harrybasset
Charter Member
Has this ever been made for FS9 or is one being worked on?
Martin P4M-1Q Mercator
- Thread starter harrybasset
- Start date
Donation drives
I doubt one has been made as Flight Sim does not support mixed power-plants of any type therefore any FDE would have to be totally imaginary.
Sunny9850
SOH-CM-2024
I have not had a chance to try out the V3 of the C123 by Mr.Vladimir A. Zhyhulskiy. Did he manage to make the jets fully functional with their own thrust adjustment proportional to the real engine or are they just simulated prop engines somehow within the confines of FS ???
When playing around with the C-119 I had experimented with different ways to combine the engine types but never really did get anywhere with it.
Cheers
Stefan
When playing around with the C-119 I had experimented with different ways to combine the engine types but never really did get anywhere with it.
Cheers
Stefan
I broached this topic some time ago re: the Mercator. It would be a unique addition to the FS9 lineup as it is indeed a mixed power-plant aircraft; Martin very skillfully blended the jet engines into the recip nacelles so it's difficult to see the jet's location. The aircraft uses the Davis airfoil also used on the B-24, but so efficiently two recip engines were sufficient to give the aircraft pretty fair performance - the jets were used for takeoff at high weights, and during emergency situations in flight (i.e., being chased by MiGs). Not many Mercators were built. An electronic reconnaissance PB4Y-2 Privateer was the first Navy aircraft lost to a Soviet shoot-down during a border flight in the Cold War; the second was a Mercator, lost I believe in 1948 or 1949 over the Western Pacific near Vladivostok, scene of several shoot-downs by the Soviets during the Cold War. The aircraft was well-suited to ELINT/SIGINT duty due to its speed and load-carrying ability, I have been told. Although my sympathies and enthusiasms lie very much with the Air Force, I would like to see a Mercator for FS9 as well.
One gets the impression reading other posts about this subject that the easiest way to accommodate a jet engine with recips would be to treat the jet as a third recip engine, as most of them used for "boost" purposes with round engines were pretty low-powered jet engines; maybe making the thrust adjustment similar to one of the recips being run at about 70% power could to the trick.
I downloaded this bird but haven't gotten around to installing and flight testing it. Looks like that's the next task to hand.
srgalahad
Charter Member 2022
Harry, some of us do like the odd, maligned, quirky or those of less-than sparkling history and glamour. Alas, but they are likely low on most builders "gotta do" list. With an unsupported power setup like the Mercator, even more will shy away from the expected snipes and criticisms.
Me, if the flight characteristics are legit. and the model basically sound, I'd be happy to have more of these - without counting too many rivets. Mind you, I'd rather have fewer GOOD flight models than a lot of odd-flying monsters that simply fill a list.
I have, but not yet installed the V3 C-123 so I can't comment on the model except to say it seems a bit remarkable. From the screenshot, it appears that the jets require no air, but do put out a nice flame (running rich will do that) -- note the intake doors on the jetpacks are closed yet there's 2 turnin' and two burnin'
. Now I'm really going tho have to install it to test it out!
Me, if the flight characteristics are legit. and the model basically sound, I'd be happy to have more of these - without counting too many rivets. Mind you, I'd rather have fewer GOOD flight models than a lot of odd-flying monsters that simply fill a list.
I have, but not yet installed the V3 C-123 so I can't comment on the model except to say it seems a bit remarkable. From the screenshot, it appears that the jets require no air, but do put out a nice flame (running rich will do that) -- note the intake doors on the jetpacks are closed yet there's 2 turnin' and two burnin'
. Now I'm really going tho have to install it to test it out!
That is unfortunate Mick. It would have been great to see that come to fruition.
I'd love to see a Mercator in FS9 and/or FSX. Another of the planes on my love-to-see list is the F9F-8P photo Cougar with the big nose. When Ito-san released his F9F-8 I e-mailed him and asked if he'd be willing to do the photo version if I supplied him with the drawings, and he politely declined. That was right about the time his vision was getting worse. 
When Ito-san released his F9F-8 I e-mailed him and asked if he'd be willing to do the photo version if I supplied him with the drawings, and he politely declined. That was right about the time his vision was getting worse.
He is much missed, a true gentleman; a couple of projects he did were from plans I sent him, always open to interesting suggestions. An Itosan Mercator could have been nice; mind you, it would still have flown like an acrobatic jet!!
Mick
SOH-CM-2024
... Another of the planes on my love-to-see list is the F9F-8P photo Cougar with the big nose...
You might yet see that one.
The last thing David and I were working on before we both realized we were too burned out to continue was a Cougar, and typical of our projects, it was going to include multiple visual models. We planned a -6 with the smooth nose, -8 with the bulge below the nose, -8P with the big photo nose, and -8T two-seater.
David had made a good start on the 3D models, though they still have a long way to go. He hadn't even begin to map textures or work on the flight model. I think he started the panel, or at least the instrument package.
This project may yet see the light of day, though it won't be any time soon. We have discussed the idea of finishing it, but neither of us has much inclination to actually sit down and do the work. David has fiddled with the 3D models on and off, but much more "off" than "on." I don't even have FS9 installed and set up on my new computer. I don't even know if the utilities I use for painting will run in Windows 7, and I can't muster up the motivation to check and find out.
We have toyed with the idea of finishing up the Cougars this winter, but as winter approaches I don't feel any increase in my motivation, and I don't know if David does either. I don't know what the chances are of working up that motivation, at least for myself, when I can't even summon up the interest to install and set up FS9. It's occurred to me that I might re-discover some interest in FS if I was to swear off working on planes and scenery, and instead just fly, get a look at some of the scenery I've installed and never checked out, fly some of the planes I downloaded and never flew, and finally fly some of the planes that David and I made that I never found time to fly. But it's hard to look forward to that when the Cougars are hanging over me...
When David first suggested finishing the Cougars I thought of seeking someone else to paint it. I thought I might ask Damian if he'd be interested, but sadly he's no longer with us. I don't know who else to ask. Maybe Markus???
We'll see how I feel over the winter - and David too. Just because he'd done a little fiddling doesn't mean he's got the motivation to dive back into a major project. If he does, either I will paint it or find someone else to do that. There might be just one basic, factory fresh paint for each version, and a paint kit for those who would like to add service markings. We'll see...
harrybasset
Charter Member
Sad to say, the Mercator was very high on my list of planes for David and I to model when we both got burnt out and retired from FS development.
I believe the Mercator was the only plane ever procured (though not originally designed) specifically for the ferret mission.
A timely reminder for us who say "Mr XXXXXXXXX could easily make aircraft YYYYYYYYY" It can mean a great deal of effort and hard work for those talented individuals and teams who strive to complete our wish lists. Thank you to all those who utilise their skills on our behalf, your work is really appreciated by the vast majority of flight simmers.
I believe the Mercator was the only plane ever procured (though not originally designed) specifically for the ferret mission.
A timely reminder for us who say "Mr XXXXXXXXX could easily make aircraft YYYYYYYYY" It can mean a great deal of effort and hard work for those talented individuals and teams who strive to complete our wish lists. Thank you to all those who utilise their skills on our behalf, your work is really appreciated by the vast majority of flight simmers.
harrybasset
Charter Member
I am still worrying at details of the Mercator having roughed out a panel and a sound package just to see what I can do. As a way round the mixed power problem, given that a sound set can produce piston and jet sounds together, would it work to boost the power of the piston engines. How much extra power would be needed to simulate the jet boost? Or will one of the flight sim maestros take pity on me and build a Mercator?
Here's a quick explanation from "ehow." I give all the credit to them.
Divide the distance the object was moved in feet by the duration of the move in minutes to calculate the velocity. For example, if the object was moved 200 feet in 5 minutes, the velocity equals 200 divided by 5, which is 40. The velocity is 40 feet per minute.
2 Multiply the amount in horsepower by 33,000 to convert it to pounds per foot per minute, which is the amount of feet the given weight is moved in a single minute and is designated as lb.ft./ minute. For the example, if the horsepower is 10, multiplying 10 by 33,000 equals 330,000 lb.ft./minute.
3 Divide the converted horsepower by the velocity to calculate the thrust. For this example, 330,000 lb.ft/minute divided by 40 feet/minute equals 8,250 lbs. The thrust is 8,250 lbs
Site locator:
eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how_7649204_convert-horsepower-thrust.html#ixzz1dyJmmgpo
So if the Merc is doing 200mph on climb-out (for example), it's traveling at 1,056,000 ft/hr, or 17,600 ft/min.
If we can find the TO hp rating of the Merc's engines, you can plug that into the horsepower=lbs/ft/min part of the equation. Then do the math to get the thrust. I don't know where to go to get the horsepower ratings at different stages of flight for various engines but I'd bet someone here does. Doing this math for various stages of the flight (excluding landing - I doubt the jets were used for approach/landing but I may be, and probably am, wrong) will give you thrust settings for takeoff, climbout, and maybe emergency boost situations.
2 Multiply the amount in horsepower by 33,000 to convert it to pounds per foot per minute, which is the amount of feet the given weight is moved in a single minute and is designated as lb.ft./ minute. For the example, if the horsepower is 10, multiplying 10 by 33,000 equals 330,000 lb.ft./minute.
3 Divide the converted horsepower by the velocity to calculate the thrust. For this example, 330,000 lb.ft/minute divided by 40 feet/minute equals 8,250 lbs. The thrust is 8,250 lbs
Site locator:
eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how_7649204_convert-horsepower-thrust.html#ixzz1dyJmmgpo
So if the Merc is doing 200mph on climb-out (for example), it's traveling at 1,056,000 ft/hr, or 17,600 ft/min.
If we can find the TO hp rating of the Merc's engines, you can plug that into the horsepower=lbs/ft/min part of the equation. Then do the math to get the thrust. I don't know where to go to get the horsepower ratings at different stages of flight for various engines but I'd bet someone here does. Doing this math for various stages of the flight (excluding landing - I doubt the jets were used for approach/landing but I may be, and probably am, wrong) will give you thrust settings for takeoff, climbout, and maybe emergency boost situations.