It's too bad FS doesn't punish you for landing with the parking brakes set! 
de Havilland Dash 7 Released
- Thread starter Milton Shupe
- Start date
Sunny9850
SOH-CM-2024
I have never made a video recording...but I always run the BlackBox recorder for the VA I belong to...it gives landing details such as vertical speed and final speed on touchdown. I'll see if I can find one...if not I'll make a quick flight
No need for such measures Tom...just plain old flying the bird a tad bit behind the power curve and hanging on her 4 R-3350s. But book values for normal operations in the L-049 show that at light weights ( I think I stipulated that ) much less than 3000ft is required.
For example @ SL a ground roll of 985ft or total landing distance of 2280ft over the FAA 50' obstacle are possible.
At 5000ft the ground roll is 1140ft but over the 50' tree we still end up with 2580ft.
Power on landings @ 87 Kts ....
And the L-049 did not even have reversible 13' props yet to help slow her down.
Cheers
Stefan
No need for such measures Tom...just plain old flying the bird a tad bit behind the power curve and hanging on her 4 R-3350s. But book values for normal operations in the L-049 show that at light weights ( I think I stipulated that ) much less than 3000ft is required.
For example @ SL a ground roll of 985ft or total landing distance of 2280ft over the FAA 50' obstacle are possible.
At 5000ft the ground roll is 1140ft but over the 50' tree we still end up with 2580ft.
Power on landings @ 87 Kts ....
And the L-049 did not even have reversible 13' props yet to help slow her down.
Cheers
Stefan
Sunny9850
SOH-CM-2024
Well I just took the L-749 from Castlegar to Nelson. Crew weight 600 lbs and 150 gal in each of the 6 tanks....plenty for the flight plus VFR reserves.
http://www.vanisleva.com/fsp_detail.php?listflight=14008 or if that doesn't work go to the main page and in the pirep list find the flight and click on details. Depending on browser you may need to click on the Test Version 2 button in the new window to see the flight map.
A couple of snap shots here: http://www.mediafire.com/?7du3y16jz96jk
The basic numbers are
1 - Take Off
CYCG: 12:58:55
2 - Landing
And no Tom I still did not set the parking brake before landing.... actually quite insulted someone would think I would stoop to those levels.
Stefan
http://www.vanisleva.com/fsp_detail.php?listflight=14008 or if that doesn't work go to the main page and in the pirep list find the flight and click on details. Depending on browser you may need to click on the Test Version 2 button in the new window to see the flight map.
A couple of snap shots here: http://www.mediafire.com/?7du3y16jz96jk
The basic numbers are
1 - Take Off
CYCG: 12:58:55
2 - Landing
| CZNL | 13:07:43 |
| Landing speed | 80 kts |
| Vertical Speed | -190 fpm |
| Pitch | 4.4 |
And no Tom I still did not set the parking brake before landing.... actually quite insulted someone would think I would stoop to those levels.
Stefan
Great! But the challenge was for the Dash 7. How did this become about the 749. I do not doubt the either aircraft's abilities. I was hoping to get folks to try their Dash 7 piloting skills and a fun challenge.
How did this become about the 749. I do not doubt the either aircraft's abilities. I was hoping to get folks to try their Dash 7 piloting skills and a fun challenge.
Sunny9850
SOH-CM-2024
Okay, talk is cheap ... bring on the video
I'll do it properly in the -7 tomorrow after work. But after being accused of doing it with brakes locked in the L-749 I wanted to set the record straight
Stefan
nigel richards
Charter Member
I'll do it properly in the -7 tomorrow after work. But after being accused of doing it with brakes locked in the L-749 I wanted to set the record straight
Stefan
Now THAT'S something I'm looking forward to!
Like yourself Stefan, I wish I could do the video bit.
Could some kind soul here point us in a good freeware direction?????
Stephan - I certainly didn't mean any insult, I was just kidding around. I'm sure you know the limits of brakes in the real world, but I suspect most virtual pilots don't realize that when they squeeze that trigger on their controller, the braking force hits 100% in about a second or two. In the real world, that would blow out the thermal plugs and leave them sitting on smoking mains in the middle of the runway. I've actually taken a Posky 747F with minimal fuel and full cargo and landed it on Meigs' runway. Yes, I did use the parking brake on that one, so I'd hate to think of what real brakes would have been like after that one!
And I found this - somewhat related...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV4tgjSPgks
And I found this - somewhat related...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV4tgjSPgks
gman5250
Charter Member
Thought I would jump in on this one. I had flown the previous version of the Dash 7 quite a few times into Courcheval, so I knew the flight charictaristics. I took up Miltons challenge on this one after downloading the port over....great work...again.
Following Milton's specs. On my first approach I was unfamiliar with the area and came in very low over the town. I bled off energy on short final and hit the numbers dead on. Only used half the runway. Of course it was just a lucky fluke. Following this attempt I did an approach more appropriate to the terrain. With a steep approach I had to hold the nose down with full forward pressure at 72, flared at the threshold then floated like a leaf like for what seemed an eternity...LOL. Touched down mid runway, but still stopped with room to spare with no reverse. Third approach I was still floating as the end or the runway disappeared under the nose...applied power and went around.
It took me about six total flights to get the approaches right. I think this aircraft could probably be flown to the gate and landed by the baggage truck with the doors open with bears...er I mean beers for all.
Love this one Milton. Thanks
Following Milton's specs. On my first approach I was unfamiliar with the area and came in very low over the town. I bled off energy on short final and hit the numbers dead on. Only used half the runway. Of course it was just a lucky fluke. Following this attempt I did an approach more appropriate to the terrain. With a steep approach I had to hold the nose down with full forward pressure at 72, flared at the threshold then floated like a leaf like for what seemed an eternity...LOL. Touched down mid runway, but still stopped with room to spare with no reverse. Third approach I was still floating as the end or the runway disappeared under the nose...applied power and went around.
It took me about six total flights to get the approaches right. I think this aircraft could probably be flown to the gate and landed by the baggage truck with the doors open with bears...er I mean beers for all.
Love this one Milton. Thanks
Blackbird686
SOH-CM-2025
In the real life videos I've watched of the Dash7 landing at low airspeed, with the flaps deployed, the nose is seen pointing down and the plane seems to "float" as it gets close to the runway. Using Milton's numbers for a short landing after a steep approach reproduces this "floating", with the nose angle pointed downward in the Dash7 model very accurately IMO.
It took me a while to get used to this too, being so used to piston powered planes and having to keep the nose up on a less steep approach. But once you've mastered the landing techniques, and learn the numbers.... you begin to look for those short airfields that require those "hairy steep" approaches. Aspen, Colorado has (had?) one such airstrip. It was in a valley surrounded by mountains and you literally had to "drop like a rock" after comming off those higher altitudes to stick the landing. Probably a good one for the Dash7, can't remember if it's in FS9's realm of scenery tho, but if it is... have a go with it.
BB686:USA-flag:
It took me a while to get used to this too, being so used to piston powered planes and having to keep the nose up on a less steep approach. But once you've mastered the landing techniques, and learn the numbers.... you begin to look for those short airfields that require those "hairy steep" approaches. Aspen, Colorado has (had?) one such airstrip. It was in a valley surrounded by mountains and you literally had to "drop like a rock" after comming off those higher altitudes to stick the landing. Probably a good one for the Dash7, can't remember if it's in FS9's realm of scenery tho, but if it is... have a go with it.
BB686:USA-flag:
nigel richards
Charter Member
T Square; to my knowledge, the old repaints will not work on the new version due to complete re-mapping and extensive model changes.
With a rich choice of carriers and paint schemes, I expect we'll be seeing an awesome crop of textures when the paintkit is finally released.
Nicely summarised BB, I remember its debut at Farnborough in the late '70's - she truly stole the show using all those awesome STOL tactics.
Milton's incredible model will do all those things perfectly.
As you say BB, if you're used to flying aircraft of rather different performance, this bird will hone your skills and encourage accurate handling.
Read the manual, learn the flight specs and get AWESOME!!!
T,
Sorry, the external model is all new with many more parts and changed body shapes. No, you your question, Sir.
I will say that these short runways, slow approaches aren't a big challenge once the Dash 7 "feel" is in your grasp.
The FSX FM by Bernt Stolle requires a little more finesse with speeds before flaps 45 as she tends to ballon upwards badly if your airspeed is too high. Both FMs are available in both sims.
In FS9, Tom's FM is the default in place and has a little less lift on the flaps 45 setting.
Remember the main difference in takeoff for each: Bernt's T/O elevator trim at 0; Tom's set at +6.
With both FMs, do not expect the aircraft to "fly off the runway". Rotate at about 85kias by tugging on the yoke, all the way back. Jerk it off the runway, then allow the yoke to move back toward a more normal setting after rotation. This is due to the nose down attitude caused by Flaps 25.
Most approach and landing scenarios do NOT require flaps 45. Even in the Greenland Air/Air Greenland video they only use flaps 25 at 42000 pounds for 2300' runways, and only use 1/3 - 1/2 the runway.
The FSX FM by Bernt Stolle requires a little more finesse with speeds before flaps 45 as she tends to ballon upwards badly if your airspeed is too high. Both FMs are available in both sims.
In FS9, Tom's FM is the default in place and has a little less lift on the flaps 45 setting.
Remember the main difference in takeoff for each: Bernt's T/O elevator trim at 0; Tom's set at +6.
With both FMs, do not expect the aircraft to "fly off the runway". Rotate at about 85kias by tugging on the yoke, all the way back. Jerk it off the runway, then allow the yoke to move back toward a more normal setting after rotation. This is due to the nose down attitude caused by Flaps 25.
Most approach and landing scenarios do NOT require flaps 45. Even in the Greenland Air/Air Greenland video they only use flaps 25 at 42000 pounds for 2300' runways, and only use 1/3 - 1/2 the runway.
gman5250
Charter Member
Yep, I'm flying the FSX FM.
I've been spending a lot of time in the Grumman S2F recently so the ballooning was not an unusual surprise in the Dash. Compensating power with the turbo lag makes it a bit more challenging but after about four or five approaches I was able to get the speeds right. Turbo rule...slow down to go down LOL.
The new port over is a great model Milton. I too will anticipate the paint kit. I'll post some skins once the kit is available.
I haven't looked into Saba or St. Barts add on scenery yet. The default FSX is pretty sad. Is there anything out there...? I'll definitely have to get the Orbx scenery for PNW and Alaska now.
I'll take a crack at Tipella today. We're burried in snow...good day to fly.
I've been spending a lot of time in the Grumman S2F recently so the ballooning was not an unusual surprise in the Dash. Compensating power with the turbo lag makes it a bit more challenging but after about four or five approaches I was able to get the speeds right. Turbo rule...slow down to go down LOL.
The new port over is a great model Milton. I too will anticipate the paint kit. I'll post some skins once the kit is available.
I haven't looked into Saba or St. Barts add on scenery yet. The default FSX is pretty sad. Is there anything out there...? I'll definitely have to get the Orbx scenery for PNW and Alaska now.
I'll take a crack at Tipella today. We're burried in snow...good day to fly.
I remember using the crosswind runways at both Illimna and Unalkleet and taking off and landing in a couple of hundred feet, with a stiff wind. Niether of those places really had a proper X wind runway but the area provided for light aircraft worked just fine. Flying one al of the way out to the Alutian Islands did bring out the biggest drawback.... SLOW.....
T
T
gman5250
Charter Member
Tipella. First pass approached 500 ft. 25 flaps gear up @72 on East approach. Fly by at 100 ft.
Second approach lined up on the shoreline 45 degrees to the runway @500 ft., held 72 almost to the treeline, pulled the throttles to idle until I got a moderate shake. Pushed the nose down firm and held that attitude with light right rudder to the threshold and actually hit the runway center line. With reversers I had about 300 ft. left. Now I gotta go scrape the pinecones out of the undercarriage.
This aircraft makes you work for it.
Great challenge....thanks everyone. I'll keep this one bookmarked.
The paint kit will go to the top of my list. The Mosquito may have to wait.
Second approach lined up on the shoreline 45 degrees to the runway @500 ft., held 72 almost to the treeline, pulled the throttles to idle until I got a moderate shake. Pushed the nose down firm and held that attitude with light right rudder to the threshold and actually hit the runway center line. With reversers I had about 300 ft. left. Now I gotta go scrape the pinecones out of the undercarriage.
This aircraft makes you work for it.
Great challenge....thanks everyone. I'll keep this one bookmarked.
The paint kit will go to the top of my list. The Mosquito may have to wait.
Bjoern
worst developer ever
What is the difference between the respective FDEs?
I was looking for some pointers in the documentation, but could not find any.
Also, there is a "model" and "model_interior" ghost (0 Kb) file in the Dash 7's root folder.
Aaaaaand:
Is the paintkit going to have a "full body" file (going to be cut up for the respective textures)?
The cut up fuselage, stabilizer and such may provide great detail, but are nothing short of a nightmare for painters.
I was looking for some pointers in the documentation, but could not find any.
Also, there is a "model" and "model_interior" ghost (0 Kb) file in the Dash 7's root folder.
Aaaaaand:
Is the paintkit going to have a "full body" file (going to be cut up for the respective textures)?
The cut up fuselage, stabilizer and such may provide great detail, but are nothing short of a nightmare for painters.
Sunny9850
SOH-CM-2024
Hi Bjoern,
the basic differences are summed up by Milton a few posts earlier:
The FSX FM by Bernt Stolle requires a little more finesse with speeds before flaps 45 as she tends to ballon upwards badly if your airspeed is too high. Both FMs are available in both sims.
In FS9, Tom's FM is the default in place and has a little less lift on the flaps 45 setting.
Remember the main difference in takeoff for each: Bernt's T/O elevator trim at 0; Tom's set at +6.
Both fly quite nice and by the numbers but there is a difference in feel when the aircraft is slowed for landing or still dirty after takeoff. It is largely a question of personal taste unless you have actually flown the real aircraft
I agree in some respects a "broken up" texture is a bit more challenging but as long as the individual sheets are aligned properly it allows for much more detail than trying to squeeze it all into one bitmap of limited size.
Cheers
Stefan
the basic differences are summed up by Milton a few posts earlier:
The FSX FM by Bernt Stolle requires a little more finesse with speeds before flaps 45 as she tends to ballon upwards badly if your airspeed is too high. Both FMs are available in both sims.
In FS9, Tom's FM is the default in place and has a little less lift on the flaps 45 setting.
Remember the main difference in takeoff for each: Bernt's T/O elevator trim at 0; Tom's set at +6.
Both fly quite nice and by the numbers but there is a difference in feel when the aircraft is slowed for landing or still dirty after takeoff. It is largely a question of personal taste unless you have actually flown the real aircraft
I agree in some respects a "broken up" texture is a bit more challenging but as long as the individual sheets are aligned properly it allows for much more detail than trying to squeeze it all into one bitmap of limited size.
Cheers
Stefan
The Master Copy FM folders allow you to copy paste either set to to activate. Try both ... the main difference for flying them is takeoff trim which I have pointed out numerous times. They both hit the nimbers. Be brave ... give both a shot and see what works best for your setup.
My preference is to use the one with least amount of trim required at cruise speeds as I am constantly reloading the aircraft when adjusting and testing.
As for the mapping, there is no way I would map an 80' aircraft fuselage or 90' wings in one piece. Even when I do shorter aircraft in one piece, the texture artists ask for it to be remapped for better details. One pixel per inch doesn't allow for details or crispness, or good panel lines. Thats 4 pixels for 4", hardly sufficient for any painter.
And you think its a nightmare for painters? Try mapping it so that its useable without stretching and easy enough for the texture artist to pull it together. Gmax positions the maps to .001M accuracy meaning about 0.04" and yes, sometimes it is hard to match up the joints.