CFS2 Perma-stickied help / problem / tweaking thread

Andrew, I just flew the plane and checked the air file. It needs to have the cycle times fixed, but I think you are referring to the gear up and down sounds heard in the cockpit. That is an error in the Gladiator sound file which the Lysander uses. (Should be fixed for the Glad too). The sound cfg calls for a gear up and a gear down sound and the sound folder has a wav sound file for each. The cfg file should have the gear entries deleted and the wav sounds removed from the sound folder.

Oooookay, further update. I've made the changes above and the plane still has gear up and gear down sounds. Theoretically that should not be possible as there are no gear sounds in the aircraft sound files, but it seems there is a default sound somewhere for a retractable gear. Still changing the gear type to =0, i.e. fixed, should have fixed that.

So now I'm stumped. Anyone else know what's going on here?
 
Last edited:
Okay figured it out. :applause:

Not only does the air file have to have the entries described above, but the aircraft.cfg file contact points for the gears have to have the retract and extend times set to 0.0 and the sound set to 0.

These are the last three values in each gear contact point values line.
 
Reply...

Kurt,

Thanks for all of the detective work. The only thing I can't figure out is which of the contact points in the aircraft.cfg file references the landing gear.

But since I went through at your recommendation and modified the sound.cfg in the Mercury sound pack since the single-engined .cfg file is only used by the Lysander and two Gladiators, I guess it's kind of moot at this point?
 
Hi Andrew

The landing gears are normally the first 3 lines of [contact_point] values. The first value in each line defines what the line is addressing. A value of 1= a landing gear; a value of 2= a scrape point, etc.

The first line of values (point.0) is usually the tail / nose gear and the second (point.1) and third (point.2) being the left and right gears.

For those who may be interested, I dug this out of my notes archives. The order of the values in each [contact_point] line is this:

0 = type of contact point (1 is a landing gear, 2 is a scrape point, 3 is a skid point, 4 is a float point)
1 = fore / aft position (in feet relative to the CoD [center of datum or center of the model] positive number is forward, negative number is aft)
2 = lateral position (in feet relative to CoD positive number is right,negative number is left)
3 = vertical position (in feet relative to CoD, positive number moves the aircraft up, negative number moves down)
4 = impact damage threshold (feet per minute the speed at which an impact with earth will cause damage)
5 = brakes (0= none, 1= left wheel, 2= right wheel)
6= wheel radius (in feet)
7= steering angle (in +/- degrees the angle which a wheel can pivot, normally only nose/tail wheel)
8= static compression (in feet the distance a landing gear is compressed while at rest on the ground)
9= maximum compression to static compression (a ratio defining gear compression on landing)
10= damping ratio (value 0.0 to 1.0 defining oscillation [bumping] over the ground. Usually seen between 0.55 to 0.95)
11= gear extension time (in seconds, 0 indicates fixed gear)
12= gear retraction time (in seconds, 0 indicates fixed gear)
13= sound type
( 0=center gear or no sound for fixed gear)
( 1=auxiliary gear)
( 2=left gear)
( 3=right gear)
( 4=fuselage scrape)
( 5=left wing scrape)
( 6=right wing scrape)
( 7=auxiliary 1 scrape)
( 8=auxiliary 1 scrape)
( 9=tail scrape)
14= airspeed limit (in knots speed which gear can no longer be extended. Discovered this value is not included in the line of values for fixed gear aircraft)
15= airspeed damage threshold (in knots the airspeed above which landing gear gets damaged. Discovered this value is not included in the line of values for fixed gear aircraft)
 
Reply...

Kurt,

Thanks for finding out the answer to these questions, I appreciate it. :encouragement:
 
Adjusting landing gear contact points...

Good morning,

The FDG P-36 ex-donationware model "uses the Force" when on the ground, and the main wheels rest well above the runway surface. I find it quite annoying, actually.

While I am doing tweaks and testing for the BoF release, how do I correct this? :banghead:
 
Hi Rami,

Go to ac.cfg, and the Contact points section.

The first three entries ie 0, 1, 2 are the tail wheel and then the two main gear info entries. Each section within those entries are separated by commas.

At begining of each entry you will see an = sign, after this count the sections along to the fourth entry, this is the vertical contact point info for this contact point.

As the contact points are measured from the ac central datum point, the contact points are always a - minus figure. To raise the ac/ contact point away from the surface you increase the - minus figure, and to lower the ac/contact point towards the ground you have to reduce the - minus figure.

To help take a look at the M$ FS ac.cfg page, about 1/4 way down is the section Contact points...https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/pr...t-esp/cc526949(v=msdn.10)?redirectedfrom=MSDN


If the sit of the ac is good then AOK, if not you can tweak the static_pitch angle, which is with the Contact points section.


Cheers

Shessi
 
Hi Rami

Download this handy contact points primer by -E and keep it in your files for ongoing reference. Despite misspelling the word complete, he knows his stuff. It explains contact points and how to adjust them succinctly.

View attachment 72821
 
Reply...

Shessi,

Thank you...mission "partially" accomplished. Now, when the mission or free flight loads, the aircraft "drops" onto its new contact points, which place it on firm ground.

Does this mean that I now have to lower the pitch angle?
 
Reply...

Good morning,

Update: Adjusted the static .cfg and pitch angle as well as the main and tail wheels, she now rests on the grass rather than hovering over it. Thanks for the help! :encouragement:
 
Rami

Looks like you got things sorted. For info, there is a 64 bit compliant, free to use version of Aircraft Container Manager 2.5 available at Simviation.
 
A question regarding AI German bombers...

Hey guys,

I also have another question regarding Thicko's Dornier bombers and the Ju-88s by Krystof Malinowski. When attacked from behind, they both have a tendency to dive hard if the damage focuses on the control surfaces, (elevator and rudder assemblies on the tail) and then recover after several seconds, which has the effect of throwing off your attack. However the Heinkel bomber does not do this.

Is this AI behavior or a .cfg /.air issue?
 
Very informative thread! Thanks guys!

I am going to play around with this little contact point issue! ;^)

attachment.php


MR
 

Attachments

  • bristol-beauforts-wheels-sunk-00.jpg
    bristol-beauforts-wheels-sunk-00.jpg
    75.8 KB · Views: 120
Rami

I think it's the AI logic, but the airfile influences behaviour too (as does the "category" in the dp file).

I took a quick look at all 3 airfiles using AirEd & noticed the GC He111 has a much smaller elevator area (record 320) than either the Do17Z2 or the KM Ju88A4 - (only 13 sq ft versus 49 & 44 sq ft)

I suspect changing this value will reduce the elevator authority (record 1101; Cm-de Pitch Moment- Elevator) & thereby it's tendency to use the vertical to react to attack:icon30:. Of course there'll be trade-offs, reduce the elevator authority too much & the Ju88 will suck as a dive bomber:gameoff: (it'll never pull out of the dive, so the AI pilots will probably not go into a dive attack profile, no matter what their mission orders might be...:blind:)
 
Reply...

UncleTgt said:
Rami

I think it's the AI logic, but the airfile influences behaviour too (as does the "category" in the dp file).

I took a quick look at all 3 airfiles using AirEd & noticed the GC He111 has a much smaller elevator area (record 320) than either the Do17Z2 or the KM Ju88A4 - (only 13 sq ft versus 49 & 44 sq ft)

I suspect changing this value will reduce the elevator authority (record 1101; Cm-de Pitch Moment- Elevator) & thereby it's tendency to use the vertical to react to attack:icon30:. Of course there'll be trade-offs, reduce the elevator authority too much & the Ju88 will suck as a dive bomber:gameoff: (it'll never pull out of the dive, so the AI pilots will probably not go into a dive attack profile, no matter what their mission orders might be...:blind:)
Click to expand...

UncleTgt,

If there's no good option here, then let's leave it alone and let the AI continue their slippery weasel ways. :encouragement:
 
I agree with MaskRider as this is indeed an extremely informative discussion. I have wondered for years now how this is accomplished as I too have several aircraft that need to be corrected. Amazing that learning has never stopped since release in 1999 with this sim. Thank you all.
 
Reply...

I agree, this thread was very productive, especially with Shessi providing concise, clear details about where to look, and CK's link to a handy-dandy reference guide. :encouragement:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top