aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello,
Yes, absolutely! They are so good that they make my provisional panel look fantastic!
A.L.
Yes, absolutely! They are so good that they make my provisional panel look fantastic!
A.L.
Gauges for Combat Flight Simulator
- Thread starter Ivan
- Start date
...so good, i'm considering a pop up panel
of enlarged engine gauges.
i've found 1&2 oil temp gauges that actually work.
what i need now is an engine2 fuel & oil pressure gauge.
side note...
i checked out the german auto pilot in the fw200.
kinda funny, really, the bitmap is in german,
but, the readouts are in feet.
of enlarged engine gauges.
i've found 1&2 oil temp gauges that actually work.
what i need now is an engine2 fuel & oil pressure gauge.
side note...
i checked out the german auto pilot in the fw200.
kinda funny, really, the bitmap is in german,
but, the readouts are in feet.
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Smilo,
A pop-up panel sounds great.
If the gauges you mention weren´t to be found, it wouldn´t be terrible to do without.
The AP is a bit strange and the wing leveller seems absent. I wonder if there´s one in meters.
Otherwise, the one you sent me is quite practical, as it just uses the height you have.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
A pop-up panel sounds great.
If the gauges you mention weren´t to be found, it wouldn´t be terrible to do without.
The AP is a bit strange and the wing leveller seems absent. I wonder if there´s one in meters.
Otherwise, the one you sent me is quite practical, as it just uses the height you have.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
i love pop up windows.
you'd be amazed at the potential.
you can keyboard toggle up to nine.
i even have panel switches to toggle them.
then, some can be non menu items.
it's almost limitless.
well, maybe only a hundred.
i haven't pushed that envelope.
i'll try not to get too carried away
with this project...we shall see.
as for auto pilot,
i think you're talking about altitude hold.
it's handy, but, i prefer the ability
to manually set the altitude i want,
then, set the vertical speed i want
and let her climb.
(i rarely use wing level)
actually, when testing,
i'll make these adjustments
while sitting on the runway.
then, i'll start the engine(s) and throttle up,
taking off and climbing
while adjusting the heading
by clicking on the heading bug.
most of the auto pilot gauges out there
also have nav and approach settings,
which i never use. i almost wish
i could find an ap gauge without them.
actually, i do have a couple without,
but, of course, they have other issues.
you'd be amazed at the potential.
you can keyboard toggle up to nine.
i even have panel switches to toggle them.
then, some can be non menu items.
it's almost limitless.
well, maybe only a hundred.
i haven't pushed that envelope.
i'll try not to get too carried away
with this project...we shall see.
as for auto pilot,
i think you're talking about altitude hold.
it's handy, but, i prefer the ability
to manually set the altitude i want,
then, set the vertical speed i want
and let her climb.
(i rarely use wing level)
actually, when testing,
i'll make these adjustments
while sitting on the runway.
then, i'll start the engine(s) and throttle up,
taking off and climbing
while adjusting the heading
by clicking on the heading bug.
most of the auto pilot gauges out there
also have nav and approach settings,
which i never use. i almost wish
i could find an ap gauge without them.
actually, i do have a couple without,
but, of course, they have other issues.
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Folks!
I agree that it looks better, although well timed screws are not all that improbable. Very Nice!
A.L.
I agree that it looks better, although well timed screws are not all that improbable. Very Nice!
A.L.
i guess it's time to show you
what i've been up to for the past few days.
understand from the onset,
this is by no means a finished panel.
it is merely, a test bed
to experiment with pop up windows
and to look at and test gauges.
-the upper left is a basic auto pilot
incorporating the stock cessna directional gyro
four digital readouts by Jerry Beckwith
(i especially like the real altitude gauge
that turns red when below 500 feet)
these overlay the dash8 auto pilot.
this window will do all you need an auto pilot to do.
-next are a german radio, adf radio
and an adf radio compass
-then, there's the lower left corner.
what the heck is that?
a conglomeration of handy gauges.
the first is altitude, -05 is trim,
000 is flaps in increments, 0
80 is % remaining fuel
the big red G is gear(retracted)
.50 is zoom % 0
5.0,00,00000 is a clicks gauge,
there's the ga bomb sight gauge
and finally where you are in the sim.
-in the center is the Sperry MKIII auto pilot.
it's a cool looking ap gauge, but,
it's a major pain in the rear to operate.
too bad, i like the looks of this one,
but, will not use it.
-beside it is a test window with some gauges
i was checking out...the clock has many features
i won't go into here.
-upper right are the german multi engine gauges
Ivan has been working on. fantastic.
the two red circles are #1&2 feather levers,
that actually work.
-lower right is a bank of auto pilot gauges
i had a look at.
the upper is basically, a black dash8
with, imho, unnecessary, added writing.
next is the same dash8 and Beckwith digitals
i described for the upper left basic ap.
third down is an ap with just altitude
vertical climb readouts, plus switches and knobs.
followed by a german auto pilot with knobs,
switches altitude and vertical climb.
-finally, in the bottom right corner,
is hubbabubba's switch panel. this little honey
allows you to toggle up to six pop up windows.
frankly, folks, i would not build a panel
without this item. as far as i'm concerned,
the switch panel is essential to any
and all cfs panels.
as always, everything is a work in progress.
what i've been up to for the past few days.
understand from the onset,
this is by no means a finished panel.
it is merely, a test bed
to experiment with pop up windows
and to look at and test gauges.
-the upper left is a basic auto pilot
incorporating the stock cessna directional gyro
four digital readouts by Jerry Beckwith
(i especially like the real altitude gauge
that turns red when below 500 feet)
these overlay the dash8 auto pilot.
this window will do all you need an auto pilot to do.
-next are a german radio, adf radio
and an adf radio compass
-then, there's the lower left corner.
what the heck is that?
a conglomeration of handy gauges.
the first is altitude, -05 is trim,
000 is flaps in increments, 0
80 is % remaining fuel
the big red G is gear(retracted)
.50 is zoom % 0
5.0,00,00000 is a clicks gauge,
there's the ga bomb sight gauge
and finally where you are in the sim.
-in the center is the Sperry MKIII auto pilot.
it's a cool looking ap gauge, but,
it's a major pain in the rear to operate.
too bad, i like the looks of this one,
but, will not use it.
-beside it is a test window with some gauges
i was checking out...the clock has many features
i won't go into here.
-upper right are the german multi engine gauges
Ivan has been working on. fantastic.
the two red circles are #1&2 feather levers,
that actually work.
-lower right is a bank of auto pilot gauges
i had a look at.
the upper is basically, a black dash8
with, imho, unnecessary, added writing.
next is the same dash8 and Beckwith digitals
i described for the upper left basic ap.
third down is an ap with just altitude
vertical climb readouts, plus switches and knobs.
followed by a german auto pilot with knobs,
switches altitude and vertical climb.
-finally, in the bottom right corner,
is hubbabubba's switch panel. this little honey
allows you to toggle up to six pop up windows.
frankly, folks, i would not build a panel
without this item. as far as i'm concerned,
the switch panel is essential to any
and all cfs panels.
as always, everything is a work in progress.
Attachments
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Smilo!
You certainly have been productive! It looks great, and it sounds very effective.
You are right about pop-up panels - they let you see things in detail. A good idea to use them. I had always thought that simplifying everything onto the main panel was better because you had everything with one look, but of course, it´s too simplified because you get no details!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
You certainly have been productive! It looks great, and it sounds very effective.
You are right about pop-up panels - they let you see things in detail. A good idea to use them. I had always thought that simplifying everything onto the main panel was better because you had everything with one look, but of course, it´s too simplified because you get no details!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Hmmm.....
That panel offers up a LOT of possibilities.
That must be the famous Sperry Mk.III autopilot.
There is something pretty similar on some of the WW2 US Bombers.
I recognize the similarities though I don't know how to use either one.
I need to spend more time in the virtual skies and less time in the virtual machine shop and electronics lab.
- Ivan.
That panel offers up a LOT of possibilities.
That must be the famous Sperry Mk.III autopilot.
There is something pretty similar on some of the WW2 US Bombers.
I recognize the similarities though I don't know how to use either one.
I need to spend more time in the virtual skies and less time in the virtual machine shop and electronics lab.
- Ivan.
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Of Boost Gauges and Atmospheres
Hello Folks,
I´m having some interesting problems trying to fine-tune a CFS1 .air for the engines of the FW200A: 9-cyl radial BMW-132A, 720 Hp at 2050 RPM, not geared, with a 1.2 ATA supercharger. Ceiling is 15000 ft because this passenger plane was not pressurized. Military versions had twice the MTOW and 2/3 more power.
Well, Googling the equivalent of 1.2 ATA, I got 35.9 inches of mercury to put into the .air file. Strangely enough, the standard German CFS ATA gauges marked 1.22 ATA, as did Ivan´s new boost gauges, but the FS98 Gauges that came with a panel for this plane marked 1.2 ATA. In FS98 they marked 1 ATA, because FS98 has no superchargers. (Power was compensated to 750 hp beause of this in the FS98 .air file). Moreover, it seems that 1 ATA is not 1 Atmosphere after all...
Consulting with Ivan, he mentioned that the equivalent value for aircraft of 1.2 ATA was 34.87 inches of mercury in the standard of measurement used for aviation engineers, but that there other standards of measurement in use... Oh deary me!, like my landlady used to say when I went to college in 1972.
Of course, entering 34.87 for Max. Manifold pressure in the .air file, this time the CFS1 gauges and Ivan´s new ones, gave correct readings.
I looked this up, and it seemed like a conspiration to drive us crazy... but I´m not paranoid anymore... I think...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standa...e_and_pressure
The mind boggles: There are more than a dozen standards!
I´m sure many of you will know about that, but there are probably just as many or more less illustrated ones like me who will benefit from this. >Slap!< Ha! What one knows is not necessarily true all the time!
Just to mention a couple I found:
A) The one Google uses: Why on earth this one????
IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) since 1982:
Standard atmosphere: 750.06 mm of Hg, 14.5038 PSI or 29.530 mm Hg at Zero Degrees Centigrade or 32-F
The 35.9 inches of mercury = 1.2 ATA at Zero Degrees Centigrade seem to come from here.
B) This seems more realistic because not everyone is flying when it is freezing outside:
ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and EEA (European Environment Association), and FAA:
Standard atmosphere: 760 mm of Hg, 14.6959 PSI or 29.921 in.Hg at 15 Degrees Centigrade or 59-F
So here´s the 34.87 inches of mercury = 1.2 ATA at 15 Degrees Centigrade or 59-F, and seems the most reasonable.
A bit cold outside... but that´s where aeroplanes fly.
C) Yet another, which we had in Physics at school, because laboratories are at room temperature - it´s more comfy.
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology.):
Standard atmosphere is 760 mm of Hg, 14.6959 PSI or 29.921 in.Hg at 20 Degrees Centigrade or 68-F
D) And just to top things off:
ATA is absolute atmosphere where the norm is the pressure of a 10-meter column of water.
1 at:= 10 mWater = 1 kp/cm² = 9,80665 N/cm² = 0,980665 bar = 98.066,5 Physical atmosphere
ATÜ is Overpressure above 1 atmosphere.
ATU is Underpressure for pressure below 1 atmosphere
And... there are other wierd combinations of 750 mm Hg (???) and different Temperatures used by the Gas Board and the Military...
No wonder Einstein said something about the intelligence of humans, but I´m sure different countries use different standards to outsmart each other - that is more plausible.
What a lovely and varied world we live in!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Hello Folks,
I´m having some interesting problems trying to fine-tune a CFS1 .air for the engines of the FW200A: 9-cyl radial BMW-132A, 720 Hp at 2050 RPM, not geared, with a 1.2 ATA supercharger. Ceiling is 15000 ft because this passenger plane was not pressurized. Military versions had twice the MTOW and 2/3 more power.
Well, Googling the equivalent of 1.2 ATA, I got 35.9 inches of mercury to put into the .air file. Strangely enough, the standard German CFS ATA gauges marked 1.22 ATA, as did Ivan´s new boost gauges, but the FS98 Gauges that came with a panel for this plane marked 1.2 ATA. In FS98 they marked 1 ATA, because FS98 has no superchargers. (Power was compensated to 750 hp beause of this in the FS98 .air file). Moreover, it seems that 1 ATA is not 1 Atmosphere after all...
Consulting with Ivan, he mentioned that the equivalent value for aircraft of 1.2 ATA was 34.87 inches of mercury in the standard of measurement used for aviation engineers, but that there other standards of measurement in use... Oh deary me!, like my landlady used to say when I went to college in 1972.
Of course, entering 34.87 for Max. Manifold pressure in the .air file, this time the CFS1 gauges and Ivan´s new ones, gave correct readings.
I looked this up, and it seemed like a conspiration to drive us crazy... but I´m not paranoid anymore... I think...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standa...e_and_pressure
The mind boggles: There are more than a dozen standards!
I´m sure many of you will know about that, but there are probably just as many or more less illustrated ones like me who will benefit from this. >Slap!< Ha! What one knows is not necessarily true all the time!
Just to mention a couple I found:
A) The one Google uses: Why on earth this one????
IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) since 1982:
Standard atmosphere: 750.06 mm of Hg, 14.5038 PSI or 29.530 mm Hg at Zero Degrees Centigrade or 32-F
The 35.9 inches of mercury = 1.2 ATA at Zero Degrees Centigrade seem to come from here.
B) This seems more realistic because not everyone is flying when it is freezing outside:
ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and EEA (European Environment Association), and FAA:
Standard atmosphere: 760 mm of Hg, 14.6959 PSI or 29.921 in.Hg at 15 Degrees Centigrade or 59-F
So here´s the 34.87 inches of mercury = 1.2 ATA at 15 Degrees Centigrade or 59-F, and seems the most reasonable.
A bit cold outside... but that´s where aeroplanes fly.
C) Yet another, which we had in Physics at school, because laboratories are at room temperature - it´s more comfy.
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology.):
Standard atmosphere is 760 mm of Hg, 14.6959 PSI or 29.921 in.Hg at 20 Degrees Centigrade or 68-F
D) And just to top things off:
ATA is absolute atmosphere where the norm is the pressure of a 10-meter column of water.
1 at:= 10 mWater = 1 kp/cm² = 9,80665 N/cm² = 0,980665 bar = 98.066,5 Physical atmosphere
ATÜ is Overpressure above 1 atmosphere.
ATU is Underpressure for pressure below 1 atmosphere
And... there are other wierd combinations of 750 mm Hg (???) and different Temperatures used by the Gas Board and the Military...
No wonder Einstein said something about the intelligence of humans, but I´m sure different countries use different standards to outsmart each other - that is more plausible.
What a lovely and varied world we live in!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
yes, Ivan, that is the famous
and infamous Sperry MK.III autopilot.
as i said, i love its "authentic" appearance.
unfortunately, the beast is too cumbersome
to operate in the cfs scenario.
okay, admittedly, the original unit,
probably, had a complex procedure to follow
in order for it to operate properly.
not to mention, it, most likely,
had to be monitored constantly
to make sure it stayed on task.
yup, it's true...i'm lazy.
why would i want to dance around,
when i could just click a couple buttons
and get the same, if not better, results?
a pretty face only goes so far.
that said, i might add the Sperry ap
to a panel as eye candy, but, certainly,
would not recommend using the thing.
it's a pity, actually, to have it relegated
to being nothing more than a pin up
on the wall of the shop statis.
Stephan, i have to say, i am thankful
for guys like you, Ivan and Hubbabubba,
who delve into the deep reaches
of air files, gauge programing,
and the other complexities of cfs.
it may not be my cup of tea,
but, i'm right there in line
to reap the benefits of your curious minds.
thank you one and all for making cfs what it is.
and infamous Sperry MK.III autopilot.
as i said, i love its "authentic" appearance.
unfortunately, the beast is too cumbersome
to operate in the cfs scenario.
okay, admittedly, the original unit,
probably, had a complex procedure to follow
in order for it to operate properly.
not to mention, it, most likely,
had to be monitored constantly
to make sure it stayed on task.
yup, it's true...i'm lazy.
why would i want to dance around,
when i could just click a couple buttons
and get the same, if not better, results?
a pretty face only goes so far.
that said, i might add the Sperry ap
to a panel as eye candy, but, certainly,
would not recommend using the thing.
it's a pity, actually, to have it relegated
to being nothing more than a pin up
on the wall of the shop statis.
Stephan, i have to say, i am thankful
for guys like you, Ivan and Hubbabubba,
who delve into the deep reaches
of air files, gauge programing,
and the other complexities of cfs.
it may not be my cup of tea,
but, i'm right there in line
to reap the benefits of your curious minds.
thank you one and all for making cfs what it is.
Hello Smilo,
I am not quite sure how to respond to this one.
Autopilots of the era really were not terribly sophisticated devices.
They REALLY WERE extremely tedious to operate and didn't have a lot of capability.
I am glad I did not go anywhere with the C-2 Autopilot I mentioned earlier.
I suspect you would find it even less useful while I would have been trying to make its functions match features from the real device.
Regardless of the appearance, what features do you absolutely need?
It should be possible to have a gauge that will control the aeroplane to any reasonable degree even without the autopilot being available in the AIR file.
With the ability to adjust Trim and some very accurate sensors to know where the aeroplane is, quite a lot is possible.
Back to the Gauge Programming status:
I just spent the better part of two days creating a series of bitmaps to allow me to create a more authentic set of basic Boost and Tachometer gauges instead of the "Technology Demonstrators" I have been programming up to this point. After all, the point to this exercise was to work toward the release of a couple Twin Engine projects.
(....and I mean MY projects!)
- Ivan.
I am not quite sure how to respond to this one.
Autopilots of the era really were not terribly sophisticated devices.
They REALLY WERE extremely tedious to operate and didn't have a lot of capability.
I am glad I did not go anywhere with the C-2 Autopilot I mentioned earlier.
I suspect you would find it even less useful while I would have been trying to make its functions match features from the real device.
Regardless of the appearance, what features do you absolutely need?
It should be possible to have a gauge that will control the aeroplane to any reasonable degree even without the autopilot being available in the AIR file.
With the ability to adjust Trim and some very accurate sensors to know where the aeroplane is, quite a lot is possible.
Back to the Gauge Programming status:
I just spent the better part of two days creating a series of bitmaps to allow me to create a more authentic set of basic Boost and Tachometer gauges instead of the "Technology Demonstrators" I have been programming up to this point. After all, the point to this exercise was to work toward the release of a couple Twin Engine projects.
(....and I mean MY projects!)
- Ivan.
Hello All,
Here is a screenshot of the final results of all the Bitmap editing.
Functionally, they are no different from before, but I believe the appearance is a bit better.
The Left Dual Tachometer is for Engines 1 and 2.
The Right Dual Tachometer is for Engines 3 and 4 even though the pointers still are marked 1 and 2.
From photographs of instrument panels for a 4 Engine aircraft, this really was how things were done.
Sometimes the markings were for L and R instead of 1 and 2, so as on the Boeing B-17, there would be two Tachometers both marked L-R.
It makes me wonder how distracting this was in practice.
(Yes, I also made L and R pointers, but have no need to program a set of Dual Tachometers using those pointers yet.)
Next comes yet another attempt at Dual Boost Gauges.
- Ivan.
Here is a screenshot of the final results of all the Bitmap editing.
Functionally, they are no different from before, but I believe the appearance is a bit better.
The Left Dual Tachometer is for Engines 1 and 2.
The Right Dual Tachometer is for Engines 3 and 4 even though the pointers still are marked 1 and 2.
From photographs of instrument panels for a 4 Engine aircraft, this really was how things were done.
Sometimes the markings were for L and R instead of 1 and 2, so as on the Boeing B-17, there would be two Tachometers both marked L-R.
It makes me wonder how distracting this was in practice.
(Yes, I also made L and R pointers, but have no need to program a set of Dual Tachometers using those pointers yet.)
Next comes yet another attempt at Dual Boost Gauges.
- Ivan.
Attachments
not much to say, except, nicely done.
these will be a welcome addition
to any cfs gauge folder and panel builder.
about my auto pilot gauge wish list;
i wasn't ignoring the question,
was just formulating an answer
without going off the deep end.
for starters, what i don't want or need;
i am not interested in the nav, approach,
or the back course toggles
that most auto pilot gauges offer.
they don't seem to work in cfs anyway.
i haven't figured out what the yaw damper
does or if it even works, so, l
it could be left out, too.
now, for my wish list;-
master on/off with indicator light
-heading hold on/off with indicator light
-heading readout
-heading adjust increments
-heading adjust decrements
(or, could these be heading bug increments and decrements?)
-heading adjust readout
-altitude hold on/off with indicator light
-altitude readout
-altitude adjust increments
-altitude adjust decrements
-altitude adjust readout
-vertical speed hold on/off with indicator light
-vertical speed readout
-vertical speed adjust increments
-vertical speed adjust decrements
-vertical speed adjust readout
handy extras...
-wing level on/of with indicator light
-airspeed on/off with indicator light
-airspeed readout
-airspeed adjust increments
-airspeed adjust decrement
-airspeed adjust readout
many ap gauges have a course readout/adjust
but, i have never been able to make one work.
these will be a welcome addition
to any cfs gauge folder and panel builder.
about my auto pilot gauge wish list;
i wasn't ignoring the question,
was just formulating an answer
without going off the deep end.
for starters, what i don't want or need;
i am not interested in the nav, approach,
or the back course toggles
that most auto pilot gauges offer.
they don't seem to work in cfs anyway.
i haven't figured out what the yaw damper
does or if it even works, so, l
it could be left out, too.
now, for my wish list;-
master on/off with indicator light
-heading hold on/off with indicator light
-heading readout
-heading adjust increments
-heading adjust decrements
(or, could these be heading bug increments and decrements?)
-heading adjust readout
-altitude hold on/off with indicator light
-altitude readout
-altitude adjust increments
-altitude adjust decrements
-altitude adjust readout
-vertical speed hold on/off with indicator light
-vertical speed readout
-vertical speed adjust increments
-vertical speed adjust decrements
-vertical speed adjust readout
handy extras...
-wing level on/of with indicator light
-airspeed on/off with indicator light
-airspeed readout
-airspeed adjust increments
-airspeed adjust decrement
-airspeed adjust readout
many ap gauges have a course readout/adjust
but, i have never been able to make one work.
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Ivan, Hello Smilo,
A nicely done solution with the dual needle instruments! - Elegant, and saves space on the panel, as well as being authentic!
Re: Autopilots. Smilo´s wish list seems to incorporate the necessary features.
I have been trying out the Autopilot that came with the FS98 FW-200 Panel by Pegasus Design, which I initially thought was a bit strange, but it is actually very good. Other than being in feet, not metric as one would expect on a German plane, the functionality of this device is quite nice.
Switched on, some buttons turn left and right (-+) to set the desired height, and also to set climbing speed. The plane will automatically fly to that level. Then, another button very easily sets or alters the Heading (Kurs), which is coupled to the Askania FernKompass (a Gyro Compass?). A banking option is also available affecting the same function.
All in all, I found it quite pleasing to operate. If only it were in metres...
I think a yaw damper is used against the Dutch Roll setting in on large jets with swept-back wings.
Anyway, this is only my two-pence worth.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
A nicely done solution with the dual needle instruments! - Elegant, and saves space on the panel, as well as being authentic!
Re: Autopilots. Smilo´s wish list seems to incorporate the necessary features.
I have been trying out the Autopilot that came with the FS98 FW-200 Panel by Pegasus Design, which I initially thought was a bit strange, but it is actually very good. Other than being in feet, not metric as one would expect on a German plane, the functionality of this device is quite nice.
Switched on, some buttons turn left and right (-+) to set the desired height, and also to set climbing speed. The plane will automatically fly to that level. Then, another button very easily sets or alters the Heading (Kurs), which is coupled to the Askania FernKompass (a Gyro Compass?). A banking option is also available affecting the same function.
All in all, I found it quite pleasing to operate. If only it were in metres...
I think a yaw damper is used against the Dutch Roll setting in on large jets with swept-back wings.
Anyway, this is only my two-pence worth.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Thanks Guys.
Unfortunately for me, it seems like my information is incorrect yet again.
The first attached image is cropped from a photograph of a modern B-25J.
Please note in the upper left corner of the image that we can see the following:
The Manifold Pressure Gauge reads up to 75 inches Hg.
The Tachometer reads up to 4500 RPM.
Unfortunately, neither gauge is correct for the B-25C I am actually building.
The next two images are extracted from a training film from 1944.
The interesting thing about this film is that by this stage of the war, the model in service was probably the B-25J.
Fortunately for me, there was a tendency for the older model bombers to be used for training purposes.
It can be clearly seen from other parts of this film that the upper turret is very far aft on the fuselage and that there is a retracted lower turret.
Both were features only on the early model B-25 Mitchells.
It also appears that the gauges are installed so that they sit under the surface of the instrument panel and thus the frames are not visible.
The screws appear to be mostly Phillips head though there are a few slotted screws as well.
It also appears from the training film that the autopilot was a prominent feature of the controls of this aeroplane.
Back to the drawing board..... Literally.
- Ivan.
Unfortunately for me, it seems like my information is incorrect yet again.
The first attached image is cropped from a photograph of a modern B-25J.
Please note in the upper left corner of the image that we can see the following:
The Manifold Pressure Gauge reads up to 75 inches Hg.
The Tachometer reads up to 4500 RPM.
Unfortunately, neither gauge is correct for the B-25C I am actually building.
The next two images are extracted from a training film from 1944.
The interesting thing about this film is that by this stage of the war, the model in service was probably the B-25J.
Fortunately for me, there was a tendency for the older model bombers to be used for training purposes.
It can be clearly seen from other parts of this film that the upper turret is very far aft on the fuselage and that there is a retracted lower turret.
Both were features only on the early model B-25 Mitchells.
It also appears that the gauges are installed so that they sit under the surface of the instrument panel and thus the frames are not visible.
The screws appear to be mostly Phillips head though there are a few slotted screws as well.
It also appears from the training film that the autopilot was a prominent feature of the controls of this aeroplane.
Back to the drawing board..... Literally.
- Ivan.
Attachments
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Ivan,
It is fortunate that you have found some reliable information to go by, especially
as it is for the early Mitchell you are preparing the gauges for. By the looks of
the instruments, they do seem to have been quite hot performers, these birds!
Good luck!
I´ve been busy putting your fantastic new German RPM and Boost Gauges into the
Fw200-A Condor, and decided to make a new full width cockpit panel bitmap for it.
There are a number of original photos showing the cockpits of these aeroplanes, and slight differences
in the instrument layout can be seen depending on the unit, and gauge styles also seemed to vary a bit.
A couple actually show Messerschmit-style gauges, so that´s very pleasing indeed!
Then, apart from the CFS1 flight dynamics, I was thinking it also deserved a Virtual Cockpit
via SCASM, because it hasn´t got one. Anyway, I opened a new thread for it, so as not to
clutter other threads up with off-topic material.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
It is fortunate that you have found some reliable information to go by, especially
as it is for the early Mitchell you are preparing the gauges for. By the looks of
the instruments, they do seem to have been quite hot performers, these birds!
Good luck!
I´ve been busy putting your fantastic new German RPM and Boost Gauges into the
Fw200-A Condor, and decided to make a new full width cockpit panel bitmap for it.
There are a number of original photos showing the cockpits of these aeroplanes, and slight differences
in the instrument layout can be seen depending on the unit, and gauge styles also seemed to vary a bit.
A couple actually show Messerschmit-style gauges, so that´s very pleasing indeed!
Then, apart from the CFS1 flight dynamics, I was thinking it also deserved a Virtual Cockpit
via SCASM, because it hasn´t got one. Anyway, I opened a new thread for it, so as not to
clutter other threads up with off-topic material.
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Hello Aleatorylamp,
Actually, I am not completely sure how reliable this information is.
It LOOKS reasonable but who knows?
I decided I really don't like the appearance of the gauges and so the gauges on my Mitchell will be close but not quite the same.
I consider it to be the same gauge specification but by a different manufacturer which was not uncommon for other equipment.
I also did some research for the P-38 Lightning and am quite confused there.
In one version (Glacier Girl), the Tachometers and Manifold Pressure gauges were nearly identical in configuration to those on the Mitchell as shown in the prior images. The differences were that the tick marks were shaded differently.
Early models of the Lightning had two Tachometers for two engines, but it appears that starting with the F model, they were combined into a Dual Gauge which make the programming a bit easier for me.
The Oil Temperature Gauge was actually one of the easiest gauges yet; Temperature conversions are very easy.
If you want to discuss "Performance", consider that the test aeroplane for these gauges is a heavily modified B-25C.
It has 4 Engines with an increased boost range so is effectively running on 4 x 2700 HP or 2 X 5400 HP engines.
On a Take-Off Run with full non-WEP power, it can hit 250 MPH as it crosses the end of the runway.
Initial Climb is around 5500 feet per minute.
Maximum Level Speed without WEP is 425 MPH.
It seems to have some serious oscillation and stability problems (!) starting around 325 MPH IAS.
If this thing were real, it would make a pretty great interceptor or heavy fighter.
I will miss this thing when the tests are over.
Regarding the appearance of Gauges, there are lots of little details that could be fixed in the ones I am currently programming. I am just choosing to keep programming for functionality rather than endlessly revising the bitmaps so that I reach the point of having serviceable gauges sooner.
Another question is whether or not to program gauges for better appearance when the stock gauges are sufficiently functional.
- Ivan.
Actually, I am not completely sure how reliable this information is.
It LOOKS reasonable but who knows?
I decided I really don't like the appearance of the gauges and so the gauges on my Mitchell will be close but not quite the same.
I consider it to be the same gauge specification but by a different manufacturer which was not uncommon for other equipment.
I also did some research for the P-38 Lightning and am quite confused there.
In one version (Glacier Girl), the Tachometers and Manifold Pressure gauges were nearly identical in configuration to those on the Mitchell as shown in the prior images. The differences were that the tick marks were shaded differently.
Early models of the Lightning had two Tachometers for two engines, but it appears that starting with the F model, they were combined into a Dual Gauge which make the programming a bit easier for me.
The Oil Temperature Gauge was actually one of the easiest gauges yet; Temperature conversions are very easy.
If you want to discuss "Performance", consider that the test aeroplane for these gauges is a heavily modified B-25C.
It has 4 Engines with an increased boost range so is effectively running on 4 x 2700 HP or 2 X 5400 HP engines.
On a Take-Off Run with full non-WEP power, it can hit 250 MPH as it crosses the end of the runway.
Initial Climb is around 5500 feet per minute.
Maximum Level Speed without WEP is 425 MPH.
It seems to have some serious oscillation and stability problems (!) starting around 325 MPH IAS.
If this thing were real, it would make a pretty great interceptor or heavy fighter.
I will miss this thing when the tests are over.
Regarding the appearance of Gauges, there are lots of little details that could be fixed in the ones I am currently programming. I am just choosing to keep programming for functionality rather than endlessly revising the bitmaps so that I reach the point of having serviceable gauges sooner.
Another question is whether or not to program gauges for better appearance when the stock gauges are sufficiently functional.
- Ivan.
Attachments
aleatorylamp
Charter Member
Hello Ivan,
Sounds like fun with so much power, and makes testing a bit less tedious!
I´d say the effective results you present are also neat and good looking.
Very interesting, the THREE-needle gauge for temperature, oil-pressure and fuel!
In my opinion, it´s more practical to go for functionality, specially as a lot of
tediously worked-on details later get lost in the actual on-panel gauge-size.
Like you say, and as Smilo has often commented, one thing is historical accuracy,
and another, functionality, with which the panel or gauge creator can or has to play.
I noticed another example on the Fw200 panel: The bottom row of engine gauges are
all fuel tank gauges - left aux, left main, right main and right aux. In reality there were
oil temperature gauges there, which the panel maker couldn´t get.
Then, I also deduced the reason for the RPM and Manifold gauge mix-up: The gauges
used were originally the ones for the Ju-52, so obviously gauges for the 4th engine
had to be duplicated from any of the other 3.
Moreover, what to do for a panel where the co-pilot´s instruments are duplicated on
the right? For the sake of practical funtionality, I wonder if one could arguably
place the radio-operator/navigator gauges there. Would that be acceptable?
Poets have "poetic license"... so we could probably have "builders´license", as it were?
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp
Sounds like fun with so much power, and makes testing a bit less tedious!
I´d say the effective results you present are also neat and good looking.
Very interesting, the THREE-needle gauge for temperature, oil-pressure and fuel!
In my opinion, it´s more practical to go for functionality, specially as a lot of
tediously worked-on details later get lost in the actual on-panel gauge-size.
Like you say, and as Smilo has often commented, one thing is historical accuracy,
and another, functionality, with which the panel or gauge creator can or has to play.
I noticed another example on the Fw200 panel: The bottom row of engine gauges are
all fuel tank gauges - left aux, left main, right main and right aux. In reality there were
oil temperature gauges there, which the panel maker couldn´t get.
Then, I also deduced the reason for the RPM and Manifold gauge mix-up: The gauges
used were originally the ones for the Ju-52, so obviously gauges for the 4th engine
had to be duplicated from any of the other 3.
Moreover, what to do for a panel where the co-pilot´s instruments are duplicated on
the right? For the sake of practical funtionality, I wonder if one could arguably
place the radio-operator/navigator gauges there. Would that be acceptable?
Poets have "poetic license"... so we could probably have "builders´license", as it were?
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp