• 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.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

Area 51M U-2S released!

A little research

A manual will be ready in a few days according to an email. I don't have frame-rate VC problems. The VC MFD are not complex at this release. Hopefully future support will add more to this aircraft.

U-2 aircraft have developed in many ways since 1955 which is a long time.

A few websites may help. Plus the James May Youtube video mention in an earlier post.
http://jalopnik.com/5537629/the-140+mph-chase-cars-of-the-us-air-force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123022292
http://www.superb.org/Tu/mgt/u2.htm
 
as far as I know the Developer has worked for Abacus in the past ;)
and no they are not affiliated:)
have to say have all of A51 Helicopters and I am happy and U-2S will be probably my first fixed wing aircraft from them when it apear at fspilotshop

Best Regards
Tom
 
Although I like early U-2s as well (especially the -Cs)....

....I also like the R and S models. Doing the NASA ER-2 would require removing some of the many SIGINT aerials on the bottom of the -S, as well as having a version with and without Senior Span installed.

I hope A51 decides to do the two NASA variants...

K.
 
Hi
For anyone who owns this can I asked how it flies? with your personal opinion ofcourse.
Does it fly 70k feet within "coffin corner". Will it stall if you decrease your airspeed by about 5 - 10 kts at that altitude?

Would really like this to be a great flight model before I buy it!
 
Dougie said:
Hi
For anyone who owns this can I asked how it flies? with your personal opinion ofcourse.
Does it fly 70k feet within "coffin corner". Will it stall if you decrease your airspeed by about 5 - 10 kts at that altitude?

Would really like this to be a great flight model before I buy it!
Click to expand...

My early opinion is that it is vastly superior to very old earlier freeware and payware.
The old Alphasim payware---now freeware----has been updated and is at simviation for those who are curious about high altitude simulation before spending money.

In a few words, yes, in my opinion, the "coffin corner" situation does occur keeping in mind that FSX may not be perfect. Weight is a factor. I set the auto-pilot for cruise at Mach.70 which is about 400 KTAS and about 100 KIAS. However, weight and altitude affect the numbers.

As an example, in one test flight, cruise was 94 KIAS, 373 KTAS, and Mach.64, at a fuel weight of 34% at 70,090 feet. Stall occured when speed dropped to 82 KIAS.

In another example at 73,370 feet, cruise at 96 KIAS, 408 KTAS, Mach.70, weight 35%, stall occured at 84 KIAS.

In my opinion, the greater the weight the lower the altitude and the higher the stall speed. The higher you get in altitude the higher the stall speed but the cruise speed also drops a little making the difference about 10 KIAS so far. At about 80,000 feet there should be less than 10 KIAS. I'll try it but fuel weight will be reduced to get that high.

That is a brief statement that may help. I've been figuring out the auto-pilot without the manual so I look forward to the release of the manual.
 
I'm looking forward to...

....the release of a non-Senior Span ER-2 and a non-Senior Span U-2S...

Bottom line: just take the bloody SS radome off and give us another U-2S .mdl to play with.

K.
 
Has anybody tried the updated U-2? Any feedback? Or screenshots? I am trying to find out if it is worth the money because I really like the U-2.
 
I have. Updated U2 is OK. By that I mean I'm finding it a little underwhelming. With the "Updated" version that adds a NASA and a 2nd USAF bird (still no U2S W/O Senior Span!!), I now am having the devil of a time getting above 60K feet. The first version, I had no problem and got to 70K feet without issue, but not since I "updated". Maybe it is just me, I don't know. Other than the not being able to get to altitude (even with 10% fuel), the plan seems to be real pitch sensitive now. So much so as to not hold steady in a climb. Again, maybe just me.

Just my feedback from several hours flying.

Bill
 
Are you using the auto pilot? The manual isn't released. Perhaps there are answers in it. I will wait for it as well. But I have been to 63,000 feet with fuel at almost 40% since the upgrade.
 
No autopilot to climb.

It just does not seem to get there? I can't get the mach hold, or the pitch hold to work, like at all. Even though on the autopilot pop-up, I get "+", and "-" signs for mach, for example, no matter what, it does not change anything. Also, even though I have centered, and calibrated my Saitek yoke, on take-off with the new model, pitch goes out of control. Major forward pressure on the yoke to keep from stalling out, or trying to vertical (vertical in a U2 - yikes!!).

Bill
 
I think the manual will help all of us but this may be of some help.

The left VC side panel has some mouse click settings on the LCD display itself. Not the switches. I use this to set heading. Altitude is a hold. A study of this side panel and the pop-up AP panel (shift+3) may help.

Yes, flight does seem more difficult as altitude goes up. I'll make some test flights soon.
 
Okay, I took the plunge and bought it. The model looks great and textures as well, but I too wish they had included an earlier version... I find it hard to reach 60.000 feet without stalling, so I have to keep trying.

U-2.jpg
 
A few for fun

A few screenys. A landing with ground effect ---shown at 76 KIAS---floating just above the runway until speed decreases to 73 KIAS for touchdown. Made it to 66,000 feet at low fuel of 16%. Landing flaps were set to extend to the 3rd position, not more.
 
A try

I swapped the air file from the 1st release with the 2nd update release. I was able to reach 81,469 feet at 14% fuel and 86 KIAS for Mach .75 which is just above stall of 82 KIAS. I stalled on purpose for that number but stall may have been 83 KIAS. I was busy, lol. Speed on the ground was high at over 400 KTAS. Cruise climb, so high up, of 100 feet per minute is ok with AP and takes time but is much more stable than my human touch.

The AP was used in different ways to see what happens but human control is to be done with great care if tried in my humble bumble opinion.

I'm also changing parts of the aircraft cfg so many test flights are being simulated.

I'm trying to keep the thread alive and hope it is helpful. I hope others add to the thread.
 
Thanks for the work using the "old" .air file.

I re-tried the "new" one last night, and got her to 65K, and that was it!

Maybe I'll go back to the "old" .air file? At least temp until it gets fully sorted.

Bill
 
make back ups

icycle said:
........Maybe I'll go back to the "old" .air file? At least temp until it gets fully sorted.
Bill
Click to expand...

Please hold on to that 1st release. I've got the installer and the aircraft folder in my documents so I can compare and swap.

I'm making some cfg changes that seem good for me. Dunno if others or Area51 are doing the same ----or better---but I'll try.
 
real time long flight

I just did a real time U-2S flight from Anchorage PANC to Seattle KSEA with most of the time at or above 80,000 feet. Fuel mileage is very good. Weather was user set cirrus at about 24,000 to 26,000 feet overcast so cirrus was 10 miles below me. And an 8 KIAS wind from ground to 2,000 feet for some landing fun but KSEA had me for RWY 34L which had wind at a heading of 343 so no cross wind but I had only 3% fuel so I called it a day, so to speak.

Fuel at takeoff was 21% for a takeoff gross weight of 22,224 pounds. At high altitude the fuel burn is tiny.

Hope this helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top