SCS Tu-134 v2.0 FSX portover

[Bjoern]

Adding a "Cold&Dark" button to get your stupid cold&dark condition back in.


- Edit:
The button only works on the ground and after a right-click on the confirmation question to avoid accidential triggering.

 

[Adonis]

As long as keep a few things in mind, the electrical system is actually very docile...

Dead radios are caused by the MSFS-internal battery draining because the MSFS-internal alternators are - by default - not connected to the MSFS-internal engines. That was my very first fix and the generators are now always active. The battery will still drain if the engines are not running.
The systems and indicators freezing up despite there being elelctrical power is either due to a bug or due to generator overload. In any case, the "Connect Lock" button on the elctrical panel will fix it.
If you've got too much stuff on the electrical buses you can't start up the APU anymore, but that's okay if kept in mind during operation.

For the last time on my part, drop the arrogance and talk to Vlad/Tushka/vl82m!

Roll back the edits you need to do for the Load/Save mod if you actually want that stuff back in.
I won't touch it.

And I don't care about a partial plane turn on. Takes you 2 seconds worth to get that out yourself, and it serves no practical purpose to any of us who know this plane.

For the last time: I AM NOT REBUILDING THE F'IN 2D PANELS. End of discussion.

For something that would realistically take like 10 minutes for you to accomplish and put as a separate panel option, I really don't understand your aversion to this. And no need to shout with uppercase.

I doubt it. It was an edit akin to replacing "(Variable) 0 > if{...}els{...}" with "(Variable) 1 == if{...} (Variable) 0 == if{...}". Same result, but more explicitly expressed.

You have any idea what that change could do to the gauge now that you know what it is?

Whatever the motivation for the original edit, I totally concur with it. I've never liked writing "||" for "or" and "&&" for "and".

I cannot find any of those instances in the FS9 version of the gauge.

Nope, didn't change. Quite peculiar as one could have simply used a custom animation powered by an "L:" var. But I don't mind, it's fixed now.

Only that with your version of the plane's load it starts open, without it it starts closed on the external model mind you.

I'm still not much of a fan for going a completely separate route from the default MSFS autopilot systems (as they have very good PID controllers), but whoever did this did a commendable job because autoland works.

This is again something you seem to not know, the autopilot logic in Russian planes is different to western systems (which the stock system simulates BTW). This is the reason for example that the TU-154's don't even use the default joystick system at all but use a gauge specifically written for them. Plus, the autopilot needs to be disconnected and manually landed at most 30 meters altitude.

Payload points did not change from the FS9 version.

They actually did:
FS9 version:

[weight_and_balance]


max_gross_weight = 108026.5
empty_weight = 65978
reference_datum_position = 0, 0, 0
empty_weight_CG_position = -6.75.000, 0, 0
empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 3000000
empty_weight_roll_MOI = 1800000
empty_weight_yaw_MOI = 3000000
empty_weight_coupled_MOI = 0
max_number_of_stations = 50


station_load.0= "176.000, 54.95, 0.000, 0.000, ШТУРМАН" 
station_load.1= "530.000, 48.79, 0.000, 0.000, ЭКИПАЖ"
station_load.2= "12566.000, 5.91, 0.000, 0.000, 76 ПАСС" 
station_load.3= "253.532, 34.45, 0.000, 0.000, б/ПР+ПРОД" 
station_load.4= "143.400, -21.98, 0.000, 0.000, б/ПР/ЗАД" 
station_load.5= "1322.774, 42.01, 0.000, 0.000, ПЕРЕД/БАГ" 
station_load.6= "3968.321, -27.72, 0.000, 0.000, ЗАДН/БАГ"

Original FSX version right after the install:

[weight_and_balance]


max_gross_weight = 108026.5
empty_weight = 65978
reference_datum_position = 0, 0, 0
empty_weight_CG_position = -5, 0, 0
empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 3000000
empty_weight_roll_MOI = 1800000
empty_weight_yaw_MOI = 3000000
empty_weight_coupled_MOI = 0
max_number_of_stations = 4


station_load.0 = "680, 43, 0, 0, Crew"
station_load.1 = "0, 0, 0, 0, Passengers"
station_load.2 = "0, 35, 0, 0, Front Baggage"
station_load.3 = "0, -25, 0, 0, Rear Baggage"

Nope, can't be fixed. The clickspots are invisible polygons in the model file.
Native FSX models (*) could simply declare the entire selector as clickable without any tricks.

*Probably FS9 models as well. It's been a while.

Noted.

It's clickable alright, but it doesn't seem to affect any variable.

It's goes (from left to right) COMM2/BOTH/COMM1/RSBN/NDB1VOR1/NDB2VOR2.

 

[Adonis]

Adding a "Cold&Dark" button to get your stupid cold&dark condition back in.


- Edit:
The button only works on the ground and after a right-click on the confirmation question to avoid accidential triggering.

No need to get down to that level of attitude, but thanks.

 

[Bjoern]

For the last time on my part, drop the arrogance and talk to Vlad/Tushka/vl82m!

Guess who I'm talking to most of the time...

And I don't care about a partial plane turn on. Takes you 2 seconds worth to get that out yourself, and it serves no practical purpose to any of us who know this plane.

Yes, you may know the real plane, but this is a home simulation of it and thus subject to differing circumstances.

For something that would realistically take like 10 minutes for you to accomplish and put as a separate panel option, I really don't understand your aversion to this. And no need to shout with uppercase.

All of my work so far was catering for flying from the VC. The 5 million aircraft reloads I had to do to get the camera positions exactly right, building the helper panel, documenting the differences between 2D panels and VC, making sure that every bloody switch knob and lever in the cockpit makes a sound when clicked and even putting together a sound for the wipers (which are not present in the 2D). Any step away from this back to the 2D panels is akin to voiding my efforts. And voiding my efforts is not something I am even remotely willing to do after I've invested so much time - which I actually should be spending on more important stuff - in this project.

If you really want the 2D panels back, take my patched up version, put the panels in yourself and publish the result as a project fork. I, for my part, am fine with that.

You have any idea what that change could do to the gauge now that you know what it is?

The basic expression evaluation stays unchanged.

I cannot find any of those instances in the FS9 version of the gauge.

That's because it contains only the "&&"s. The "||" was an example to drive the point home.

Only that with your version of the plane's load it starts open, without it it starts closed on the external model mind you.

Well, there is a piece of default code that retracts the lights after it is loaded.
With the old version of the Load/Save stuff, I've instructed to remove it along with the fuel cutoff, but I modified that part of the installation instructions to leave the automatic light retraction in.

This is again something you seem to not know, the autopilot logic in Russian planes is different to western systems (which the stock system simulates BTW). This is the reason for example that the TU-154's don't even use the default joystick system at all but use a gauge specifically written for them. Plus, the autopilot needs to be disconnected and manually landed at most 30 meters altitude.

No, the basic modes (Attitude hold, altitude hold, heading hold, NAV hold, approach mode) are not different to any western autopilot from the same timeframe. The only thing that is really different is support for RSBN-related things in "NAV hold" and "approach" modes.

They actually did:
FS9 version:
...

Original FSX version right after the install:
...

Version 2.0 straight from the SCS homepage:

station_load.0 = "680, 43, 0, 0, Crew"
station_load.1 = "0, 0, 0, 0, Passengers"
station_load.2 = "0, 35, 0, 0, Front Baggage"
station_load.3 = "0, -25, 0, 0, Rear Baggage"

FSX version, Sept '14:

station_load.0 = "680, 43, 0, 0, Crew"
station_load.1 = "0, 0, 0, 0, Passengers"
station_load.2 = "0, 35, 0, 0, Front Baggage"
station_load.3 = "0, -25, 0, 0, Rear Baggage"

What I have (for whatever reason):

station_load.0= "176.000, 54.95, 0.000, 0.000, Navigator"
station_load.1= "530.000, 48.79, 0.000, 0.000, Pilots"
station_load.2= "0, 5.91, 0.000, 0.000, 76 PAX"
station_load.3= "253.532, 34.45, 0.000, 0.000, Front Steward+Eq"
station_load.4= "143.400, -21.98, 0.000, 0.000, Aft Steward+Eq"
station_load.5= "0, 42.01, 0.000, 0.000, Front Bag"
station_load.6= "0, -27.72, 0.000, 0.000, Aft Bag"

It's goes (from left to right) COMM2/BOTH/COMM1/RSBN/NDB1VOR1/NDB2VOR2.

Still, I can't fix it in the VC.



And to make one thing clear:
I'm not interested in making this the most realistic simulation of a Tu-134 ever. If something doesn't work exactly like on the real plane, it shall not be my problem.

 

[Adonis]

And to make one thing clear:
I'm not interested in making this the most realistic simulation of a Tu-134 ever. If something doesn't work exactly like on the real plane, it shall not be my problem.

Then you are of absolutely no use to people who fly this plane in Flight Simulator at all.

 

[roger-wilco-66]

Then you are of absolutely no use to people who fly this plane in Flight Simulator at all.

I've been follwing this thread for a while now with much interest and admire the work and efforts people are willing to put into such a project and share the results with others in the community.
From that standpoint I personally think this insulting remark is absolutely way over the top since you don't represent "all the people who fly this plane..." and I'm sure there are a lot of people who appreciate Bjoerns efforts here.

My 2ct.

Mark

 

[Adonis]

I've been follwing this thread for a while now with much interest and admire the work and efforts people are willing to put into such a project and share the results with others in the community.
From that standpoint I personally think this insulting remark is absolutely way over the top since you don't represent "all the people who fly this plane..." and I'm sure there are a lot of people who appreciate Bjoerns efforts here.

My 2ct.

Mark

I don't think it that way. He doesn't listen to reason and wants to turn the plane into a kids toy instead of fixing it adequately, and fails to respect the differences between western and Russian planes. Not an insult, but simple fact.

 

[stovall]

Ok, from this point on information will be directed at the topic at hand, the SCS Tu-134 v2.0 port over. Disparaging remarks about people or their abilities are not tolerated. I would much rather see this thread stay open and productive. If that is not possible it will be closed.

 

[Adonis]

Ok, from this point on information will be directed at the topic at hand, the SCS Tu-134 v2.0 port over. Disparaging remarks about people or their abilities are not tolerated. I would much rather see this thread stay open and productive. If that is not possible it will be closed.

If Bjoern keeps disrespecting the differences of this plane compared to western ones (which I doubt he will not do) and do childish remarks like:

Adding a "Cold&Dark" button to get your stupid cold&dark condition back in.

you might as well close it right now as far as I am concerned.

 

[stovall]

Looks like this thread has run its course.