1% discussion

I

Ivan

Charter Member
Hi No Dice,

You might want to check the labels on your 1% aircraft downloads. Some of them are not very clear as to what the aircraft is.

- Ivan.
 
1%

Hello Ivan,
I had them in an old file and just labeled them as to what the files said. I didn't see a readme file so I don't even know who did them. ??

Dave
 
Hi No Dice,

I wasn't thinking about that. I was trying to point out things like:

Spitfire Mk1x instead of Spitfire Mk.IX
and
Me109jg

- Ivan.
 
No Dice said:
Hello Ivan,
I had them in an old file and just labeled them as to what the files said. I didn't see a readme file so I don't even know who did them. ??

Dave
Click to expand...
I have a Word document
by the 714 Assembly Line
if you are interested.
 
Engine Specifications

Hey Folks,

This also might help. I don't necessarily trust the data though.


Hey Smilo,

Perhaps it would be a good idea to move this to a new thread? Seems like we moved way off the original topic.

- Ivan.
 
Hey Smilo,

You wouldn't also happen to have the spreadsheet that goes with it, would you?

- Ivan.
 
I don't have much 1% stuff for CFS1 but I have found their spreadsheets for their airfiles and DP for CFS2. I enclose the files for the FW190A3 as I know that Ivan has done lots of testing for his FW so should have lots of data lying around.

Dave
 
Thanks Dave,

I do have a fair amount of data on the FW 190A that really doesn't agree much with what one typically finds in books. On my FW 190A-8 Flight Model, I actually ran into a problem with adjusting the roll rate. If I have the roll rate and handling match up with documents, the Aileron control factor is so high that AI can't fly the thing. If I drop the control factor so AI can fly it, I can't get the roll rate I am looking for without also dropping the damping which reduces the overall precision of roll control.

Another thing I have wondered about is how to represent the engine power of a late war FW 190. They didn't tend to use MW 50 injection much. "C3 Einspritzung" increased the engine power much like water injection (2000 - 2100 HP over the normal max of 1730 HP) but was useable for almost as long as there was fuel for the plane. It didn't have a 10 minute or 5 minute limit.

- Ivan.
 
at Ivan's request, I will attempt a little forum moderation.
the 1% discussion seemed to be taking over the original topic
of the "Adding visual counters to downloads" thread,
so I will try to create a new 1% thread
and move the related posts here.
cross your fingers and hope this works;

---------------------:kilroy:-------------------------

well, I'll be jiggered, it worked!
 
well, I'll be jiggered, it worked!
Click to expand...

I hope jiggering doesn't hurt too much, smilo. :isadizzy: Bones don't mend that well at our age.

Isn't fun to realize that you can do something you had no idea it could be done. Sometimes, ignorance is really bliss...:kilroy:
 
Ivan

If AI cannot cope with your settings for the roll rate you will just have to develop an AI air file as well. It would be better than the stock cfs FW190 airfile making the plane porpoise as it flies along.
 
Happy Birthday Dave!!!

The porpoising in the stock FW 190A is due to poor values in the trim effects. I believe if you reduce them, the plane will stop porpoising.

The trick with tuning my FW 190A flight model is to find a set of values that will work for both. I believe there is a way to do this but the problem is that it will change some of the physical values. The aileron travel on the real FW 190A is very low. I increased the aileron control factor to compensate, but if I just increased the area or range of motion, perhaps that will work also?

There are more things to do than that: The elevators are too sensitive. The engine performance is still too low for a late model 190A. I already fixed the weird canopy frame issue and put a pilot in, and also animated the cooling fan and reduced the size of the cowl opening. I still need to add the intake bulges on the sides of the cowl.

The work isn't hard, it's just tedious and I don't really want more tedious right about now.

- Ivan.
 
Belated Happy Birthday Dave!:birthday:

I have to agree with Dave here. Where does it says that AI aircraft must have exactly the same AIR file as flyable ones?

CFS1 originals AI non-flyable aircraft are, for the most part, flying bricks, but they still perform their duties reasonably well. I don't think it is the AIR file fault if an AI aircraft reacts weird compared to a flyable one, but the AI engine itself.
 
List of CFS2 Airfiles

Screen Dump of the airfiles/spreadsheets available for the 1% aircraft. Most of the 1% aircraft should be available in the CFS2 library. A couple on the list were updated by me as I found that the differences in some of the aircraft airfiles were significant, especially with one early model aircraft able to take on and defeat late model aircraft with no problems.
 
Hello Seagull V,

Do you happen to have 1% CFS1 Files? Which early model aircraft was the overperforming one?

-Ivan.
 
Porpoising

Ivan said:
(...)

The porpoising in the stock FW 190A is due to poor values in the trim effects. I believe if you reduce them, the plane will stop porpoising.

(...)
- Ivan.
Click to expand...

During Minuteman, smilo and myself joint report on stock aircraft profiles for Joint-Ops, I found that section 1199-50, labeled;*50 Pitch Rate FB?, was causing the porpoising. Changing the value from 70 to 20 did the trick.

In AirEd.ini version 1.52, created by Ron Freimuth and modified by Jerry Beckwith, it is said;
Affects ALT Hold Pitch Stability, Altitude hold in turns and Autoland| 25(small AC) to 670(large AC -not Concorde)
Click to expand...
I hope it helps; it took my whole Sunday evening to found that #\?&|%!"?±@ file!:a1451:

Only three stock aircraft have a value there; P-51D (30), P-47D (10), and Fw 190a (70), others are at zero.

Porpoising on the Spit MkIX and the Bf 109G are related to different things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top