H
harleyman
Guest
Cool BLOG Bill...
Its looking great in IE 8 BTW...
Its looking great in IE 8 BTW...
-
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
Tailwind Released!
- Thread starter Lionheart
- Start date
Yeah, well except it's not playing my music. Probably because that TW xml-sound gauge should be also inserted to Kodiak. But everything else in it works, and it has that great looking old time compass that I tend to use over the G1000
.
That should work! Make sure your tunes are properly named, and in WAV 16bit Windows format. If they are in 32bit, it will crash FS as FS only runs 16bit.
EDIT: (reread the post) Ahh.. roger.. The Kodiak isnt fitted with the sound system. It will not work in there. arrgh. My apologies.
Bill
I was actually fiddling with that sound thingy today, trying if it would cooperate with my Kodiak, but as you said, it's not working. But I still have my Winamp.Hey All,
So I gave in and bought the tailwind. Really really nice plane - I like it - however I'm wondering if the air/cfg files were fixed in version 1.4 to reflect 600 miles of range at a reasonable speed (what ever that is). I can't get 600 miles unless I'm like at 107kts TAS (about 123mph) (IAS 99kts) at 5500ft (fuel flow is 5.38 gal/hr mixture 20%). Is going this slow right? I don't expect 600 miles at 180 mph as I doubt that is an economical cruise speed but is 55 odd mph slower than 180 to get that range sound about right? Also I saw specs for tailwinds with 30 or 35 gallon fuel tanks as well.
-Ed-
So I gave in and bought the tailwind. Really really nice plane - I like it - however I'm wondering if the air/cfg files were fixed in version 1.4 to reflect 600 miles of range at a reasonable speed (what ever that is). I can't get 600 miles unless I'm like at 107kts TAS (about 123mph) (IAS 99kts) at 5500ft (fuel flow is 5.38 gal/hr mixture 20%). Is going this slow right? I don't expect 600 miles at 180 mph as I doubt that is an economical cruise speed but is 55 odd mph slower than 180 to get that range sound about right? Also I saw specs for tailwinds with 30 or 35 gallon fuel tanks as well.
-Ed-
Hey Ed,
Yes, Build 1.4 has improved range, but no where near 800 miles.
Here are stats on the actual W-8 plane;
SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECS FOR W8 TAILWIND
W8
100 HP Continental
160 MPH Cruise
Climb between 700 and 1100 FPM (one and two passengers)
Flaps 27 and 45 degrees; landing and takeoff
Weights; 837 LB and 1400 LB
Fuel Capacity 25 US Gallons
Rudder Deflection
Cruise/RPM
2850 RPM / 160 MPH / 141 Kts
2650 RPM / 145 MPH / 127 Kts
Stall Speeds
69 MPH / No Flaps
54 MPH / Half Flaps
48 MPH / Full Flaps
Range: 120 Kts / 138 MPH / 720 NM / 830 Miles
Fuel Burn; 2750 RPM / 6 US Gal's an hour
120 Knots is considered economy maximum distance cruise speed. I hadnt heard of any with regular panel tanks that could hold over 25 gallons. They did do wingtanks and aluminum wings (alum. ribs and wing skins). My birds (W8 and W10) are with single 25 gallon fuselage (behind the panel) tanks.
You can modify the airfiles to have more fuel. Basically just change it out to whatever you wish, such as 35 gallons.
But, embarrassingly, I didnt make mine to go 800 miles. I also cannot see it happening, but perhaps they do that kind of range.
Bill
Yes, Build 1.4 has improved range, but no where near 800 miles.
Here are stats on the actual W-8 plane;
SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECS FOR W8 TAILWIND
W8
100 HP Continental
160 MPH Cruise
Climb between 700 and 1100 FPM (one and two passengers)
Flaps 27 and 45 degrees; landing and takeoff
Weights; 837 LB and 1400 LB
Fuel Capacity 25 US Gallons
Rudder Deflection
Cruise/RPM
2850 RPM / 160 MPH / 141 Kts
2650 RPM / 145 MPH / 127 Kts
Stall Speeds
69 MPH / No Flaps
54 MPH / Half Flaps
48 MPH / Full Flaps
Range: 120 Kts / 138 MPH / 720 NM / 830 Miles
Fuel Burn; 2750 RPM / 6 US Gal's an hour
120 Knots is considered economy maximum distance cruise speed. I hadnt heard of any with regular panel tanks that could hold over 25 gallons. They did do wingtanks and aluminum wings (alum. ribs and wing skins). My birds (W8 and W10) are with single 25 gallon fuselage (behind the panel) tanks.
You can modify the airfiles to have more fuel. Basically just change it out to whatever you wish, such as 35 gallons.
But, embarrassingly, I didnt make mine to go 800 miles. I also cannot see it happening, but perhaps they do that kind of range.
Bill
Hey All,
Now 800 miles seems hard to believe but maybe they could do it. Have you ever asked on the Tailwind owners group at yahoo groups? I'm thinking 600 (522nm) should be doable. I just flew 531 miles (461nm) on 23.4 gallons - mixture on 18% at 115 IAS about 124TAS. Would not have made 600 miles but at 120 TAS maybe barely. I take it this how you modeled it? I was just wondering what economical cruise on a plane like this is - obviously way way slower than stated cruise speeds. I don't know the answer just wondering what is real and that 800 really makes you think. Am tentatively planning to fly this from London to Australia but it may be a bit distance challenged.
-Ed-
Pilotfriend lists the W10 as having a range of 600 miles as well. Also Pilotfriend lists 35 gallons of fuel.
Now 800 miles seems hard to believe but maybe they could do it. Have you ever asked on the Tailwind owners group at yahoo groups? I'm thinking 600 (522nm) should be doable. I just flew 531 miles (461nm) on 23.4 gallons - mixture on 18% at 115 IAS about 124TAS. Would not have made 600 miles but at 120 TAS maybe barely. I take it this how you modeled it? I was just wondering what economical cruise on a plane like this is - obviously way way slower than stated cruise speeds. I don't know the answer just wondering what is real and that 800 really makes you think. Am tentatively planning to fly this from London to Australia but it may be a bit distance challenged.
-Ed-
Hey Ed,
Yes, it would be a bit distance challenged.
This is a good question on distances.. I was running calculations and they do not add up.
At 8 Gallons USG per hour, that gives you 3.125 hours of fuel. At 120 Knots, thats 375 Nautical miles in 3 hours. That is also with a W8, which is a smaller, more economical engine. So, again, it doesnt add up.
A standard tank that fits under the panel (dashboard) of a standard Tailwind is 25 gallons. Its easy enough to make a bigger tank, but it will hamper leg room, and come closer to the dashboard's rear surface, requiring thinner gauges, or indentions in the fuel cell. But, wing tanks is the best way to go. You can add small plastic cells to huge cells in alum. wings, thus you wouldnt need a fuselage panel tank.
The TW's are definately not a 'Grand Touring' bird. Pretty much just a speedster for running around in, quick jaunts, $100.00 burger runs.
I am including some pics, a couple have panel shots, where you can see the tank hanging down underneath near your feet (toes). The lower it hangs, the more fuel it has in the cell, of course. But the more limited your interior space.
Note; the little aerobatic bird in black was sold to a gentleman in Russia, I believe near Moscow.
Bill
Yes, it would be a bit distance challenged.
This is a good question on distances.. I was running calculations and they do not add up.
At 8 Gallons USG per hour, that gives you 3.125 hours of fuel. At 120 Knots, thats 375 Nautical miles in 3 hours. That is also with a W8, which is a smaller, more economical engine. So, again, it doesnt add up.
A standard tank that fits under the panel (dashboard) of a standard Tailwind is 25 gallons. Its easy enough to make a bigger tank, but it will hamper leg room, and come closer to the dashboard's rear surface, requiring thinner gauges, or indentions in the fuel cell. But, wing tanks is the best way to go. You can add small plastic cells to huge cells in alum. wings, thus you wouldnt need a fuselage panel tank.
The TW's are definately not a 'Grand Touring' bird. Pretty much just a speedster for running around in, quick jaunts, $100.00 burger runs.
I am including some pics, a couple have panel shots, where you can see the tank hanging down underneath near your feet (toes). The lower it hangs, the more fuel it has in the cell, of course. But the more limited your interior space.
Note; the little aerobatic bird in black was sold to a gentleman in Russia, I believe near Moscow.
Bill
Hey All,
Bill I've been doing some more looking...
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/cgi-bin/res.pl?keyword=Wittman+Tailwind+Model+W-8&offset=0
1125km = 675 miles - look at how far the derivative above it goes!
http://cafefoundation.org
Then find your way to the aircraft test pdfs (click research then click aprs) and a Wittman will be there. I can't link to it directly. The article has no distance stuff but a heck of a good article - late in the article says the plane is a cross country plane carrying two people a long distance quickly.
http://airventure.aviation.museum/collection/aircraft/Wittman%20Tailwind%20W-8C%20Specifications.asp#TopOfPage
This is Wittman's plane says 600nm
http://www.propcons.com.au/picgal06.htm
Take very special note of this page! Caboolture (just north of Brisbane) to Melbourne at 120 kts That distance is about 750nm (860miles)!!
http://www.propcons.com.au/pics/picgal06/Specs.pdf
Original specs from a 1977 steve wittman brochure - in fact mailed by Steve Wittman!
-Ed-
Bill I've been doing some more looking...
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/cgi-bin/res.pl?keyword=Wittman+Tailwind+Model+W-8&offset=0
1125km = 675 miles - look at how far the derivative above it goes!
http://cafefoundation.org
Then find your way to the aircraft test pdfs (click research then click aprs) and a Wittman will be there. I can't link to it directly. The article has no distance stuff but a heck of a good article - late in the article says the plane is a cross country plane carrying two people a long distance quickly.
http://airventure.aviation.museum/collection/aircraft/Wittman%20Tailwind%20W-8C%20Specifications.asp#TopOfPage
This is Wittman's plane says 600nm
http://www.propcons.com.au/picgal06.htm
Take very special note of this page! Caboolture (just north of Brisbane) to Melbourne at 120 kts That distance is about 750nm (860miles)!!
http://www.propcons.com.au/pics/picgal06/Specs.pdf
Original specs from a 1977 steve wittman brochure - in fact mailed by Steve Wittman!
Bill I'm getting the impression this is a very fast gas sipping aircraft that goes along ways. 800 odd miles may be it's very max at slow speed while 600 may be doable at a reasonable cruise (whatever that is - maybe 140/150 kts for perhaps a w10). Opinion?
-Ed-
Hey Ed,
Dang, that is some great research.
I'll do some engine tuning to the carburetion and let you know when its ready.
Shall we do this to the W-10?
Bill
Hey All,
Bill really good of you to do this.
I think both aircraft need some fixing in terms of range. I believe you have takeoff and climb parameters right bang on - it's just cruise speeds and range that I wonder about.
For example I flew the W8 and at 7500 ft throttle set to 117 IAS gave 132 TAS with air fuel mixture at about 0.07 (from AFSD) and total range for the plane was a bit over 300 miles (about 275-280nm). What it should be I'm not sure (likely a lot more) but that is probably around cruise speed (150mph). Here are a couple references that suggest a couple fuel consumptions for a couple engines for W8s. I don't know if either is the engine you have modeled but depending on the hp of the engine you put in the tailwind it could be a bit more or less "thirsty". I'm not concerned with whether the final model gets 800 or not I'm just looking for something more "real". My guess is for the "average" build whatever that was the W8 might get 550 - 650 miles at "high" cruise and maybe over 700 at "low" cruise - just a suggestion.
http://www1.iwvisp.com/douglass/tailwind.htm
http://www.aviation-ads.co.uk/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=85&catid=0&Itemid=1
Sure would help to get ahold of some of these references!
http://www.eaa.org/homebuilders/kitplans/wittmantailwind.asp
As for the W10...
See this thread for some ideas on one W10 plane - look down a couple posts for the range number. Doesn't say how fast though.
http://www.studentpilot.com/interact/forum/showthread.php?p=391704
Here is another W10.
http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/TailwindForum/message/2322
Again lots of information missing.
Anyway you modeled the w10 with a high hp engine so it should be fast but probably be a bit shorter on range than the common 600 mile number. Maybe 600 to 650 miles on "low" cruise and 500 or so on "high" cruise. Just a thought. With a lack of hard data getting it absolutely right is impossible but I know you can get in the ballpark.
If I can help with testing air/cfg files just let me know.
-Ed-
Bill really good of you to do this.
I think both aircraft need some fixing in terms of range. I believe you have takeoff and climb parameters right bang on - it's just cruise speeds and range that I wonder about.
For example I flew the W8 and at 7500 ft throttle set to 117 IAS gave 132 TAS with air fuel mixture at about 0.07 (from AFSD) and total range for the plane was a bit over 300 miles (about 275-280nm). What it should be I'm not sure (likely a lot more) but that is probably around cruise speed (150mph). Here are a couple references that suggest a couple fuel consumptions for a couple engines for W8s. I don't know if either is the engine you have modeled but depending on the hp of the engine you put in the tailwind it could be a bit more or less "thirsty". I'm not concerned with whether the final model gets 800 or not I'm just looking for something more "real". My guess is for the "average" build whatever that was the W8 might get 550 - 650 miles at "high" cruise and maybe over 700 at "low" cruise - just a suggestion.
http://www1.iwvisp.com/douglass/tailwind.htm
http://www.aviation-ads.co.uk/index.php?option=com_adsmanager&page=show_ad&adid=85&catid=0&Itemid=1
Sure would help to get ahold of some of these references!
http://www.eaa.org/homebuilders/kitplans/wittmantailwind.asp
As for the W10...
See this thread for some ideas on one W10 plane - look down a couple posts for the range number. Doesn't say how fast though.
http://www.studentpilot.com/interact/forum/showthread.php?p=391704
Here is another W10.
http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/TailwindForum/message/2322
Again lots of information missing.
Anyway you modeled the w10 with a high hp engine so it should be fast but probably be a bit shorter on range than the common 600 mile number. Maybe 600 to 650 miles on "low" cruise and 500 or so on "high" cruise. Just a thought. With a lack of hard data getting it absolutely right is impossible but I know you can get in the ballpark.
If I can help with testing air/cfg files just let me know.
-Ed-
Hey Easy Ed,
Sorry to take so long on the retune.
I adjusted the fuel flow scaler to 3.0 in the 'aircraft.cfg' file for best results of closest realistic fuel burn.
fuel_flow_scalar= 0.3
I did a few tunes until I got to 3.0. I then ran from KPLN to KBOS (Boston), setting up at;
ALT...............6,000'
Throttle..........2300 RPM
Airspeed.........150 MPH / 130 KTS
Preset GPS distance....625 NM
I did it and had approximately .2 US Gallon left in the tank as I crossed over Boston International.
Now that is a fast cruise at 150 MPH, so figure 130 MPH would yeild a very longer distance. Changing the fuel flow scaler did not interfere with aircraft performance / max airspeed.
I am going to try a setting of 0.25 next and see how that does with a 800 NM journey.
I figured 600 to be realistic and thats with a high cruise.
Hope that helps. I took some screenshots that show distance, airspeed, GPS distance to target, and fuel remaining.
Bill
Sorry to take so long on the retune.
I adjusted the fuel flow scaler to 3.0 in the 'aircraft.cfg' file for best results of closest realistic fuel burn.
fuel_flow_scalar= 0.3
I did a few tunes until I got to 3.0. I then ran from KPLN to KBOS (Boston), setting up at;
ALT...............6,000'
Throttle..........2300 RPM
Airspeed.........150 MPH / 130 KTS
Preset GPS distance....625 NM
I did it and had approximately .2 US Gallon left in the tank as I crossed over Boston International.
Now that is a fast cruise at 150 MPH, so figure 130 MPH would yeild a very longer distance. Changing the fuel flow scaler did not interfere with aircraft performance / max airspeed.
I am going to try a setting of 0.25 next and see how that does with a 800 NM journey.
I figured 600 to be realistic and thats with a high cruise.
Hope that helps. I took some screenshots that show distance, airspeed, GPS distance to target, and fuel remaining.
Bill
I went ahead and ran a second for 800 NM distance as stated in all the literature and that came out to a fuel flow scaler of 0.20
That got me from KPLN to KMLC, 2300 RPM, 6,000', at 816 NM and I had 0.3 US Gallons to spare, lol...
(I was down to scaler 0.11 and nothing changed, so I started reloading the sim as it wasnt taking the adjustments, and had to go back up to 0.20. Took all afternoon of testing, even at 16X).
So... Official fuel flow scaler is 0.20 which is 800 NM plus some vapour left over. My settings are 600 NM range, mid way cruise (again), and scaler at 0.30.
I havent done the W8's yet. I may have to do those tomorrow.
Bill
That got me from KPLN to KMLC, 2300 RPM, 6,000', at 816 NM and I had 0.3 US Gallons to spare, lol...
(I was down to scaler 0.11 and nothing changed, so I started reloading the sim as it wasnt taking the adjustments, and had to go back up to 0.20. Took all afternoon of testing, even at 16X).
So... Official fuel flow scaler is 0.20 which is 800 NM plus some vapour left over. My settings are 600 NM range, mid way cruise (again), and scaler at 0.30.
I havent done the W8's yet. I may have to do those tomorrow.
Bill