_wings]
wing_fold_system_type = 4
fold_rates = .02,.04

Numbers like .2, .3 (% per second per wing (left,right I think)

Some have asked about the pilot figures.
JAVIS is working on replacements for both.
I am working on "disappearing xml code" (Thank you Lionheart) to make them disappear at your discretion.

JAVIS has the gmax source to start the S2F-1. Thank you Sir for doing this one. :applause:

Regarding wing lights, not the best as they are gmax lights required because folding wings cannot use effects lights.

I have sent euroastar350 the gmax source for the FSX native conversion. :running:

I have sent Fliger the new S2T model to check out the flight model. :kilroy:
Does anyone have performance data for the S2T military version?That would be a great help.


We are awaiting the E-1B paint kit from Smoothie and simkid22; shouldn't be long. :mixedsmi:
I sent simkid22 the materials to build the same for the S2F-3. These guys are really busy so we should be patient.

Nigel has created an awesome sounds package. I think you will love this one. :applause:

Regarding sounds for the S2T, I borrowed the KA350 sounds for testing but I hope we can do something better. They may be realistic (if so, okay) but if not, ... maybe someone can recommend something else.

Does anyone have credible performance data for the S2F-3? Fliger could use it to tweak the FM.

Thanks to all of you for your interest and support. :applause:
 
I looked and flew and looked and flew,did the VC walk-through,checked all animations in and out(in flight and on the ground)and found only one teenie-tiny problem.By the way they both fly sweeeeeeet,and that sound - WOW!
The animation for the port(left)elevator is a little off(as seen in attached screen capture). Not a big problem,I can live with it.I wasn't sure if it had been addressed all ready.
To all involved: :applause::applause::applause:
Horus J(Joel)
View attachment 49547
 
HorusJ said:
I looked and flew and looked and flew,did the VC walk-through,checked all animations in and out(in flight and on the ground)and found only one teenie-tiny problem.By the way they both fly sweeeeeeet,and that sound - WOW!
The animation for the port(left)elevator is a little off(as seen in attached screen capture). Not a big problem,I can live with it.I wasn't sure if it had been addressed all ready.
To all involved: :applause::applause::applause:
Horus J(Joel)
View attachment 49547
Click to expand...

Hey Joel,

Great catch! I must have messed that up along the way unknowingly. Thanks. :)
 
It has a Hook...

...and I haven't had a carrier plane since the last Big Flush.
I remember there were various options for this, ranging from 3-wire addons to special gauges.
What would be best for this one, to trap and launch?
 
About wingfold...

You are dead on about the rates being an expression of percent. 0.10 would be 10% per second, or ten seconds to fold. 0.05 would be 5% per second (20 seconds) and 0.5 would be a whopping 50% per second (2 seconds for full travel). This parameter was left out of the Container SDK, so I'm not certain if using two rates will govern right/left separately, or if it's a different rate for fold vs. unfold. I'm not on my FS rig right now so I can't test it.

Math Edit: If the wings take 15 seconds to fold/unfold, then use the decimal value of 1/15, or 0.067 for the rate.
 
Tom Clayton said:
You are dead on about the rates being an expression of percent. 0.10 would be 10% per second, or ten seconds to fold. 0.05 would be 5% per second (20 seconds) and 0.5 would be a whopping 50% per second (2 seconds for full travel). This parameter was left out of the Container SDK, so I'm not certain if using two rates will govern right/left separately, or if it's a different rate for fold vs. unfold. I'm not on my FS rig right now so I can't test it.

Math Edit: If the wings take 15 seconds to fold/unfold, then use the decimal value of 1/15, or 0.067 for the rate.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification Tom. Yes, the two numbers govern the wings separately as I have it now. The port wing is slower by around 20 seconds in the videos I saw.

Back many years ago, maybe '03 or '04, there was discussion about getting more smoothness on these longer time frame animations but I haven't fopund it yet.

In the interest of smoothness, using a faster rate will definitely smooth the animations.
 
Been testing too

HorusJ said:
I looked and flew and looked and flew,did the VC walk-through,checked all animations in and out(in flight and on the ground)and found only one teenie-tiny problem.By the way they both fly sweeeeeeet,and that sound - WOW!
The animation for the port(left)elevator is a little off(as seen in attached screen capture). Not a big problem,I can live with it.I wasn't sure if it had been addressed all ready.
To all involved: :applause::applause::applause:
Horus J(Joel)
View attachment 49547
Click to expand...

Milton,

In addition to the above mentioned animation on the S-2, the E-1B is missing the CSD scoops on the right side neacelles. The Late model S-2D/E/G and the E-1B's had these. The S-2A/B/C/F, C-1A and the CS2F aircraft (the short fuselage) and their sub variants did not have these. If it can be corrected, great, if not, cest la vie! I can live with it! They both fly great and the sounds are good! All the animations on the E-1B look good! This is another fantastic project!!!! I was up till 3 am puttering around in these! LOL!

Dave
 
p3aewguy said:
Milton,

In addition to the above mentioned animation on the S-2, the E-1B is missing the CSD scoops on the right side neacelles. The Late model S-2D/E/G and the E-1B's had these. The S-2A/B/C/F, C-1A and the CS2F aircraft (the short fuselage) and their sub variants did not have these. If it can be corrected, great, if not, cest la vie! I can live with it! They both fly great and the sounds are good! All the animations on the E-1B look good! This is another fantastic project!!!! I was up till 3 am puttering around in these! LOL!

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave, thanks for this observation. I will add the CSD scoop to the starboard nacelle of the E-1B.

EDIT: Dave, the best I can determine, the S2F-3 had this same scoop on both nacelles, starboard side only, and the S2F-3 has two scoops, one on each nacelle. Is this the same for the E-1B?
 
Milton Shupe said:
Dave, thanks for this observation. I will add the CSD scoop to the starboard nacelle of the E-1B.
Click to expand...

Milton,

Should be on the right/ starboard side of both nacelles, just like the S-2E (S2F-3). Thanks! Was just up flying it again! LOL! Can't keep my hands off it! That huge rudder allows great engine out control, yup, been practicing emergency proceedures! Flight model seems good, for me not being a real life Stoof driver. Gonna be interesting to see what a real world Stoof driver will think about it. Great controllabilty with just a touch of "you really have to pay attention to it" thrown in. Awesome Bird!

Dave

Edit: That's correct. The later model Stoofs and the E-1B all had the CSD's (Constant Speed Drive for AC (alternating current) generators, which have to run at a certain rpm for frequency ,or hertz, control) to operate the higher powered ASW equipment and radars. The Early Stoofs used DC electrical power for this and did not have CSD's.
 
Thank you Dave. These have now been added to the E-1B

I have also corrected the elevator pivot on both the E-1B and S2F-3 as pointed out by HorusJ. :jump:
 
Cool, dont think I've ever seen the nose wheel spin freely like that after trapping on any other model.
Been watching this one for a while, cant believe how fast its coming together :guinness:

Craig.

ps. whos arm do the FSX guys have to twist to get that Majestic class carrier. Don't know if it would even be possible but it would fill a gap in the carriers available:kilroy:
 
I have been doing the flight development in FSX Accel, which is great for carrier employment. I was haveing some difficulty in having the hook engage the "cross deck pendants" so Milton and I are collaborating on adjusting the hook points.

Cheers: Tom
 
Tail Hook Coordinates

These are the actual tail hook coordinates for the S2F-3 and S2T:

S2F-3 and S2Turbo Tailhook positions at the pivot location of the tail hook:

Length =7.428'
Long: = -19.488'
Vert: = -3.221'

Since the FS2004 SDK makes no mention of the Tail Hook, I wonder if there is an assumed "angle of the dangle" since it is not specified in the cfg parameters.

Tom says he can not get a capture with this -3.221' vertical number but seems to work with -1'.

We are still looking at this.

For the E-1B, the gmax coordinates for the tail hook pivot are:

[TailHook]

tailhook_length= 6.758 ;(feet)

tailhook_position= -19.180, 0.0, -3.159 ;(feet) longitudinal, lateral, vertical positions from datum

cable_force_adjust=1.0

Again, the vertical number may not work.
Tom will zero in on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top