• 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

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Waco SRE Test bed in FS9

S

sblzei

Charter Member
While my FSx puter is out for repair, I wanted to test the new WACO SRE anyway. Tried with FS9, but it refused to load the model, so I transplanted the .cfg and .air files in the FS9 stock Piper Cub, added a new 2D panel I'm working on (still provisional), and did some little writing on the exterior (for better identification). And there I went.

The airplane looks well balanced and handles very well, take off requires a very moderate pull, and touchdown is easy with no risk of overturning.
In summary: a very good flying model.

Now my question is: how is the behavior of the airplane affected by the different environment (FS9 vs FSX)?
I will have an answer when my PC will be back, but I am curious to know if this difference has alrady been explored. I noticed thas some portovers have also a specific .cfg or .air file, but not all of them.
Anybody knows why?
 
sblzei said:
Now my question is: how is the behavior of the airplane affected by the different environment (FS9 vs FSX)?
I will have an answer when my PC will be back, but I am curious to know if this difference has alrady been explored. I noticed thas some portovers have also a specific .cfg or .air file, but not all of them.
Anybody knows why?
Click to expand...



this might be a dumb question but i'll ask it anyhow. if you changed the cfg. and the air file, how can you evaluate the performance of the model?
don't those files determine that? wouldn't changing them skew the results?
 
I think he transplanted the Waco .air and .cfg files to the Cub. He is flying the Waco but it just looks like a Cub - I think :confused:

Myles
 
I have not completely investigated the differences but for what it is worth there is a real difference in how one approaches the flight dynamics of sea planes. The water appears to be much stickier in FSX. I was always able to use real values for FS9 sea planes, but in FSX it seems I must reduce weight, increase power and/or thrust to get them off the water.

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