Carenado Arrow IV FS2004
- Thread starter Thunderbolt
- Start date
F
FlyTexas
Guest
Wonderful! Thank you Carenado for continuing to build for us FS2004 users. :ernae:
Brian
Brian
Likewise Graeme. The Arrow would have been a guaranteed purchase for me, but unfortunately I'm one of the heathen that hasn't come around to the VC (a TrackIR might change my mind, but I can't see that happening in the near future.) I fly a fair bit of IFR and just find it easier using the 2D. It's a shame as I did some of my commercial training in an Arrow IV so was keen to have one for FS9, but for now I'll have to give it a miss.
Az
Az
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
:woot::friday:
A
adhockey
Guest
She's pretty, but at 27.99 USD--not priced to move, IMO. If I buy two payware planes at this price I've spent as much on the original sim. Some guys are willing to spend thousands on FS add-ons, but because my sim time is limited by real life, I try to be judicious about getting good value out of payware purchases.
Now 9.95 for a Lionheart Creation or equivalent quality is a steal/must have; at or under 19.99 is usually about the right price point.
My $0.02
(Double emphasis if it's missing a 2D panel or has bad contact points.)
Now 9.95 for a Lionheart Creation or equivalent quality is a steal/must have; at or under 19.99 is usually about the right price point.
My $0.02
(Double emphasis if it's missing a 2D panel or has bad contact points.)
Thunderbolt
Charter Member 2014
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
I just picked it up but won't be able to take her out for a spin 'til tuesday at the earliest.....darn!
wombat666
Administrator
Very disappointed that there is no 2d panel in this one.
I'm thankful to have another Carenado FS2004 aircraft, 2D panel or not.
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
He speaketh the truth...:woot:Thank you Carenado!I'm thankful to have another Carenado FS2004 aircraft, 2D panel or not.
N
nzntn
Guest
Same here and I change some contact points, then the Aircraft was in the air
were you able to stop all the bouncing I applied the fix but did not solve problem fully especially when landing
"We have detected that people who have some sceneries or mesh terrain installed have a bouncing problem when starting, taxiing and stopping the PA28 Arrow for FS2004.
You have to edit the aircrfat.cfg file and modify these two sections:
******************************************************************************************************************************************************
[contact_points]
static_pitch = -0.5
static_cg_height = 3.6
max_number_of_points = 9
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 2.0, 0.8, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88, -4.5, -3.88, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00, 0.3, 2.5, 0.8, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.88, 3200, 2, 0.69, 0.00, 0.3, 2.5, 0.8, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
point.3 = 2, -2.95, -18, 0.62, 1600, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0
point.4 = 2, -3.10, 18, 0.62, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6, 0, 0, 0
point.5 = 2, -18.80, 0, -1.0, 3200, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0
point.6 = 2, 5.5, 0, -1.5, 3200, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0
point.7 = 2, -19.5, 0, 4.7, 3200, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0
point.8 = 2, -3.0, 0, -1.8, 3200, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0
gear_system_type=0
[brakes]
parking_brake = 1 //Parking brake available
toe_brakes_scale = 0.5 //Brake scalar
auto_brakes = 0
differential_braking_scale = 0.9 "
D
Drake
Guest
Looks great!
D
David Peteritis
Guest
Hi, here is what I had to set mine at, doesn't start to bounce till about 100 kph. Fast enough to rotate and slow enough to land.
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 5.2, 0.6, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88,-4.5,-3.88, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00,0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.88,3200, 2,0.69, 0.00, 0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
Just a note on suspension, hopping and stiffness.
Hopping is caused by stiffness of the setup (or possibly too much nose weight on a stiff nose gear). Stiffness is determined by the max-static ratio in the contact points. Any max-static ratio over 2.5 is going to yield a a stiffness.
The recommended changes here makes the suspension even more stiff (changing from 2.5 to 5.2).
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 5.2, 0.6, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88,-4.5,-3.88, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00,0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.88,3200, 2,0.69, 0.00, 0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
We must remember that suspension is made up of more than static compression to max compression. Have you even seen a car on jacks with the wheels hanging? Have you ever really noticed a RW aircraft with hanging suspension. This must be modeled in and correctly reflected for the best suspension movement.
Short of that, without having this aircraft, I would recommend the following for a softer suspension.
Current suspension movement = .3 X 2.5 = .75' (9")
Change the max-static ratio to 2.0 and recalculate static compression.
.75' divided by 2.0 = .375 static compression
Now, anytime you change static compression, you must change the vertical distance to the ground. In this case, we increased static compression so the wheels will be off the ground by up to .075' or almost an inch. So, drop the vertical distance number by that much.
Here is the end result for the mains only:
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 5.2, 0.6, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88,-4.5,-3.12, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00,0.375, 2.0, 0.7, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.12,3200, 2,0.69, 0.00, 0.375, 2.0, 0.7, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
Note I also increased damping to .7 although .8 or .9 may work better.
Also, the nose gear is very stiff and needs a similar treatment.
If the aircraft has all the animations and contact points in synch, this should work. You may have to tweak vertical distance to get the correct appearance of tires on the ground.
Hopping is caused by stiffness of the setup (or possibly too much nose weight on a stiff nose gear). Stiffness is determined by the max-static ratio in the contact points. Any max-static ratio over 2.5 is going to yield a a stiffness.
The recommended changes here makes the suspension even more stiff (changing from 2.5 to 5.2).
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 5.2, 0.6, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88,-4.5,-3.88, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00,0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.88,3200, 2,0.69, 0.00, 0.3, 5.2, 0.6, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
We must remember that suspension is made up of more than static compression to max compression. Have you even seen a car on jacks with the wheels hanging? Have you ever really noticed a RW aircraft with hanging suspension. This must be modeled in and correctly reflected for the best suspension movement.
Short of that, without having this aircraft, I would recommend the following for a softer suspension.
Current suspension movement = .3 X 2.5 = .75' (9")
Change the max-static ratio to 2.0 and recalculate static compression.
.75' divided by 2.0 = .375 static compression
Now, anytime you change static compression, you must change the vertical distance to the ground. In this case, we increased static compression so the wheels will be off the ground by up to .075' or almost an inch. So, drop the vertical distance number by that much.
Here is the end result for the mains only:
point.0=1, 5.00, 0.0, -3.75, 3200, 0, 0.57, 33, 0.20, 5.2, 0.6, 3.5, 3.5, 0, 130.0, 130.0
point.1=1, -3.88,-4.5,-3.12, 3200, 1, 0.69, 0.00,0.375, 2.0, 0.7, 5.0, 5.0, 2, 130.0, 130.0
point.2=1, -3.88, 4.5, -3.12,3200, 2,0.69, 0.00, 0.375, 2.0, 0.7, 5.0, 5.0, 3, 130.0, 130.0
Note I also increased damping to .7 although .8 or .9 may work better.
Also, the nose gear is very stiff and needs a similar treatment.
If the aircraft has all the animations and contact points in synch, this should work. You may have to tweak vertical distance to get the correct appearance of tires on the ground.