-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Well, actually removing the parking brake may accomplish this, but it is only necessary to release the parking to close the doors... :d
There's a manual? :costumes: :mixedsmi:
Access Panel
Hi Panther,
Thanks for the response. I had already tried that but I evidently didn't wait long enough for it to close before I looked away. I just need to be more patient.
Mud Marine, if your comment was directed at me about reading manuals, the manual is always the first thing I download and read before flying. When I couldn't get them closed I tried looking through it twice more and couldn't find it. If you could tell me what page it is on, it would be appreciated. Unfortunately when you get to be my age your eyes as well as other things (grin) don't work as well.
Thanks for your service in the marines, I am proud of all those who has or is serving.
Thanks,
Tom
Hi Panther,
Thanks for the response. I had already tried that but I evidently didn't wait long enough for it to close before I looked away. I just need to be more patient.
Mud Marine, if your comment was directed at me about reading manuals, the manual is always the first thing I download and read before flying. When I couldn't get them closed I tried looking through it twice more and couldn't find it. If you could tell me what page it is on, it would be appreciated. Unfortunately when you get to be my age your eyes as well as other things (grin) don't work as well.
Thanks for your service in the marines, I am proud of all those who has or is serving.
Thanks,
Tom
If it was directed at you I would have used a quote, like I'm doing now. My comment is directed at people in general that don't read the manual but come here looking for the fast answer. Those type of posts are endless........I was poking fun at them, that's all. It's really no big deal........just my weird sense of humor is all.
No problem. I know what you mean and I feel the same way, especially if the answer to a question has been answered just a few entrys back in the thread. Just wanted to assure everyone that if I ask a question it is because I really can't find the answer.
Thanks again for the support you and everyon else provide.
Tom
Panther_99FS
Retired SOH Administrator
Actually in the initial release,
The manual wasn't included in the download...Only a POH...:mixedsmi:
Yes Panther, you're always the one to point out my deep flaws and mistakes!!:costumes:
That's Panther on the right giving me a wedgie!!hehe
A little more for the engine curious:
Looking through the P&W R-2800 book reveals some interesting things about the induction system:
There are two automatically controlled gate valves in the induction system, one just before the carb and one before the auxiliary blower. These are controlled by a servo sensitive to pressure in the carb intake. The net effect is to slowly open as altitude increases, to maintain a constant MP up to each stages critical altitude. For example set 53" and it will maintain that MP without movement of the throttle till it is necessary to engage a further supercharger stage.
Currently the sim plane is setup such that it would be necessary to continually adjust the throttle position to maintain a constant MP with altitude change. The actual setup was simpler!
Cheers: T.
Looking through the P&W R-2800 book reveals some interesting things about the induction system:
There are two automatically controlled gate valves in the induction system, one just before the carb and one before the auxiliary blower. These are controlled by a servo sensitive to pressure in the carb intake. The net effect is to slowly open as altitude increases, to maintain a constant MP up to each stages critical altitude. For example set 53" and it will maintain that MP without movement of the throttle till it is necessary to engage a further supercharger stage.
Currently the sim plane is setup such that it would be necessary to continually adjust the throttle position to maintain a constant MP with altitude change. The actual setup was simpler!
Cheers: T.
Some of the later R2800 models featured an overboost control, which was also part of the carb water methanol control and metering unit. This adjusted throttle and gate positions and also the fuel mixture for operation with the denser and cooler water meth/fuel mixture (and also prevented overboosting the engine beyond max). The water meth was injected right in to the fuel stream before both being pressure injected at the base of the primary supercharger.
I do not currently have info as to whether or not this unit was fitted to B engines such as the 10W.
However it is/was still possible to burn up the engine by running at too high a CHT, too high a MP, shock cooling and a zillion ways one could destroy one of these engines.
T.
I do not currently have info as to whether or not this unit was fitted to B engines such as the 10W.
However it is/was still possible to burn up the engine by running at too high a CHT, too high a MP, shock cooling and a zillion ways one could destroy one of these engines.
T.
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
Fliger, I think what you are talking about requires a significant amount of coding outside the core FSX engine. This requires an immense amount of design work and should not be held against the team.
You also insinuated that the setup requires additional throttle as you gain altitude. If you have auto-mixture set (which might be a more realistic approach to flying this plane), then you do not require additional throttle as you climb. At least this is my experience. If I misread what you were saying though, my apologies.
As for burning the engine up, Acceleration allows for some function of ADI (not quite the same) and can cause engine failure. However, the system is raw at best. ADI is quite literally an on or off function and does not inject anything than 100% when being utilized. Also, the engine blow is not necessarily correct itself either. It can be coded to a much higher degree, but would pretty much negate the idea of using it in the first place if realism is the factor considering the time to make it.
Almost all the radials could be burned up if you engaged your turbo and went to the wall with your throttle, even with the injection. Manifold pressures would also be out of this world. If you are comparing it to for example the RealAir Spitty, they did somewhat a hack with coding to make it blow, but it is not entirely realistic.
Anyways, those are my thoughts. There might be some close look perhaps, but I think the level of sophistication that you are talking about is certainly not attainable at this time. This is their first release, and I am sure they are dying for the cash right now. Perhaps with future iterations of planes it might be possible, but as is I don't see any reason to code to that level of realism. There are VERY few planes modeled in FS that exhibit that kind, or level of coding, and those WWII radials present their own set of limitations that FSX doesn't support.
You also insinuated that the setup requires additional throttle as you gain altitude. If you have auto-mixture set (which might be a more realistic approach to flying this plane), then you do not require additional throttle as you climb. At least this is my experience. If I misread what you were saying though, my apologies.
As for burning the engine up, Acceleration allows for some function of ADI (not quite the same) and can cause engine failure. However, the system is raw at best. ADI is quite literally an on or off function and does not inject anything than 100% when being utilized. Also, the engine blow is not necessarily correct itself either. It can be coded to a much higher degree, but would pretty much negate the idea of using it in the first place if realism is the factor considering the time to make it.
Almost all the radials could be burned up if you engaged your turbo and went to the wall with your throttle, even with the injection. Manifold pressures would also be out of this world. If you are comparing it to for example the RealAir Spitty, they did somewhat a hack with coding to make it blow, but it is not entirely realistic.
Anyways, those are my thoughts. There might be some close look perhaps, but I think the level of sophistication that you are talking about is certainly not attainable at this time. This is their first release, and I am sure they are dying for the cash right now. Perhaps with future iterations of planes it might be possible, but as is I don't see any reason to code to that level of realism. There are VERY few planes modeled in FS that exhibit that kind, or level of coding, and those WWII radials present their own set of limitations that FSX doesn't support.
Actually the system used in the SOH A26, which also uses supercharged R2800's, is about correct. One can advance the throttle nearly to the firewall to set takeoff power, wet or dry (WEP brings in the wet power, if not quite correctly) and then with the gear up and starting to clean up the reductions are made in MP and RPM (in that order) for climb power, and eventually cruise power. Monitoring the power output with suitable instrumentation such as AFSD, one sees approximatly correct outputs HP for the MP/RPM settings. The only non realistic things in this approach is that you cannot overboost the engine (only slightly non relaistic) and there is no penalty for running at full mill power continouously, which would require some damage modeling by gauge wizards (possible) and there is no blower shifting. The power setting deliver a pretty good approximation of the real airplane power outputs and pretty convincing book speeds are delivered. Jerry did a good job on this.
The F6F (sim model) will deliver almost 80" MP at full throttle, indicating on AFSD some 3500 Hp or so..... So one should start out at something like 70% throttle to limit to the max dry power specs (54") at 2700 RPM (2000 HP) but will have to keep advancing the throttle as you climb to maintain this power setting (54") as you climb. The plane did not work like this. It should work more or less like the A 26 cited above.
As to mixture control. The R2800 Bendix injection carb (think single point fuel injection) has 4 positions, Idle cutoff, auto rich, auto lean and manual. Use of manual was not generally recommended. So auto mixture in the sim would be the best choice....
Necessary engine management: Use wet power for TKO if available, monitor MP to not exceed (should be close to full throttle if engine rigged properly under standard ISA conditions); after gear retracted transition to climb MP and RPM, then cruise; always adjust cowl flaps for optimum conditions. This is not all that hard, the DC2 project modeled in an engine damage penalty for running at takeof fpower too long. A number of planes have featured this effect.
These guys were pretty busy on takeoff, not much time to fiddle and fuss for an exact MP setting. On a deck takeoff one could set full power before brake release, on a field takeoff this might or might not keep you straight down the runway....
Then there was ram effect, which on takeoff would add several inches to the MP as you accelerated, then take it away as you rotated, disturbing the scoop airflow.....
So life gets complicated after (more than) 16 (cylinders).
So even if a plane is setup such that not much overboost is possible it is still possible to have enjoyable power setting "fun" if you know the book values.
T.
The F6F (sim model) will deliver almost 80" MP at full throttle, indicating on AFSD some 3500 Hp or so..... So one should start out at something like 70% throttle to limit to the max dry power specs (54") at 2700 RPM (2000 HP) but will have to keep advancing the throttle as you climb to maintain this power setting (54") as you climb. The plane did not work like this. It should work more or less like the A 26 cited above.
As to mixture control. The R2800 Bendix injection carb (think single point fuel injection) has 4 positions, Idle cutoff, auto rich, auto lean and manual. Use of manual was not generally recommended. So auto mixture in the sim would be the best choice....
Necessary engine management: Use wet power for TKO if available, monitor MP to not exceed (should be close to full throttle if engine rigged properly under standard ISA conditions); after gear retracted transition to climb MP and RPM, then cruise; always adjust cowl flaps for optimum conditions. This is not all that hard, the DC2 project modeled in an engine damage penalty for running at takeof fpower too long. A number of planes have featured this effect.
These guys were pretty busy on takeoff, not much time to fiddle and fuss for an exact MP setting. On a deck takeoff one could set full power before brake release, on a field takeoff this might or might not keep you straight down the runway....
Then there was ram effect, which on takeoff would add several inches to the MP as you accelerated, then take it away as you rotated, disturbing the scoop airflow.....
So life gets complicated after (more than) 16 (cylinders).
So even if a plane is setup such that not much overboost is possible it is still possible to have enjoyable power setting "fun" if you know the book values.
T.
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
Yes, close to full throttle sounds about right, but you are forgetting one very important thing... there is no modeled supercharger, and FSX doesn't necessarily model it by default either. As a matter of fact, I don't believe anyone other than A2A has modeled one correctly, and from experience, that system and all the other elements of Accusim took over 9 months to code correctly. This is not the case here.
All things being equal, MP will eventually drop off during a climb, and around 7,000 ft roughly (might be a bit lower) you really need to start kicking in the turbosupercharger to maintain MP. I'm not sure if the F6F however incorperated a switch that would link the throttle and turbo however...
In my tests with the F6F, I noticed no MP dropoff as long as auto mixture was set in realism settings. If what you observed is correct, then I would have had to use an incredible amount of throttle to maintain FL240 in my tests, wheras I was happily plugging along at 32 inches MP at roughly 49% throttle.
As for the auto mixture itself, as you suggested manual control was not recommended. One didn't have time to deal with it anyways when zooming and booming. Just set auto rich or auto lean and go to town. Is it possible what you are experiencing is due to the fact that auto mixture is not enabled in the .cfg? Unless you physically select auto mixture in the realism settings the aircraft will not behave in this fashion, giving results as you described. I noticed this first when I climbed to roughly to 10,000 feet and noticed a severe lack in MP... at which time I turned it on rather than fiddle with the mixture.
As for engine damage, there are a lot of things that have to be considered in order to correctly simulate it. While a lot of planes do indeed feature it, they are not necessarily always correct in that particular simulation. I will concede however it is a nice feature. For instance carb temp, CHT, oil temp, all associated flaps, airflow through and around the flaps, etc. Most simply associate it with CHT, but more often than not cowl flaps are not even modeled in most aircraft. I haven't tested this particular aircraft enough to know whether or not utilizing the cowl flaps has any appreciable affect on CHT. Also, the airflow over the cowl flaps at very high speeds would be reduced slightly.
I digress though. I don't have the book numbers, however you do. My experience with the 2800 only comes through from that of the P-47 at the moment and from the pilot manuals and observations on the engine as recorded by the USAAF. It seems to me to act just about right with the absence of engine damage, etc. At least in my opinion, within the confines of FSX.
There are a lot of other things I would like to see in this fantastic release before getting engines tuned this closely. And to be frank, sometimes the numbers lie.
All things being equal, MP will eventually drop off during a climb, and around 7,000 ft roughly (might be a bit lower) you really need to start kicking in the turbosupercharger to maintain MP. I'm not sure if the F6F however incorperated a switch that would link the throttle and turbo however...
In my tests with the F6F, I noticed no MP dropoff as long as auto mixture was set in realism settings. If what you observed is correct, then I would have had to use an incredible amount of throttle to maintain FL240 in my tests, wheras I was happily plugging along at 32 inches MP at roughly 49% throttle.
As for the auto mixture itself, as you suggested manual control was not recommended. One didn't have time to deal with it anyways when zooming and booming. Just set auto rich or auto lean and go to town. Is it possible what you are experiencing is due to the fact that auto mixture is not enabled in the .cfg? Unless you physically select auto mixture in the realism settings the aircraft will not behave in this fashion, giving results as you described. I noticed this first when I climbed to roughly to 10,000 feet and noticed a severe lack in MP... at which time I turned it on rather than fiddle with the mixture.
As for engine damage, there are a lot of things that have to be considered in order to correctly simulate it. While a lot of planes do indeed feature it, they are not necessarily always correct in that particular simulation. I will concede however it is a nice feature. For instance carb temp, CHT, oil temp, all associated flaps, airflow through and around the flaps, etc. Most simply associate it with CHT, but more often than not cowl flaps are not even modeled in most aircraft. I haven't tested this particular aircraft enough to know whether or not utilizing the cowl flaps has any appreciable affect on CHT. Also, the airflow over the cowl flaps at very high speeds would be reduced slightly.
I digress though. I don't have the book numbers, however you do. My experience with the 2800 only comes through from that of the P-47 at the moment and from the pilot manuals and observations on the engine as recorded by the USAAF. It seems to me to act just about right with the absence of engine damage, etc. At least in my opinion, within the confines of FSX.
There are a lot of other things I would like to see in this fantastic release before getting engines tuned this closely. And to be frank, sometimes the numbers lie.
ffice
V
vstudios
Guest
Hi IanHenry,
yes the arrester hook works with the Acc carriers and is located to the right of the lights panel.
Please see attached image for Vc location.
yes the arrester hook works with the Acc carriers and is located to the right of the lights panel.
Please see attached image for Vc location.