PDA

View Full Version : First Milviz Only Project: Cessna 310R



Roadburner440
April 9th, 2010, 02:31
Today we are announcing the first Milviz only product (which ironically is not military, but still holds a special place in aviation) the Cessna 310R. This aircraft was the last model in the long running production of the Cessna 310. For a twin this aircraft had a lot of power, and the turbochargers enable it to fly up to a maximum altitude of 20,000ft! Even though this aircraft ended production in 1980 it is still hugely popular in the GA community. So without further delay here are screenshots taken from the rendering program. As these are still WIP's please feel free to comment, and thanks for taking the time to look!
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_9.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_8.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_7.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_6.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_5.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_4.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_3.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_2.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_10.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_1.jpg

gajit
April 9th, 2010, 02:35
Wow - looking great -I sincerely wish the project every success. Would you just be FPS considerate to us using older PCs please.

jeansy
April 9th, 2010, 02:37
looking nice

Roadburner440
April 9th, 2010, 02:53
We have learned a lot through our partnerships with FSD, and the Nemeth Bro's. We will be very considerate of people with older PC's. In fact that is top consideration at this point moving forward.. we realize that even though huge textures and stuff look nice that not everyone has top of the line computers. Just like with the Huey if a large number of users experience bad frames or such we will expedite restructuring the model/reducing the textures, but I do not anticipate that happening this time.

bstolle
April 9th, 2010, 03:07
WOW, that looks absolutely terrific!!! Thanx a lot for doing this wonderful GA plane.
The very high quality of the visual model combined with high frame rates sounds almost too good to be true

Roadburner440
April 9th, 2010, 03:15
Not going to say the framerates will knock your socks off :-P, but we want it to be as fast as possible without compromising to much in the looks department.

6297J
April 9th, 2010, 03:29
This is great news - congratulations and thank you :salute:

The Dreamfleet 310 was one of my dearest friends in FS9 - I can't wait for this one :jump:

thunder100
April 9th, 2010, 03:30
Hi

3 request from an DF-F1 C-310 owner(ported to FSX) and user(and many other payware)

A.)pls seperate the VC sections that the center avionics stacks are not cut out no knobs but flat that 3rd party avionics can be moved there( or a seperated interior model like this)
B.)Put the VC textures in the shared textures folders that one also can repaint the cockpit colour(not all C-310 are black/dark grey)
C.) still there are the high end boys as well-a 4048x 4048 version would be fine

All the best

Roland

Roadburner440
April 9th, 2010, 03:40
As far as the textures go I do not foresee there being any issue with that. As far as incorporating 3rd party avionics into the aircraft we will have to wait and see. You are talking about making it a 2D panel so that you can incorporate other avionics sets. Being an owner of the PMDG Jetstream 4100 I have some minor experience with that and the Reality XP Wx-500 weather radar.. I think maybe if we created a window it would allow switching of those boxes similiar to the way they did it on the 4100... The only issue is the knobs and such modeled in the VC would not work, and you would just have click points on the screen. We are also aware the 310 came in many color combinations. I am sure like every other aircraft the customer could order to spec (for that kind of money you should be able to).

peter12213
April 9th, 2010, 03:41
Wow - looking great -I sincerely wish the project every success. Would you just be FPS considerate to us using older PCs please.

I have to agree that YF23 was completely unuseable on my pc!

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 04:15
@Peter I think the reason the FPS for the YF-23 was bad on your machine was due to the glass MFD's and PFD's. This one is fully 3D. The only 2d thing in there will be the radio stack and that's a pop up.

@everyone else the model comes in two formats: one is 100% analog (with the aforementioned radio stack pop-up) and the other is a modern day type (with the flat panelling) and the default Garmins. You can easily replace those with whatever you wish.

Though you will be able to re-paint the cockpit, we are only supplying an extremely basic paint kit for those parts. You will, however, be able to remove the weathering if you like your birds pristine.

The external paint kit will come with the option to entirely remove the dirt or to minimize it down to whatever you're happy with.

Textures are very high quality and we don't need to go to 4K as we already have nice enough 2K's. The poly count is very good for this and FPS should be amazing. The whole model including VC is under the exterior of the Huey. (live and learn...)

We are still thinking about where to sell this but probably off our own site at first and thence onwards to the other 3rd party sites.

Thanks for looking.

kc

Tweek
April 9th, 2010, 04:38
Looks wonderful. Particularly fond of the streaks of dirt on the underside, which look very realistic.

txnetcop
April 9th, 2010, 05:10
You just got my attention. I never had a twin rating but I still flew lots of them and the 310R was a sweetheart as long as you kept your mind on what you were doing!!! Awesome
Ted
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

JAMIE
April 9th, 2010, 05:32
Today we are announcing the first Milviz only product (which ironically is not military, but still holds a special place in aviation) the Cessna 310R. This aircraft was the last model in the long running production of the Cessna 310. For a twin this aircraft had a lot of power, and the turbochargers enable it to fly up to a maximum altitude of 20,000ft! Even though this aircraft ended production in 1980 it is still hugely popular in the GA community. So without further delay here are screenshots taken from the rendering program. As these are still WIP's please feel free to comment, and thanks for taking the time to look!
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_9.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_8.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_7.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_6.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_5.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_4.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_3.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_2.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_10.jpg
<o:p></o:p>http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u359/Roadburner426/Cessna%20310R/310_1.jpg

lawdawg
April 9th, 2010, 05:41
Yessir!
That looks very very nice :)

gajit
April 9th, 2010, 05:58
Thanks guys for response re FPS.

My credit card awaits :salute:

peter12213
April 9th, 2010, 06:34
Will you also be releasing 1024x1024 textures as an option like vertigo Sim do?

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 06:36
Sure, we will do that but it will be released afterwards.

BeaverDriver
April 9th, 2010, 06:36
I just heard about the 310 project and came right over to register so that I could lend my full support for this project. The screen shots are outstanding and it would be hard to imagine a better GA airplane to do. Thanks very much and I will be monitoring the progress of it with great interest. I suspect you'll have a lot of sales with this machine.

Many thanks!

6297J
April 9th, 2010, 07:07
I just heard about the 310 project and came right over to register so that I could lend my full support for this project. The screen shots are outstanding and it would be hard to imagine a better GA airplane to do. Thanks very much and I will be monitoring the progress of it with great interest. I suspect you'll have a lot of sales with this machine.

Many thanks!

Are you the same 'BeaverDriver' who tweaked the C185F?
If so, thank you very much! :salute:

mohawk3
April 9th, 2010, 07:25
Hello everyone,
This 310 looks awesome!!( althrough I regret that there's not a 310B ), & I never had performance problems with MilViz models.If you have a "decent" PC then it's OK.Then, if you want more, you have to invest more.

pbearsailor
April 9th, 2010, 07:38
I got my licenses in other planes, including straight tailed 310 for my multi, but this model, the 310R, is the plane that really taught me how to fly IFR back in the late 70's. Fond memories of N5133J.

Really look forward to this one!

cheers,
steve :wavey:

gajit
April 9th, 2010, 07:42
Hello everyone,
This 310 looks awesome!!( althrough I regret that there's not a 310B ), & I never had performance problems with MilViz models.If you have a "decent" PC then it's OK.Then, if you want more, you have to invest more.

Sorry - disagree. Carenado, A2A, Classic Hangars, Nemeth, Cera, Sibwings, Iris, Aerosoft, Realair and many other developers can produce exceptionally detailed and complex products without reducing my system to a stuttering slide show.

But as long as your ok then who cares!!

mohawk3
April 9th, 2010, 08:36
Sorry - disagree. Carenado, A2A, Classic Hangars, Nemeth, Cera, Sibwings, Iris, Aerosoft, Realair and many other developers can produce exceptionally detailed and complex products without reducing my system to a stuttering slide show.

But as long as your ok then who cares!!
Well, as I sad: If you want more, you have to invest more...cannot ask from a 8000$ car to cruise at 200mph, as you cannot ask from a cessna310 fly at FL400.And for many add-ons there might be problems with complexity of their systems than with 3d models.And some Nemeth &Iris a/c are MilViz models...

thunder100
April 9th, 2010, 08:45
As far as the textures go I do not foresee there being any issue with that. As far as incorporating 3rd party avionics into the aircraft we will have to wait and see. You are talking about making it a 2D panel so that you can incorporate other avionics sets. Being an owner of the PMDG Jetstream 4100 I have some minor experience with that and the Reality XP Wx-500 weather radar.. I think maybe if we created a window it would allow switching of those boxes similiar to the way they did it on the 4100... The only issue is the knobs and such modeled in the VC would not work, and you would just have click points on the screen. We are also aware the 310 came in many color combinations. I am sure like every other aircraft the customer could order to spec (for that kind of money you should be able to).

Basically correct

e.G if I put RXP GPS in has to be flat.Still I can turn then the knobs by the clickspots-->just dont look as nice as there is no §D knob-->a very minor thing

Roland

gajit
April 9th, 2010, 08:51
And some Nemeth &Iris a/c are MilViz models...

Yes - and the ones that are not seem to have better FPS.

Gibbage
April 9th, 2010, 09:45
Its nice to see this one getting some air time! Its one of my best works to date, in that not only does it look amazing, its not nearly as heavy as the P-38! Its a great balance, and I think people will find its VERY frame friendly. I made sure of that!

Hay Colin, you think we can also have a "clean" version? That thing needs some soap and water! I know the 310's are getting long in the tooth, but some pilots care about there hardware :wiggle:

Skittles
April 9th, 2010, 10:10
Just out of interest, what is the poly count of this model?

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 10:17
We will be doing a clean version for those who like it like that.

Gajit, we've only had one real problem with FPS that I know of and that's the Huey. Which we fixed asap. The others, including the Iris Vulcan, the Iris F20 VC, the Razbam F-102, the A2A Corsair, the FSD P-38, YF-23 and Cirrus as well as a whole lot of others which we can't talk about, have no or only minor issues.

We will be offering a money back guarantee so, if you don't like it, we will give your money back.

kc

The poly count is 162K for everything. That includes both the modern VC and the steam VC. As an example, the Huey external was (at first release) just over 210K. Just the external. Overkill.

Skittles
April 9th, 2010, 10:27
The poly count is 162K for everything. That includes both the modern VC and the steam VC. As an example, the Huey external was (at first release) just over 210K. Just the external. Overkill.

:eek:

I don't even know how you could burn up 210k on the external model alone! Someone went a bit mad with the MeshSmooth modifier perhaps? lol.

tigisfat
April 9th, 2010, 10:32
IS this the same one that FSD announced? Did you guys opt out of that agreement?

6297J
April 9th, 2010, 10:34
IS this the same one that FSD announced? Did you guys opt out of that agreement?


They didn't announce it - that was one of the wrong guesses in the Bonanza Prize thread.

tigisfat
April 9th, 2010, 10:44
They didn't announce it - that was one of the wrong guesses in the Bonanza Prize thread.


I guess they didn't announce it, but they said something about how it was not their next release but it was something they were working on.

ryanbatc
April 9th, 2010, 10:50
They didn't announce it - that was one of the wrong guesses in the Bonanza Prize thread.

Hmm I swear I saw pictures of this same C310R in that thread, and that FSD would be making it....

I'm cornfused!

edit: yep here it is:
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=33834&p=383041&viewfull=1#post383041

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 10:54
We were trying to make the best darned Huey out there as a feast for the eyes. Well.. it was that but it was also slow as heck on some systems. I won't tell you about how high the VC was but... let me put it this way.. it was WAY more than the external model. Not anymore though. However, it does prove the point that FSX (and todays systems) can handle very large quantities without dying. What this bodes for the future remains to be seen. If MS were indeed to do a FS Live, perhaps they would allow for people who don't want to be limited to 100K models a la FS9. Perhaps. we shall see. Not everyone wants to fly MP. I don't. Not unless I can shoot you down!!!! Mwaaahaahhaa......

There's no max for poly limits (apparently) in FSX... there are limits to what older machines can handle though.

On the subject of FSD, the short answer is yes. We have decided that it's time for Milviz to become a dev and not a content supplier. The 310 wasn't supposed to be announced but, it was. Nuff said on this one please.

kc

6297J
April 9th, 2010, 10:56
Hmm I swear I saw pictures of this same C310R in that thread, and that FSD would be making it....

I'm cornfused!




You are right - I've just gone back and had a look. I'm confused too :confused:

edit - ahhh!! I see!! Nuff said indeed ;)

Skittles
April 9th, 2010, 11:02
We were trying to make the best darned Huey out there as a feast for the eyes. Well.. it was that but it was also slow as heck on some systems. I won't tell you about how high the VC was but... let me put it this way.. it was WAY more than the external model. Not anymore though. However, it does prove the point that FSX (and todays systems) can handle very large quantities without dying. What this bodes for the future remains to be seen. If MS were indeed to do a FS Live, perhaps they would allow for people who don't want to be limited to 100K models a la FS9. Perhaps. we shall see. Not everyone wants to fly MP. I don't. Not unless I can shoot you down!!!! Mwaaahaahhaa......

There's no max for poly limits (apparently) in FSX... there are limits to what older machines can handle though.

kc

And there I am with my project getting pissed because I've used 1,000 polys on my main fuselage body! Ha. It's nice to know I've got a few more to play with.

Draw calls are what it's about these days. Minimise them and you're on to a winner.

You'll know this actually - I've been wanting to ask someone for a while. In terms of gauges, do 3D gauges really offer a performance advantage over 2D gauges in the VC? If so how much?

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 11:05
Skittles. The answer is yes: 3d offers much better performance than 2d does. And yes again: draw calls are what it's all about.

Gibbage
April 9th, 2010, 11:06
Honestly, FSX can push 250K poly's per aircraft easy. Its just when you start to stuff 4K textures, and MFD's does it start to drain FPS. FSX is a VERY robust engine, if you handle it properly. Milviz and I have many many MANY models under our belt now, as Colin listed, and only a very few had frame issues, and in that, only on a few systems.

If your still on the edge, wait for the reviews. Like I said, the 310 will be one of the most frame friendly aircraft from Milviz yet since I found a great balance, and it lacks the frame hungry MDF's, so I have confidence it will be a pleasure to fly.

Also, a little history. I found a nice 310R at a local airport here, and flew out in a 172 to take Photo's of it. Was a great flight, and a good chance to get some real life air time and call it research ;) The 310R is VERY accurate as I filled a 2GB card with 8mp shots for it! Maybe later tonight I will post some pix of the real 310. Anyone interested?

tigisfat
April 9th, 2010, 11:10
Honestly, FSX can push 250K poly's per aircraft easy. Its just when you start to stuff 4K textures, and MFD's does it start to drain FPS. FSX is a VERY robust engine, if you handle it properly. Milviz and I have many many MANY models under our belt now, as Colin listed, and only a very few had frame issues, and in that, only on a few systems.

If your still on the edge, wait for the reviews. Like I said, the 310 will be one of the most frame friendly aircraft from Milviz yet since I found a great balance, and it lacks the frame hungry MDF's, so I have confidence it will be a pleasure to fly.

Also, a little history. I found a nice 310R at a local airport here, and flew out in a 172 to take Photo's of it. Was a great flight, and a good chance to get some real life air time and call it research ;) The 310R is VERY accurate as I filled a 2GB card with 8mp shots for it! Maybe later tonight I will post some pix of the real 310. Anyone interested?

That sounds good.

How about making Ken's aircraft? I think he has pictures covering every square inch, and I like his paint job.

krazycolin
April 9th, 2010, 11:21
I don't see why not. I was going to ask some pro's if they would be interested in painting some stuff for us... So..anyone? You into this?

MCDesigns
April 9th, 2010, 14:41
KC, thanks for your comments on the huey. I always felt that it could have been more than it turned out to be as it is my fav aircraft and I had hig expectations. If that experience gave you guys more insight into future models it was worth it and I'll definitely be giving the 310 a shot.

The preview renders are looking sweet, can't wait to try her out! :ernae:

Roadburner440
April 9th, 2010, 15:09
I think every aircraft is a learning experience for developers MC. Just look at A2A and PMDG.. everything just builds on itself. As long as we can go back and admit/see where and what went wrong and how to improve that leads to better products. Or as we call it in engineering classes the engineering paradigm/feedback loop.

Ken Stallings
April 9th, 2010, 15:43
Looking at the initial shots it certainly has my attention and devotion!

The panel looks really nice already. So, I'm very excited about this!

Looks like all the baggage compartments are being modeled, so that's pretty cool! And looking at the few shots of the exterior it all looks very accurate on initial look.

Cheers, and thanks for this one!

Ken

tigisfat
April 9th, 2010, 15:49
Looking at the initial shots it certainly has my attention and devotion!

The panel looks really nice already. So, I'm very excited about this!

Looks like all the baggage compartments are being modeled, so that's pretty cool! And looking at the few shots of the exterior it all looks very accurate on initial look.

Cheers, and thanks for this one!

Ken

Ken, now you can safely put your 310 through 6g maneuvers and do inverted flybys of Portales.:icon_lol:

Ken Stallings
April 9th, 2010, 15:55
Ken, now you can safely put your 310 through 6g maneuvers and do inverted flybys of Portales.:icon_lol:

LOL!!!

Well, that wasn't my first thought, but yeah, I guess I could! :icon_lol:

Ken

MCDesigns
April 9th, 2010, 17:08
I think every aircraft is a learning experience for developers MC. Just look at A2A and PMDG.. everything just builds on itself. As long as we can go back and admit/see where and what went wrong and how to improve that leads to better products. Or as we call it in engineering classes the engineering paradigm/feedback loop.

Very true Steve, but you don't very often see developers say it as such, which goes a long way with me. I have seen some developers make exciuses for design decisions that made no sense or were completely false because they bet on the general FS consumer not having a clue/and/or they lacked the knowledge themselves.

Don't suppose you could throw a hot copilot in the Vc with the polys you guys are saving could you? LOL Believe it or not, that is the main reason the ol flight1 Cessna 421 still gets air time in FSX :wiggle:

Jim Goldman
April 9th, 2010, 17:09
Guys:

The captures look absolutely stunning..... wonderful workmanship and good luck this the release.

Best

Jim Goldman

MCDesigns
April 9th, 2010, 17:14
I just heard about the 310 project and came right over to register so that I could lend my full support for this project. The screen shots are outstanding and it would be hard to imagine a better GA airplane to do. Thanks very much and I will be monitoring the progress of it with great interest. I suspect you'll have a lot of sales with this machine.

Many thanks!

Just wanted to say welcome BeaverDriver!! :ernae::ernae:
Make yourself at home

Roadburner440
April 10th, 2010, 05:09
Well probably the difference with me is I log heavy amounts of time in FSX myself, and I am a customer of just about every developer there is. So I can understand people being upset about aircraft not running correctly (believe me I know I do). When I buy a product I expect to be able to install it, and go flying with little to no trouble. The only area where I expect people to have a little flexibility is in the security of the products.. It is unfortunate that legitimate people have to pay for the decisions of criminals, but in todays society throughout the world I think just about everything in our lives is affected by that. Cause without them we wouldn't need secure installations for programs, registration keys, locks on doors, etc. That is one thing like with the VRS bug I can understand them wanting to keep their hard work under lock and key. We are certaintly hitting the ground running with this one though. I am just suprised at the reaction to it. I personally am a military aircraft person myself, but reading the specifications on this bird she really seems like quite a beast for a GA airplane.

krazycolin
April 10th, 2010, 05:57
A woman? In the co-pilot seat? Can we name her Cindy? Consider it done! We'll throw 10 or 15 K at her alone and see what we come up with! We can do something really nice with a hat too. It is, after all, spring.

Unfortunately, she's not going to say or do much. Except maybe wink at you once or twice. Unlike some other women who complain all the time about how badly you fly....:wiggle:

kc

Reddog
April 10th, 2010, 07:29
If u are going to put in a passenger please also allow it to be removed. Haven't seen any sofar that I would want to look to much.

krazycolin
April 10th, 2010, 07:45
Any passengers we put in will be removable and so will the yokes.

Gajit has graciously accepted our asking him to do some pre-paints for this bad boy, so, for release it will include some nice paint jobs, both clean and dirty. And yes, we will do Ken's plane as he has accepted as well to help us out on this one.

Thanks guys!

kc

cbreeze
April 10th, 2010, 07:54
Looking real good. Put me on the list for one when it is done.

cbreeze

pivo11
April 10th, 2010, 09:39
Just wanted to say welcome BeaverDriver!! :ernae::ernae:
Make yourself at home

G'day,

I am posting here on the behalf of BeaverDriver, who is having some problems loging in. His name and passwords keep being refused, for whatever reason.

He would like to thank everyone for their welcome and assures you all that he will get back to you as soon as he can sort out the log-in problem. For those that mentioned the C185F work, he would like to remind everyone that a lot, if not most, of the work was done by Bernt Stolle. (One of the best, my view. ndlr) Rest assured that as soon as the old 'Driver can, he will be talkin' to you.

May life smile,
Fritz

gajit
April 10th, 2010, 10:11
Any passengers we put in will be removable and so will the yokes.

Gajit has graciously accepted our asking him to do some pre-paints for this bad boy, so, for release it will include some nice paint jobs, both clean and dirty. And yes, we will do Ken's plane as he has accepted as well to help us out on this one.

Thanks guys!

kc

Yep - Very happy to help and I will consider any requests or suggestions that will help to make this product a top seller.

Please feel free to PM me but i will need good reference photos.

Ken Stallings
April 10th, 2010, 12:08
I am just suprised at the reaction to it. I personally am a military aircraft person myself, but reading the specifications on this bird she really seems like quite a beast for a GA airplane.

Oh she is! She is!

At cruise power settings, this aircraft from 7,000 to 10,000 feet MSL will cruise at 180 knots TAS and consume a total fuel burn rate of about 22 to 25 gallons per hour! That's a very enviable combination of performance and economy for a twin engine aircraft.

Plus, with the twin you get increased takeoff performance, payload, and safety margin.

The C-310R also has an empty weight of 3,474 pounds (approximately) and a max gross weight at takeoff of 5,500 pounds. That means you can load up fuel, bags, and people to a combined weight of about 2,026 pounds! For example, since my aircraft can carry up to 163 gallons of fuel (978 pounds) it gives me right at 1,000 pounds of useful load!

This is why the C-310R is so enjoyed by its owners, and was used for a time by the USAF in the 1950's as a utility transport, often to carry general officers to their various base visits.

Cheers,

Ken

tigisfat
April 10th, 2010, 12:42
Oh she is! She is!

At cruise power settings, this aircraft from 7,000 to 10,000 feet MSL will cruise at 180 knots TAS and consume a total fuel burn rate of about 22 to 25 gallons per hour! That's a very enviable combination of performance and economy for a twin engine aircraft.

Plus, with the twin you get increased takeoff performance, payload, and safety margin.

The C-310R also has an empty weight of 3,474 pounds (approximately) and a max gross weight at takeoff of 5,500 pounds. That means you can load up fuel, bags, and people to a combined weight of about 2,026 pounds! For example, since my aircraft can carry up to 163 gallons of fuel (978 pounds) it gives me right at 1,000 pounds of useful load!

This is why the C-310R is so enjoyed by its owners, and was used for a time by the USAF in the 1950's as a utility transport, often to carry general officers to their various base visits.

Cheers,

Ken
Wow, I didn't know that. There are quite a few twins based on smaller airframes. Once you get full fuel, there's not much useful load left for you. There's quite a few light jets like that too.

Ken Stallings
April 10th, 2010, 13:12
Wow, I didn't know that. There are quite a few twins based on smaller airframes. Once you get full fuel, there's not much useful load left for you. There's quite a few light jets like that too.

Indeed! There are number of cabin class turbine twins that don't have as much full fuel useful load as my C-310R. For my four-person family, the C-310R is all the airplane I will ever need for vacations. A number of the VLJ's on the market can give you speed and altitude performance, but a relatively paltry useful load when filled with fuel.

In terms of raw power at takeoff, I'm used to the 4,080 foot field elevations out here at Portales and surrounding areas. When I put in full power to takeoff at Houston (at sea level), I was literally shocked out of my senses with the resulting power on takeoff roll! When I flew the 330hp a side Baron 55, I never once got to takeoff at a low elevation airport.

Ken

Cheers,

Ken

Piglet
April 10th, 2010, 19:20
What?!? No balance weights on the tire rims?!?
LOL, actually it sure looks like ya done your homework!:applause: Just don't forget the crumbling P.O.S. plastic used in aircraft interiors...

tigisfat
April 10th, 2010, 20:14
Indeed! There are number of cabin class turbine twins that don't have as much full fuel useful load as my C-310R. For my four-person family, the C-310R is all the airplane I will ever need for vacations. A number of the VLJ's on the market can give you speed and altitude performance, but a relatively paltry useful load when filled with fuel.

In terms of raw power at takeoff, I'm used to the 4,080 foot field elevations out here at Portales and surrounding areas. When I put in full power to takeoff at Houston (at sea level), I was literally shocked out of my senses with the resulting power on takeoff roll! When I flew the 330hp a side Baron 55, I never once got to takeoff at a low elevation airport.

Ken

Cheers,

Ken

You used to own a baron?

Ken Stallings
April 11th, 2010, 14:31
You used to own a baron?

Did not own it. It was co-owned (sort of) by a business and my MEI. It was supposed to be the payment to the MEI (who is a good friend) but the business owner welched on him by taking a loan out of the aircraft and then failing to make the payments! So, the lien owner took possession of the aircraft, leaving my friend out in the cold.

The really idiotic part was the loan was for only a small fraction of the worth of the aircraft, so the lien holder got a great deal out of it. But, prior to all that, I made a deal with the formal owner that I would borrow his Baron for my Commercial AMEL training and he could borrow my Skyhawk for his instrument training.

Had my friend ever taken formal ownership of the Baron, I was looking at a co-ownership with him. But, alas, that never happened. But, as it worked out, I'm better off owning the 310R.

The 310R has far better avionics and de-ice boots, hot props for de-ice, and windshield de-ice. The Baron had the 300hp engines, both low time, but no radar, stormscope, or de-ice equipment. And very important for me, the 310R has a Garmin 530W and the Baron 55 had an older King GPS.

Ken

BeaverDriver
April 15th, 2010, 14:48
Are you the same 'BeaverDriver' who tweaked the C185F?
If so, thank you very much! :salute:

Well, it took a while but it looks like I can log in again (not sure I'll be able to next time though - we'll see :wavey:)

Yup, that would be me, but Bernt (sg38) did all the real work on it. I happen to have a fair bit of RW time in 185's as I was a bush pilot for a number of years, so I kinda knew how the thing should fly. Bernt, with Carenado's blessing, then took what I told him about what should happen and turned it into a very good flight model. So he certainly deserves most of the credit for that project. On behalf of him and myself though, thank you for this, and you are very welcome.

BeaverDriver
April 15th, 2010, 14:54
Oh she is! She is!

At cruise power settings, this aircraft from 7,000 to 10,000 feet MSL will cruise at 180 knots TAS and consume a total fuel burn rate of about 22 to 25 gallons per hour! That's a very enviable combination of performance and economy for a twin engine aircraft.

Plus, with the twin you get increased takeoff performance, payload, and safety margin.

The C-310R also has an empty weight of 3,474 pounds (approximately) and a max gross weight at takeoff of 5,500 pounds. That means you can load up fuel, bags, and people to a combined weight of about 2,026 pounds! For example, since my aircraft can carry up to 163 gallons of fuel (978 pounds) it gives me right at 1,000 pounds of useful load!

This is why the C-310R is so enjoyed by its owners, and was used for a time by the USAF in the 1950's as a utility transport, often to carry general officers to their various base visits.

Cheers,

Ken

Hey Ken,
I've been reading with great interest your comments on the 310. Nothing like actual experience to give one a feel for even an FS airplane. My twin time is mostly on Aztecs (and not a lot at that - I spent most of my time in Beavers, Otters and 185's), so it's neat to compare what you have to say about the 310 with what I know about the Aztec ("Aztruck" :d). As a kid growing up in the 60's I was in love with the 310 when it came out, and the more it matured, the better I liked it. There is a 310R sitting on the ramp across from our hangar now and I just kind of drool at it on the way by.

Anyway, thanks for your comments and thoughts on the plane. I'm really looking forward to this one very much!

Ken Stallings
April 15th, 2010, 16:05
Hey Ken,
I've been reading with great interest your comments on the 310. Nothing like actual experience to give one a feel for even an FS airplane. My twin time is mostly on Aztecs (and not a lot at that - I spent most of my time in Beavers, Otters and 185's), so it's neat to compare what you have to say about the 310 with what I know about the Aztec ("Aztruck" :d). As a kid growing up in the 60's I was in love with the 310 when it came out, and the more it matured, the better I liked it. There is a 310R sitting on the ramp across from our hangar now and I just kind of drool at it on the way by.

Anyway, thanks for your comments and thoughts on the plane. I'm really looking forward to this one very much!

Nothing beats hangar flying! Get a few pilots together and the talk about airplanes always gets intriguing! :engel016:

Ken

Roadburner440
April 15th, 2010, 21:34
Yeah there sure is nothing like hangar flying. Being a maintainer that is all I really get to do. Although I am APU qualified so that adds some fun to everything being able to at least start APU's and run up all the systems and such. Is always a good time getting to talk with pilots about the aircraft