Razbam screenshots......

[Navy Chief]

Just a few screenshots. Although the T-2C Buckeye is the FS9 version, it still looks great in FSX!

Took off from Patuxent River in it. And the EA-6B Prowler is cruising over MCAS Iwakuni, Japan.

NC

 

[delta_lima]

Two awesome models there for sure! The EA-6B is such a rewarding treat to bring aboard the boat ....

Say, I never did get the T-2's hook to work in FSX. Did you manage to get it working?

Thanks,

dl

 

[Navy Chief]

Two awesome models there for sure! The EA-6B is such a rewarding treat to bring aboard the boat ....

Say, I never did get the T-2's hook to work in FSX. Did you manage to get it working?

Thanks,

dl

I have not, but when I get a chance to talk to Ron, I will ask him about it!

Pete

 

[delta_lima]

Thanks. I remember him saying a while back that this would be addressed when the product would be "reincarnated" for FSX. I just wondered if someone knew something I didn't ...

looking forward to the fix ... or the new one!

dl

 

[Navy Chief]

Thanks. I remember him saying a while back that this would be addressed when the product would be "reincarnated" for FSX. I just wondered if someone knew something I didn't ...

looking forward to the fix ... or the new one!

dl

Still trying to reach Ron. But here are a couple more shots.

The pilot's face is actually Ron's, and I am in the back seat! NC

 

[delta_lima]

Still trying to reach Ron. But here are a couple more shots.

The pilot's face is actually Ron's, and I am in the back seat! NC

He's way handsomer than you! Just kidding - I never paid any attention, to be honest. It's a gorgeous bird. Love all trainers, esp naval ones. If it can be fixed in the shorter term, that would certainly extend the life of an otherwise perfectly acceptable FS9 model. She's lovely. I just don't fly her much these days since she can't do CARQUAKs in FSX.

Here's the reference thread in question: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=41213&highlight=buckeye

Anyway - loads of good stuff happening at Razbam these days ... the glass is definitely more than half full!

dl

 

[Navy Chief]

He's way handsomer than you! .......And a lot younger too! I just don't fly her much these days since she can't do CARQUAKs in FSX. Wouldn't that freeware program, RBCO, make it carrier-ops capable?

Here's the reference thread in question: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=41213&highlight=buckeye

Anyway - loads of good stuff happening at Razbam these days ... the glass is definitely more than half full!

dl

At least I thought it would!

NC

 

[Navy Chief]

Reading up on it, I am sure the RBCO program would work; I just don't know what the panel.cfg entries would be for it.

NC

 

[delta_lima]

No NC, it wouldn't. Whether using RCBCO or regular FSX-A carrier functions, they both require there to be a hook - whether "real" or virtual. As you'll see in the post, I added in a hook line in the cfg so that I'd get a virtual (albeit non-moving hook) - no dice. Hence the question.

thanks nevertheless, mate!

dl

 

[Navy Chief]

No NC, it wouldn't. Whether using RCBCO or regular FSX-A carrier functions, they both require there to be a hook - whether "real" or virtual. As you'll see in the post, I added in a hook line in the cfg so that I'd get a virtual (albeit non-moving hook) - no dice. Hence the question.

thanks nevertheless, mate!









dl

Rats!

 

[delta_lima]

@ Prowler .... hook fix?

Hello Prowler,

Sorry to be a pain - just wondering if a working hook fix is anyway feasible for this lovely bird? This lovely bird is itching to do some carrier work ....

I know you're busy - just wondering/hoping. If not, I understand.

Many thanks either way

dl

 

[Cag40Navy]

Hello Prowler,

Sorry to be a pain - just wondering if a working hook fix is anyway feasible for this lovely bird? This lovely bird is itching to do some carrier work ....

I know you're busy - just wondering/hoping. If not, I understand.

Many thanks either way

dl

I can assure that it will not happen. Due to the FSX one being in development right now.

 

[delta_lima]

Well, I guess that's a bad news/good news situation

I haven't been to the RAZBAM site for a while to get a sense of what their pipeline looks like - I'm guessing it'll be quite a while, given I saw mention here of the next project up being the Convair 200 series prototype fighter ...

Anyway - Thanks for the update - will definitely look forward to that.

dl

 

[Cag40Navy]

Well, I guess that's a bad news/good news situation

I haven't been to the RAZBAM site for a while to get a sense of what their pipeline looks like - I'm guessing it'll be quite a while, given I saw mention here of the next project up being the Convair 200 series prototype fighter ...

Anyway - Thanks for the update - will definitely look forward to that.

dl

After the 201, the T-2 is next!

 

[delta_lima]

After the 201, the T-2 is next!

Sounds awesome!

thanks,

dl

 

[Rich]

I have added tailhooks to aircraft that never had them in real life to create a what if and they worked.

What is your tailhook entry ??

Check the aircraft.cfg for a Hydraulics entry, make sure it actually has pressure entered.

I do'nt have this aircraft so know nothing about it.

RCBO correctly setup should work too.

Rich

No NC, it wouldn't. Whether using RCBCO or regular FSX-A carrier functions, they both require there to be a hook - whether "real" or virtual. As you'll see in the post, I added in a hook line in the cfg so that I'd get a virtual (albeit non-moving hook) - no dice. Hence the question.

thanks nevertheless, mate!

dl

 

[delta_lima]

Hooray-I'm hooked up!

I have added tailhooks to aircraft that never had them in real life to create a what if and they worked.

What is your tailhook entry ??

Check the aircraft.cfg for a Hydraulics entry, make sure it actually has pressure entered.

I do'nt have this aircraft so know nothing about it.

RCBO correctly setup should work too.

Rich

Hello Rich,

As you can tell from here, I tried all of that:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...2-Buckeye-FSX-Compatibility&highlight=buckeye

But I thought I'd try again ... and presto! So, Ron, take your time ... - j/k

I have no idea why it didn't work last year - my aircraft.cfg must have had a typo somewhere...

Anyway - here's the shot. Nice form, if I do say ... :mixedsmi: I left in the status data on the top left - as a reference for budding fellow naval aviators / nuggets.

She's a fun old bird, that I'll enjoy happily until her replacement comes along.

dl

ps: for those wondering, here are my edits:


[hydraulic_system]
normal_pressure = 1000.000

[TailHook]
tailhook_length=5.32
tailhook_position= -12.66, 0.00, -2.57
cable_force_adjust=3.0

I lengthed the tail hook - was finding that on a flat approach, the hook would simply bounce up and off the deck with out engaging. That suggested to me that the virtual (functioning) hook was shorter than the visible/model hook. From my reference books on the T-2, and my own "eyeball" perspective, it also seems close. Main thing - it works.

[launch_assistance]
launch_bar_pivot = 6.433, 0.0, -3.822
launch_bar_lug = 11.423, 0.0, -7.0

The launch assist is way too much, and as with so many older, slower jets, getting launched at 200 kts over the bow is bit unrealistic. I compensate by having no throttle on launch - but it feels a bit silly. That's why the Etendard workaround that Sylvain devised is so brilliant for that plane - maybe a more universal fix with an editable launch speed function will materialize, without having to go the RCBCO route.

 

[Rich]

DL, can you post a screenshot of this aircraft on the deck with hook extended please.

 

[delta_lima]

No problem - except that I won't be back to sim PC till Tuesday.

What orientation do you want? I'll take and post on Tues night.

thanks,

dl

 

[Rich]

DL, side on please, I think your tailhook may be to long and was before you lengthened it, I do'nt have the model so can't check.

Many thanks