Virtavia A-4E-F Skyhawk FDE Update

mal998 said:
Here is the first installment of updated flight dynamic files for the Virtavia A-4E/F Skyhawk. These 2 zips include files for the #0-1 Clean aircraft and the #2-3 Adversary aircraft. They should not be used for any other models as they were constructed specifcally for only the stated types. As usual backup the original files. If you have added additional textures make sure you copy and paste the new textures information into the files I have provided.

These files were built using the Realism slider turned full on (right). Hopefully you will find them to be an improvement over my original work. If you have questions or comments feel free to let me hear your thoughts, as my interest revolves around improving flyability while attemting to capture some sense of how the aircraft actually behaved in the real world. Having said that, most of us are keenly aware of the restrictions and limitations posed by FSX.

As I complete new files I will continue to post them up here at SOH. Thanks to Wings of Gold for checking these out and giving me the thumbs up.

As a side note for all those who have contributed to help keep SOH up and running, thank you. For those who have not yet contributed please give what you can, when you can.

Thanks,
mal
Click to expand...

MAL998,

Curious as to what these FDE updates correct/improve. The headers from the previous aircraft.cfg fdes noted the corrections:
So is it Ver 2.7 that is the latest and greatest?



// A-4E/F Skyhawk Flight Dynamics Ver 1.0 by mal - CLEAN Aircraft
// 4-22-2012
// 5-17-2012 ver.1.1
// 5-20-2012 ver.1.2
// 5-29-2012 ver.1.3
// 6-05-2012 ver.1.4
// 6-08-2012 ver.1.5 Near Completed Flight Model
// 6-16-2012 ver.1.6 New Models added to Cfg.
// 6-18-2012 ver.1.7
// 6-21-2012 ver.1.8 G models added
// 6-27-2012 ver.1.9 Cleaned up descriptions & misc. items
// 6-29-2012 ver.1.9 Clean Aircraft CFG.
// 7-31-2012 ver.2.0 FD Completed
// 9-11-2012 ver.2.1 Flight testing completed - remembering 9-11
// 21 Oct 2012 ver.2.2 : new lts sect, fuel dump & exh fx, AP bank, wingfld/tailhk, thumb UI.
// 11-29-2012 ver.2.3 Updated lateral stability, COG, yaw moi. h-tail incidence, launch bar lug
// 12-04-2012 ver.2.4 adjusted h-tail incidence, decreased flap lift & pitch, lowered fuel gain, reduced elevator effectiveness, reduced pitch stability, decreased oswald efficiency, modified (404) stall characteristics, lowered vert. inertia, lowered elevator control factor.
// 12-06-2012 ver.2.5 increased yaw stab2
// 12-07-2012 ver.2.6 decreased aileron & rudder effectiveness, increased yaw stab 1 & 2
// 1-06-2013 ver.2.6 out for testing
// 1-08-2013 ver.2.6 test results positive
// 1-22-2013 ver.2.6 ver.2.6 fine tuned - 2.6 release candidate
// 1-30-2013 ver.2.6 decreased yaw stability, increased aileron response, increased elevator response
// 12-27-2014 Ver.2.7 FDE Update mal
 
mal998 said:
OK, thanks for that Frank.
I have the correct names.
But for the sake of keeping the air file names simple I will continue to name them with only the model numbers rather than the whole name which would make them too long.
Click to expand...
I think that's a good idea.
:ernaehrung004:
 
gray eagle,

The files I just posted are the newest and reflect the latest changes to the A-4. Those changes are numerous and would only bore you if I listed them all. Suffice to say they were extensive and there will probably be more in the future.

As a matter of fact I have been in contact with a gentleman who has made some recommendations which I will most likely put into practice. So the files will change again.

It was unusual for me to list all those changes in the first place. Normally you would not see that kind of info in most aircraft.cfg's or airfiles.

What really matters is this; does the aircraft fly OK in the sim and do most users have an enjoyable experience?

Hopefully the answer is yes on both counts.
 
A4 Syhawk Exhaust effects

The Virtavia A4 start up exhaust effects (Smoke) looks to be originating from the wrong position. I've attached a pic of the smoke emanating from midway right fuselage.
After the black smoke clears, the white smoke follows (From same position)

The current settings are:

[smokesystem]
smoke.0= -19.00, 0.00, 0.00, fx_Virtav_A4_exhaust //fx Z offset=0.725

Here is a pic of the current effect circled in yellow.

If I hash out the smokesystem, The exhaust still comes out it the same place. Wierd.

attachment.php
 
mal998 said:
gray eagle,

The files I just posted are the newest and reflect the latest changes to the A-4. Those changes are numerous and would only bore you if I listed them all. Suffice to say they were extensive and there will probably be more in the future.

As a matter of fact I have been in contact with a gentleman who has made some recommendations which I will most likely put into practice. So the files will change again.

It was unusual for me to list all those changes in the first place. Normally you would not see that kind of info in most aircraft.cfg's or airfiles.

What really matters is this; does the aircraft fly OK in the sim and do most users have an enjoyable experience?

Hopefully the answer is yes on both counts.
Click to expand...

Yes and Yes :encouragement:
 
Just a note on the actual A-4 roll rate. The A-4 will roll very quickly. 720 deg/sec seems to come to mind from my old CNATRA days. But, because the A-4 is short in the longitudinal axis, the jet's stability will become increasingly wonky the longer you roll.

IIRC the TA-4J/F NATOPS restricted one from rolling more than 360 degrees for that reason.

I haven't tried the new files....I'm just throwing that out for discussion.

Deacon
 
Deacon211 said:
Just a note on the actual A-4 roll rate. The A-4 will roll very quickly. 720 deg/sec seems to come to mind from my old CNATRA days. But, because the A-4 is short in the longitudinal axis, the jet's stability will become increasingly wonky the longer you roll.

IIRC the TA-4J/F NATOPS restricted one from rolling more than 360 degrees for that reason.

I haven't tried the new files....I'm just throwing that out for discussion.

Deacon
Click to expand...

I found that with this FDE, if I doubled the aileron setting from 1.0 to 2.0, the roll rate was pretty much spot on and the roll/yaw behavior reflected exactly as noted in NATOPS. I have watched in cockpit video of A-4's rolling and noted the asymmetric slat deployment during the rolls(uneven deployment with each slat bobbing in and out on their tracks). This is a key reason the Blue Angels bolted their A-4F slats in the closed position. One other issue which restricted full deflection rolls was the risk of wing panel delamination. I've heard this from several A-4 qualified pilots.
 
StormILM said:
I found that with this FDE, if I doubled the aileron setting from 1.0 to 2.0, the roll rate was pretty much spot on and the roll/yaw behavior reflected exactly as noted in NATOPS. I have watched in cockpit video of A-4's rolling and noted the asymmetric slat deployment during the rolls(uneven deployment with each slat bobbing in and out on their tracks). This is a key reason the Blue Angels bolted their A-4F slats in the closed position. One other issue which restricted full deflection rolls was the risk of wing panel delamination. I've heard this from several A-4 qualified pilots.
Click to expand...


Yep, that was definitely a concern. I recall that before any maneuvering flight (ACM, Tacform, Weps, etc) you were required to get the slats to deploy at least once, by loading up the jet.

Even a brief delay caused by a sticky slat was a bit of a "whoa, settle down there big fella" moment...for the second it lasted.
 
Storm, here's the thing, I could go back to the drawing board and increase the roll rate but I think your solution is better.

Initially I had set the roll rate very high but the jet did become squirrely.

I decided to roll it back which makes the paltform more stable for the average flyer, particularly when it comes to carrier landings. At this point I really don't think the slower roll rate detracts from the total flight experience.

If however the general concensus is to up the roll rate I might be persuaded to have another look.
 
mal998 said:
Storm, here's the thing, I could go back to the drawing board and increase the roll rate but I think your solution is better.

Initially I had set the roll rate very high but the jet did become squirrely.

I decided to roll it back which makes the paltform more stable for the average flyer, particularly when it comes to carrier landings. At this point I really don't think the slower roll rate detracts from the total flight experience.

If however the general concensus is to up the roll rate I might be persuaded to have another look.
Click to expand...

MAL, I'm with you, I would not touch it in the FDE because it may(or may not) upset stability. I'd leave it to the user to adjust it up a little via the flight tuning in the config or by other means with their controller software. It feels very good as is but to those who want to get more roll rate, it's easy to adjust but from my testing, 1.8 to 2.0 is as high as I'd set it.
 
Let me see if I got this correct,
drop the Aircraft.cfg file in the Virtavia A-4 Skyhawk 0-1 Clean folder?

Then Put the 2 .Air files in that same folder? (Virtavia A-4 Skyhawk 0-1 Clean)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top