Texan Joyriding

Texan Turning

Please try these modified cnt pts to help with turning problem. And I very much doubt that the 'push stick forward to unlock tailwheel' is implemented. I can't seem to find anything anywhere that would indicate anything to that effect. How? XML? Where? Model? (Cheesh).

[contact_points]
point.0=1, -15.000, 0.000, -2.220, 2300, 0, 0.512, 60.0, 0.180, 2.5, 0.900, 0.0, 0.0, 0, 0.0, 0.0
point.1=1, 2.000, -4.300, -6.150, 1875, 1, 1.100, 0.0, 0.500, 2.5, 0.423, 4.6, 4.1, 1, 0.0, 0.0
point.2=1, 2.000, 4.300, -6.150, 1875, 2, 1.100, 0.0, 0.500, 2.5, 0.423, 3.1, 5.3, 3, 0.0, 0.0
point.3=2, -0.038, -20.824, -1.083, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 5, 0.0, 0.0
point.4=2, -0.001, 21.144, -0.972, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 6, 0.0, 0.0
point.5=2, -20.048, 0.000, 0.973, 2300, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 9, 0.0, 0.0
point.6=2, 8.212, 0.000, -4.500, 2000, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0
point.7=2, 5.827, 0.000, -2.544, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0
point.8=2, -1.916, 0.000, -2.375, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0
point.9=2, -8.212, 0.000, -1.692, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0
point.10=2,-15.007, 0.000, -0.674, 1800, 0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.000, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0
max_number_of_points=11
static_pitch= 12.200
static_cg_height= 6.200 //5.100
gear_system_type= 1
tailwheel_lock= 1
emergency_extension_type= 1
//
[brakes]
toe_brakes_scale= 1.000
parking_brake=1
differential_braking_scale= 0.800
auto_brakes=0
hydraulic_system_scalar= 1.000

Enjoy,
Chuck B
Napamule
 
Chuck,
Could you please explain the problem you were having with the ground steering. I don't seem to have much difficulty with it. I will try your set of contact points, however, the push stick forward to unlock IS implemented. Here's how:

Firstly, on the following line:
[contact_points]
point.0=1, -15.000, 0.000, -2.220, 2300, 0, 0.512, 60.0, 0.180, 2.5, 0.900, 0.0, 0.0, 0, 0.0, 0.0

180 gives a full swivel, when it's unlocked.

Secondly:
tailwheel_lock= 1

This means it has a locking tailwheel.

Thirdly:
Within the "xml" .cab file, in the "Panel" folder, is the gauge called "glock". It has parameters for the yoke/stick being forward to unlock, and back to lock.

Fourth:
That .xml gauge is drawn from the panel.cfg file, as:
gauge02=xml!Glock, 127,13,14,14


Hope this explains it?

Joseph
 
No problems with the stick/tail wheel implementation here. I think all works nicely. Aside from feeling under powered and sluggish.
 
As Joseph indicates, there is a 'hidden' .xml gauge that locks the tail wheel when the stick is not pushed forward. The only thing I would suggest changing with the tail wheel, is from having it fully controllable with the rudder pedals when un-locked as it is right now, to being more accurate/authentic by having it free-castoring, requiring differential braking and some prop-wash over the rudder to steer when un-locked (like the real thing).

The amount of power and control forces/effectiveness, right now, as is with the FDE, is actually very, very close to spot on to a stock-configured AT-6 - it's actually one of the things I like most of all with the Wozza Texan. They aren't docile, and they aren't that easy to push around without some muscle - if you ever see one parked next to something like a Mustang, they are also quite big!
 
News To Me

Joseph,
You said:

''Firstly, on the following line:
[contact_points]
point.0=1, -15.000, 0.000, -2.220, 2300, 0, 0.512, 60.0, 0.180, 2.5, 0.900, 0.0, 0.0, 0, 0.0, 0.0
180 gives a full swivel, when it's unlocked.''

Really? That's a new one on me. I thought that (0.180) was compression and not turning ratio related. Hummmm??? Are you SURE?
Chuck B
Napamule
PS: I won't touch the 'xml' with a 10 ft pole. No need. My 'solution' (as always) is to use my fav mil jet panel. Then I use 'Shift+G', 'M', 'Ctrl+E' and I'm gone!
 
Good-evening,

John, yes, I may need to work with the steering, as you mentioned. Will have to see what I can do.

I don't have any real big gripe with the stock FD in general. (It's pretty darn good!) However, I do feel that it is sluggish, particularly at cruise settings. Unless I'm missing something, I just can't seem to bring it within performance specifications.

Regardless, my aim is not to "fix" something, because nothing is broken. It is to develop an FD that matches, and represents the Racing T-6's, of which some will be portrayed with Chris's textures.

Chuck,
Was going off of memory here...I had to double check...looks like you are right..I was off on my count. 360 is where I would usually put 180...this might have something to do with that steering problem. Time for more digging! I'll review your set of points.

This from the SDK:
1 (1)ClassInteger defining the type of contact point: 0 = None, 1 = Wheel, 2 = Scrape, 3 = Skid, 4 = Float, 5 = Water Rudder
2 (-18.0)Longitudinal PositionThe longitudinal distance of the point from the defined reference datum (feet). Positive is forward (out the nose).
3 (0)Lateral PositionThe lateral distance of the point from the defined reference datum (feet). Positive is starboard (right, as viewed from the top with the airplane pointing “up”).
4 (-3.35)Vertical PositionThe vertical distance of the point from the defined reference datum (feet). Positive is up.
5 (3200)Impact Damage ThresholdThe speed at which an impact with the ground can cause damage (feet/min).
6 (0)Brake MapDefines which brake input drives the brake (wheels only).
0 = None, 1 = Left Brake, 2 = Right Brake.
7 (0.50)Wheel RadiusRadius of the wheel (feet).
8 (180)Steering AngleThe maximum angle (positive and negative) that a wheel can pivot (degrees).
9 (0.25)Static CompressionThis is the distance a landing gear is compressed when the empty aircraft is at rest on the ground (feet). This term defines the “strength” of the strut, where a smaller number will increase the “stiffness” of the strut.
10 (2.5)Ratio of Maximum Compression to Static CompressionRatio of the max dynamic compression available in the strut to the static value. Can be useful in coordinating the “compression” of the strut when landing.
11 (0.90)Damping RatioThis ratio describes how well the ground reaction oscillations are damped. A value of 1.0 is considered critically damped, meaning there will be little or no osciallation. A damping ratio of 0.0 is considered undamped, meaning that the oscillations will continue with a constant magnitude. Negative values result in an unstable ground handling situation, and values greater than 1.0 might also cause instabilities by being “over” damped. Typical values range from 0.6 to 0.95.
12 (1.0)Extension TimeThe amount of time it takes the landing gear to fully extend under normal conditions (seconds). A value of zero indicates a fixed gear.
13 (4.0)Retraction TimeThe amount of time it takes the landing gear to fully retract under normal conditions (seconds). A value of zero indicates a fixed gear.
14 (0)Sound TypeThis integer value will map a point to a type of sound:
0 = Center Gear,
1 = Auxiliary Gear,
2 = Left Gear,
3 = Right Gear,
4 = Fuselage Scrape,
5 = Left Wing Scrape,
6 = Right Wing Scrape,
7 = Aux1 Scrape,
8 = Aux2 Scrape,
9 = Tail Scrape.
15 (0)Airspeed LimitThis is the speed at which landing gear extension becomes inhibited (knots). Not used for scrape points or non-retractable gear.
16 (200)Damage from AirspeedThe speed above which the landing gear accrues damage (knots). Not used for scrape points or non-retractable gear.

<tbody>
</tbody>



Joseph
 
Chuck,

I've nearly figured it out. With your set, the searing is manageable, but that's because it's setting the tailwheel as steerable, with that value of 60. That's fine for some aircraft, but as John mentioned, the T-6 is free castoring. I had mis-read those numbers earlier, mistaking that compression .180 value, for my free-castoring value of 180 on the previous line. Sorry about that.

So, I have tweaked the differential braking a bit, changed the stock 360 tailwheel value to 180 (where I thought it was the first time) and now it is performing much more like the real-world counterpart. Throttle/braking needed, but also with the stick forward, fully unlocked, and free-wheelin' it. I bit more touch, and I think John's going to be happy.

Was there any other values there that seemed to help your setup Chuck?

Thanks for pointing out my blunder..it's solving the mystery for me.

Joseph
 
Just to keep the dream alive...

View attachment 62913

...and yes - I always prefer hand drawing the graphics on planes I create. The simple reason is that they look better than vectorised bitmaps almost every time. Unless I can find a really clean and large image.
 
Joseph,
Well I am glad to hear that my 'observation' helped. It's all good. I went and used the default panel (and xml gauges) and it's working for me now. Did the change to compression help anything? Maybe. Maybe not. The xml for gear is working as intended. 10% of forward stick does the trick. And it still will turn a little bit even if the wheel is supposedly 'locked' (again, due to cnt pt tweak?). Then I used my mil jet panel (to have a 2D panel view of gauges) and copied the 'vc' section from default panel into my panel cfg and put a copy of xml.cab in my panel folder and it worked. I like the vc panel. It's Super. Nice work.

I find that on loading (and heavy crash onto runway) that the engine shuts off (due to stress? I have crash detection off (for this reason)). Then when I went and set fuel selector, magnetos, and push start button (from vc) it was suddenly spining in the air (out of control) and it would not come down. (I use 'Y' and F1 to set it back down-but it took off again...). Then after change of cnt points I could do 'Ctrl+E' from Locked Spot view and it started ok. Humm.

I find that as you near 240 kts the controls 'stiffen' and you can't turn. And if you are in a dive you can't pull up. Not until you slow to under 240 kts. I don't think the 'real' Texan is going to be guilty of doing this. I installed a spoiler and use that to slow quicker so I can pull up. So this is not no 'Reno Racer' as is. Not yet.

I had it flying at 450 kts (using MY panel, turbo-prop FDEs (PC-7), and no xml) and it can hold knife-edge all day long with little or no controller input. The HARD part is using these FDEs for a PISTON version. News at 11. But there seems to be some model related issues as it wants to fly with '-3.5' of pitch trim in level flight (at curise speed). I don't think you want that when racing. Must fly close to '0.0' pitch trim, IMHO. Will work on FDEs tomorrow. Today I just did not do much except play around. It's a FABULOUS looking ac. I LOVE it's looks. New 'hot' engine-new paint? Not my problemo (hehe). Scrap metal gray is good enough for me-as long as it can 'scoot'. Ha.

My Dad was an ac mech on a carrier in WWII in the Pacific (1945) and he worked on these babies (lost the pictures). I was 5 then but I remember driving my Mom crazy with 'radial' engine sounds coming out of my mouth. They flew over our house every day where I grew up in Texas. So did P-51's and other 'warbirds'. Never can forget those 'detonation' and prop sounds as they flew by at 'break neck speeds' and (under) 500 ft. Ah, the good ole days. So would a 'Texan' be dear to me? I guess. That and the P-51 and the Mitchell and the P-38.
Chuck B
Napamule
Edit: '..other values..?' Well I looked into the air file and it don't look 'real'. Lots of 'gimicky' and 'guesstimate' values showing. Some sections 'missing' (not necessary). So you need a 'good' air file for starters.
 
Chris,
Beautiful artwork my friend, Good tribute!

Chuck,

I believe the problem you were experiencing was due to some of the contact points being off, perhaps. Not sure, sounds unusual.

Mr. Carter did a fabulous job on the original FD. I have heard lots of reports, and compared them with several first hand pilot reports, of men who fly the T-6. I am very comfortable using his platform, for this project.

Just wait and see, I think you will be pleased with the result. With every hour of tweaking, I am feeling more and more realism being incorporated into this FD.

240kts would be well above limits, and out of the question on the real T-6. I would suspect there would be issues.

With my current configuration, am having no trim issues at all.

Am currently bringing hourly fuel consumption to a norm, with maybe a little excess burn at race settings.

My goal is to represent as true, and accurate as possible, the simulation of racing one of these beasts. We'll see what happens.

Joseph
 
OK, after another bout od "self-flagellation" I am getting somewhere. For one thing I have the cowling bumpmaps so that they don't cause facetting of the mdl. I have also completed and fixed all the decals on the sides, moving them to about their right positions. I have added about three thousand more rivets to the paint although I still need to do the fuselage bumpmap yet.

Is looking better although I do still need specs as well as reducing the alpha a bit.

View attachment 63100 View attachment 63101

Oddly I must say that the original bumps for the wings are really OK. It's just the cowling and fuselage bumpmaps that need really fixing. For one thing, if you look a bit closer, you will see I have adjusted the panel lines a bit.

Coming along, anyway...
 
Chris,

Wow! It's just looking incredible. big +1

Do you intend to do any work on any of the interior, or small parts textures?

Keep it up!

Joseph

 
Cbris, it's looking great! I'm looking forward to seeing more progress as you're picking away at it. :applause:
 
@Joseph - there's not really much needed on the interior - some colour changes to a more "civilian" look perhaps. Maybe some small touches. But the VC is what makes this model so much a pleasure - it is really nicely detailed.

As for the exterior, I think it is still too shiny.
 
Chris,
I can maybe make a civilian variant theme for the interior, if you wish... Let me know.

Joseph
 
Keeping this thread alive...

I have been in contact with the owners of "Thumper 12" and have their blessings on:

View attachment 63966

And even more enjoyable, they are letting me loose on:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/North-American-SNJ-5/1202126/L/&sid=d6c86e10f5c72f9eccdd6bfc8833a4d7

a.k.a. McDonald Racer #37McDonald Racer #37

I don't know if you know this, but "12" crashed a couple or three years ago - it was a "landing" - the pilot walked away, but "12" is not with us anymore. "37" is incredible - Visit them on Facebook and scroll down till you see the prop... I don't know for sure if this link will work... check... Aha it does! As you scroll through their pics, you'll see that it could be a tricky paint job for FSX - all that polish and then speed tape over the rivets...

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=285206244970&set=a.285206024970.41532.166415684970&type=1&theater
 
Chris,

#12 is looking fantastic. And I'm excited that your going to do #37, it is purdy!

Everything on my end is coming along pretty good also. So far!

Joseph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top