• 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.

Any fans of the Cessna big twins here ?

phantomx1 said:
On my machine it bounces like riding over rough terrain on both take off and landing. Anything below about 10-15 kts is smooth. Above that it's like taking off or landing across the rows of a corn field even though I'm on the paved runway.
Click to expand...

A few people have reported this "bouncing" on the takoff run and the landing roll out but I don't see it and our beta testers didn't see it (and from comments here others don't either)
It's almost impossible to fix a problem you can't see, so if anyone who gets this bouncing effect finds a cause and/or a cure please let me know, either through this forum or direct to support @premaircraft.com.

Bob
PAD
 
I'm getting the same type of bouncing as well. But since I'm running FS2002 I didn't bother to pass it on as the old system often causes odd things to FS2004 FDE's.

The good thing is PAD obviously installed a strong landing gear as I've yet to nose her into the runway.
 
_ben said:
Joe
I've dl fs9 and fsx versions - the fsx version is much tougher to turn
than the fs9 version.
I've only been behind a c172 yoke so I was mondering which is closer to
reality in your experience?
ps thanks PAD for your efforts
ben
Click to expand...

I havent had the chance to fly the FSX version of the 414, but ill try to compare it to the 172 for ya:

Well, if you are talking about taxiing the airplane, (and I regularly in real life fly both my 414 and a C172) the 414 is MUCH heavier on the rudder pedals. You have to start applying pressure on the pedals a bit before you actually want to make the turn, and you often have to use opposite rudder pedal to help round the turn out and get the airplane moving in a straight line again. One interesting characteristic about the 414 that we weren't able to simulate was the differential braking tendencies with extremely tight turning. When you maneuver the 414 in a very tight area that require full rudder in one direction AND differential braking, as soon as the rudder pedals are pushed entirely in one direction, the opposite brake pedal becomes inoperative. This means that the only way to round out a tight turn is to use opposite rudder to round it out, then use opposite brake if necessary when it regains effectiveness. The lesson learned here is that when you are making on-the-dime turns around a wheel in the 414, dont get the turn going too fast, or you wont be able to stop it where you want to.

If you were talking about flying wise, the 414 is tremendously heavier in both pitch and roll than the 172, which one could gather just by looking at it. Its low speed handling characteristics, particularly at speeds between 85-100 knots, are phenomenal, better than any twin ive ever flown, and are only made better with performance upgrades such as Vortex Generators and Winglets.

Joe
 
bobmay said:
A few people have reported this "bouncing" on the takoff run and the landing roll out but I don't see it and our beta testers didn't see it (and from comments here others don't either)
It's almost impossible to fix a problem you can't see, so if anyone who gets this bouncing effect finds a cause and/or a cure please let me know, either through this forum or direct to support @premaircraft.com.

Bob
PAD
Click to expand...

I also had the bounce during take off and landing. To correct the issue I went into the contact points and took a look at the settings. The Static Compression ratio on the front gear was very low at .099. I changed this to .3 and the bounce went away. While in the contact points I also moved the scrape points around a bit to better match up with the fuselage. Here is a copy of my new contact points. I tried very hard to get the plane to bounce by punishing the landing gear with hard landings, pulling the nose gear up and letting it slam back into the runway...I could not get the plane to bounce. Just nice normal landing gear operations.

[contact_points]
static_pitch = 0
static_cg_height = 3.21
tailwheel_lock = 0
gear_system_type = 0
max_number_of_points = 9

point.0 = 1, 9.533, 0, -3.3, 1181.1, 0, 0.546, 45, 0.3, 2.5, 0.8216, 2.5, 3.5, 0, 0, 0
point.1 = 1, -0.908, -8.906, -3.778, 1574.8, 1, 0.546, 0, 0.5, 2.5, 0.88, 4.7, 4.7, 2, 0, 0
point.2 = 1, -0.908, 8.906, -3.778, 1574.8, 2, 0.546, 0, 0.5, 2.5, 0.88, 5.2, 5.2, 3, 0, 0
point.3 = 2, 0, -22.5, 0.5, 1574.8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0
point.4 = 2, 0, 22.5, 0.5, 1574.8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6, 0, 0
point.5 = 2,-16.33, 0.0, 0.833, 1574.80, 0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,9.00,0.0,0.0
point.6 = 2, 2.416, 0, -1.5, 1574.8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0
point.7 = 2,-16.33, 0.0, 6.833, 1574.80, 0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,7.0,0.0,0.0
point.8 = 5.000,-16.600,-0.000,-0.500,1574.803150,0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000,0.000,4.000,0.000,0.000

OBIO
 
There are two issues regarding the nose bounce problem as I relayed to Bob May this morning.

One is the very stiff nose suspension, the other is the CoG is too far forward which places a lot of weight on the nose.

OBIO is on the nose contact point although you may need to adjust the vertical distance to ground to around -3.6~ to compensate for more static compression.

point.0=1, 9.533, 0.0, -3.600, 1181.10, 0.0, 0.546, 45.0, 0.300, 2.5, 0.8216, 2.5, 3.5, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0

For the CoG correction, in the Airplane Geometry section, replace the current statement with this one:

wing_pos_apex_lon=1.88
 
Thanks for the useful responses guys.

I have now posted a "fix" on our website and from the response so far from users the dreaded bounce seems to have been tamed.

Bob. :running:
PAD
 
capceo said:
I havent had the chance to fly the FSX version of the 414, but ill try to compare it to the 172 for ya:

Well, if you are talking about taxiing the airplane, (and I regularly in real life fly both my 414 and a C172) the 414 is MUCH heavier on the rudder pedals. You have to start applying pressure on the pedals a bit before you actually want to make the turn, and you often have to use opposite rudder pedal to help round the turn out and get the airplane moving in a straight line again. One interesting characteristic about the 414 that we weren't able to simulate was the differential braking tendencies with extremely tight turning. When you maneuver the 414 in a very tight area that require full rudder in one direction AND differential braking, as soon as the rudder pedals are pushed entirely in one direction, the opposite brake pedal becomes inoperative. This means that the only way to round out a tight turn is to use opposite rudder to round it out, then use opposite brake if necessary when it regains effectiveness. The lesson learned here is that when you are making on-the-dime turns around a wheel in the 414, dont get the turn going too fast, or you wont be able to stop it where you want to.

If you were talking about flying wise, the 414 is tremendously heavier in both pitch and roll than the 172, which one could gather just by looking at it. Its low speed handling characteristics, particularly at speeds between 85-100 knots, are phenomenal, better than any twin ive ever flown, and are only made better with performance upgrades such as Vortex Generators and Winglets.

Joe
Click to expand...

Great stuff.
Thanks for that.
Ben
 
We did run into the bouncy Nose Gear issue with our Connies as well and had the same problem that not everyone on the team encountered it....even when using the same FS airport and load conditions.

Using Miltons excellent tutorial on the gear calculation vs visual model we arrived at a fix which included a new MDL with a bit more suspension travel and revised contact points.

Thanks for another great airplane in the hangar to the great folks at PAD.

Stefan
 
Is anyone else having problems with the attitude gauge acting weird? By weird I mean WEIRD!
 
OBIO said:
Is anyone else having problems with the attitude gauge acting weird? By weird I mean WEIRD!
Click to expand...

In a word, YES.
Noticed it yesterday but since it was a VFR approach I was ok.

Otherwise ( and no bouncy gear for me) it's a great model. Nose wheel steering seems a bit sensitive, but that may be my pedal set-up.

Rob
 
I contacted Bob at PAD concerning this issue. Basically it boils down to some of the gauges used in the 414 are PAD originals, some are FS stock....the attitude gauge being FS stock. The fix is to swap out the faulty attitude gauge for one that works.

OBIO
 
OBIO said:
Is anyone else having problems with the attitude gauge acting weird? By weird I mean WEIRD!
Click to expand...

There is now a fix for this on our web site. Not a very clever fix, just a change in the panel.cfg to call the MS stock King Air attitude gauge ( which I guess both FS9 and FSX users will have in their gauges folder) :kilroy:

Bob
PAD
 
Very interesting. Does anyone know of a good Cessna 404 and 402 for FS9? I used to fly real ones with cargo and it would be fun to fly them in the sim.

Thanks and cheers,

Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top