• 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.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

T-38A Is OUT!

Paul your issue is not losing speed in the final seconds, it is NOT losing speed. Look at picture #3. You are still at 170Kts, ten feet off the ground and stalling her to get down.

Here is how I was taught to land. Padre Bill quoted you from the more recent version of the bible. Here is the OLD testament version that was taught when I flew. It is also how we landed the F-4.

You calculate landing and approach speeds as a cross check. However, if you set the proper AOA with pitch (control stick) and get the donut, you will be on the correct speed.

Aim just short of the runway's edge and use the throttles to get there. Speed (AOA ) is done with the pitch and the glide slope is set with the throttles. If you see yourself getting low (too many red) add power. If you are high (too many white) reduce power. This way, you have only one control to worry about, the throttles.

Your goal is to land in the first 1000 feet of runway. So as you reach the overrun, raise you aim point about 200-300 feet down the runway and slowly pull power, hold your attitude or verrrryyyy slight pull back on the stick a smidgen .

The jet's nose will naturally pitch up and flatten out the approach, lose speed and settle on the runway. If you get the red chevron let the stick go forward to green. Don't worry about landing long. Once you get the picture you will start landing within the 1000 feet.

If you haven't already done so, watch the video I made on landing. Look at the gauges to see when I start reducing power and what AOA I am holding. You will see the jet's approach flatten out at the end.

If it makes you feel any better, I had hell landing this thing at first. I kept dropping too fast in the final turn and had to add power and go around.
 
Didn't Chuck Yeager say something about being able to fly a barn door if it had enough power on it? I wonder if this is the barn door he had in mind? :icon_lol: :salute:

Glenn
 
Uh Oh! This plane does not work in multiplayer -- at least, it does not work well.

When I load into a multiplayer session with the T-38 that uses FSX's radios to communicate, it causes massive communication problems. Messages become delayed, garbled, and unreadable. This is a problem that affects everyone in the session. The moment I leave the session all returns to normal, and when I load back in with this aircraft, everyone in the session is affected. This does not occur with any other aircraft that I fly. Switching to another aircraft solves the problem..... but I want to fly the T-38!

This is a serious problem in multiplayer servers that focus on ATC, with multiple controllers and dozens of pilots using a variety of frequencies -- things can get chaotic if all comms are lost. The problems begin as soon as the T-38 is spawned, and it does not matter what frequency the aircraft is on, or if the battery switch is on or off. The problem goes away as soon as the aircraft leaves the session. Unfortunately, this has resulted in multiplayer communities recommending that their members not buy the T-38, and forcing them to kick players from their sessions who fly the T-38.

I bought the T-38 to fly online in Air Traffic Control sessions.... so I am not very happy at the moment (although I think all other aspects of the aircraft are wonderful). What could possibly cause this? I tried taking the 2D radio/GPS panel out of the mix, but the problem persisted. Could it have to do with things that are coded outside of FSX? A2A does a lot with outside coding, but their products are fine.... perhaps it is in the way things are coded.

I have not yet flown the T-38 in a closed session with other T-38 drivers (none of my friends have bought it yet)... but I am worried there may be problems there too. My friends do not want to buy it until they know it can be flown in multiplayer.

What was the level of multiplayer testing done in the development/beta testing? If any of the developers want to look more into the possible multiplayer problems, I would be happy to lend a hand... feel free to send me a PM and we can set up a session and go do some testing/flying.

Still, this is a great aircraft, and I recommend it to others.... just hoping we can fly it online someday soon.

Cheers,

Chris

**** If it helps -- the RealAir Duke and the Captain Sim C-130 do the exact same thing to FSX comms..... I don't own those aircraft, but our multiplayer community has them documented as causing the exact same issue.
 
Can you tell us more about the problem(s)? We are dieing to know, because this has ruined several of our large multiplayer events. (not just the T-38, but other aircraft that do the same thing).

If you guys know what causes this, please let us know and maybe we can urge other companies to fix the problem in their own aircraft. It may also help other developers from making the same mistakes on future projects.

I think multiplayer is a whole different animal in FSX, and there is a lot that can go wrong. I am glad you guys are on top of it.

Cheers,

Chris
 
The problem is that some elements of the product (i.e. smoke) are being called many times, over and over. Seeing as this is one of the things that MP transmits from one user to the others, it's flooding the server and borking out. For the most, these are easy fixes. We just didn't plan for them and that is our bad. It will not happen again.

We are going to fix this for the SP that will be released in the next little bit along with a bunch of other stuff...

I think you will all be pleased.
 
Thanks Colin,

You guys are brilliant. That makes a lot of sense. I know that gliders do the same thing, because they spawn tow-planes that never go away, and the session gets filled with tow-planes and everyone lags out.

I am really impressed with how brilliant your team is, and how good the customer support is. It is so good.... I am going to go register on your support forums.

Thanks again,

Chris
 
keatles said:
Here is a screenshot of my first T-38A repaint. Difficult to know which textures are mapped to which parts of the airplane, but getting there slowly.

Wonderful model with a really good (if a little confusing) paint kit.

Orca01-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Hi,

When will it be available?

Thank you!
Regards,
Zsolt
 
krazycolin said:
The problem is that some elements of the product (i.e. smoke) are being called many times, over and over. Seeing as this is one of the things that MP transmits from one user to the others, it's flooding the server and borking out. For the most, these are easy fixes. We just didn't plan for them and that is our bad. It will not happen again.
Click to expand...
krazycolin said:
We are going to fix this for the SP that will be released in the next little bit along with a bunch of other stuff...
I think you will all be pleased.
Click to expand...

my two cents:
The source of the problem lies in the architecture of the DirectX communication layer and the asynchronous protocol between SimConnect server and clients.
Communications between client and server are asyncronous, this means that when the client makes a request to the server does not polls to wait for the answer but intercepts it when and if it arrives.
This protocol is very efficient but has a serious drawback, the "dead lock" that comes when the server is flooded and does not have not enough bandwidth to answer to clients. If server is "dead locked" it hangs and players begin to be kicked out as the timeout expires.
Several situations can trigger the "dead lock":
- slow connections with too high ping times, too narrow bandwidth, too many players, etc. each players needs to have at least 25 kbit of bandwidth, european domestic lines with outgoing 256 kbit bandwidth can support not more than 10 players.
- several connections/disconnections at the same time can trigger the dead lock as well, to solve this one need a careful FSX server configuration with a dedicated machine, one player acting as player and server at the same time into a LAN (both physical or virtual) make the "dead lock" most likely.
- bad programming techniques that do not take in account above issues, both .mdl embedded code, c/c++ dll's and xml routines are called at least 18 times per second by the FSX engine, one must be carefull to call "server propagated" events only when necessary. One example is the Capt Sim C130, exterior .mdl calls COM_RADIO_SET event so many times that floods the server in few seconds making himself unusable on multiplayer, it seems that Milviz programmers did the same mistake, hopefully they will fix it soon.
- At SIM SKUNK WORK we have addressed this problem since the analysis phase of the project because the multiplayer was one of requirements.
Hope this helps all developer, at SIM SKUNK WORK we are all "Open Source and open mind" oriented, no secrets, just contribute to give to simmer community the best sim software we can.
cheers
/Mario
 
Quite honestly, MP was never one of our selling points though, now, I see that it certainly makes for a fun time.

It shall be fixed and all further Milviz planes will allow for MP (not necessarily shared cockpit though).
 
I know the MP issue is a big "hot" button for many, and I can see from the text traffic on the Milviz Beta Testers Forum that it's being rectified at this moment. However, I would like to throw out some thoughts on this, if I may.

If the MP sites are recomending people not buy the T-38 simply because it's not MP worthy at this time, then I think that's unfair. The people who were involved in building and testing this model were arseholes-and-elbows trying to make this model as real as practicallity would allow. There was enough "is it ready yet" as it was, and the MP issue just would have delayed it even more, had we known about it. In the "current Milviz T-38 pics" thread, I believe it was stated that we had not tested it in MP. We all have other full time jobs, and quite frankly, probably spent more time testing this model than common sense would allow.

The majority of us Milviz Beta testers have real world flying jobs. I think it's safe to say we are high time jet pilots, and we recomend this model. The dudes over at the MP sites that are telling people to not buy it...well, go ask them if they fly jets four days a week all day long, or if they just dream about it. Then ask yourself if you want to take advice on what to fly from people who fly jets four days a week all day long, or from people who just dream about it.

I certainly don't mean to outright insult anyone, but alot of work went into this model over a long period of time. It's an awesome flyer.


EDIT/DISCLAIMER: These are my personal thoughts on the matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top