Junkers Ju-52/3m - Page 9
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 247

Thread: Junkers Ju-52/3m

  1. #201
    Hello Ivan,
    Yes, very interesting indeed!

    I was trying to figure out a way of separating the two views, but couldnīt decypher it.

    Anyway,
    a) to "Move the MODEL's Interior Cockpit View to behind the obnoxious Bulkhead." has a problem: I did that, but behind the cockpit bulkhead there is a horizontal opaque division that shows up between the upper dome-cross-sectioned roof structure and lower square-cross-sectioned fuselage structure. I didnīt have enough components free to use.

    b) To activate a different VC point with the Spoiler: Iīll investigate the SCASM code for a Spoiler conditional to have two different Virtual Cockpit views. One normal VC (spoiler off) and one Gunner VC position (spoiler on).

    However, Iīll also analyse the other options you mention more carefully, and see what I can do.

    Perhaps you mean the dorsal gunner when you mention the gunner behind the bulkhead. Heīs on outside the roof anyway, so that point of view shouldntīneed any bulkhead modification.

    The Cockpit gunner is above the cockpit, infront of the bulkhead, so the parts donīt bleed either.

    At the moment these three points of view donīt pose any bleed problems, but none of them offer a view below the fuselage. For that youīd need to be inside the fuselage, transparent and without the opaque division I mentioned above. Also, youīd see pieces of wing+engines, tail and nose.
    The question is: Do we want that?


    There are two blueprints attached to this post, showing the 4 gunner positions:
    Cockpit Gun on the cockpit, Dorsal Gun on the roof, and 2 Waist Guns on the fuselage sides behind trailing edge level.

    This is on the model I called "Gunship", although there were 12 special units modified by "Weser Flugzeugbau", specifically converted into convoy escorts - real "Gunships" - with another 2 extra fuselage guns and a ventral one (re-instating the "stew pot" on the earlier g3e auxiliary bomber below the fuselage). The extra armament was not made standard for weight reasons.

    The Night Flier model as the one recovered from the Norwegian Lake lacks the waist guns. Although there was provision for them, they didnīt have them mounted, so the unit on display in the Norwegian Museum doesnīt have them.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails View1.jpg   View2.jpg  
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  2. #202
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    well, Stephan, it would appear we're moving
    in the right direction and yes, it's very interesting.

    i would venture to say,
    being a bomber pilot/gunner/bombardier in cfs
    could be the epitome of multi tasking.
    especially, if one is to hit the mission target
    and survive the mission itself...no small task.

    i come back to a past comment about bleeds
    if the bulkhead is removed, or something like that.
    in my opinion, if a gunner is looking at bleeds
    instead of attacking enemy aircraft...he's dead.
    in other words, i, for one, can live with a few bleeds.

    when thinking about point of view(s),
    i would also remind you,
    not to forget about the bombardier.
    he requires a centered and unobstructed forward view.

    and on that happy note,
    i'm off to do some homeboy chores.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  3. #203

    Bleeds

    Hello Aleatorylamp, Smilo,

    I am lazy.... I know the proper way of doing things, but do not want to spend the time on just one model which is why I do things a certain way. There is a certain group of features that *I* need for suspension of disbelief and that may not be the same as yours.
    The same thing was true with plastic models which is why most of mine never got a camouflage paint job.
    I like the shape of aeroplanes and most of that shape is on the outside or shell of the model.

    Now you might be wondering why I started with that discussion.
    In my opinion, a properly built model for CFS really requires two separate models. One is viewed from outside and one is viewed from inside.
    I know this, but since I am lazy, I just redisplay the pieces that have bleeds. It isn't really the best way of doing things, but it gets perhaps 95% or even 98% of the effect with perhaps 10% more work. This is what I have been doing all along.

    The situation you are running into is actually something that would affect the P-38 Lightning Projects I was working on, the Mitchell, and even the BV 141B.
    Yes, I have released the BV 141B already, but I chose a compromise for he cockpit display. I left out the Aft Wall of the Cockpit entirely.
    (Didn't I say I was Lazy?)

    So a useful summary of this suggestion would be that you certainly can do things the way I described but you might need to build avisual model for the interior to make things work optimally.
    I have actually already thought about this subject before this discussion came about, but am always drawn to the greater interest of building a new pretty model than going back for the drudgery of improving a old one.

    Hope this helps.
    - Ivan.

  4. #204
    Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan.
    Well, I agree that we are moving in the correct direction, only that I donīt exactly
    understand what it is you are suggesting as being the next step. So, where do we
    go from here?

    The forward cockpit gunner with his head above the cockpit has an even better view
    forwards and forward-down, and sideways and backwards than the pilot, who has the
    instrument panel and centre engine in front of him, and the cockpit bulkhead behind.

    Then, the rear or dorsal gunner has the rest of the plane and wings obstructing large
    parts of the forward-down and some lateral-down-forward views, but would have the
    best upper, rear, lateral and most lateral-down views.

    Both gunners have a 180-degree swivelling firing circle horizontally.

    So, respecting the well-shaped external model, and the virtual cockpit from the raised
    front
    gunnerīs position viewpoint, this could be the normal VC view, (as installed on the
    most recent WIP model attached to post #197), and additionally, the spoiler-activated
    extra VC
    view could be the rear gunnerīs dorsal position view. Iīd only have to figure
    out how to SCASM-code the Spoiler instruction.


    Neither of the two views would involve bits and pieces visible and others invisible, or bleeds.
    The only thing would be that there wouldnīt be a ventral gunnerīs view.

    How about that?

    Update:
    Then, the bombardier view only needs a separate instrument panel bitmap in the
    downward-looking map view option, which is as unobstructed as you want because
    no model parts interfere there. The grey filled in sides around the viewing circle with
    the scale, could be made transparent. But that wonīt let the chase-view work
    simultaneously, would it?

    Further note:
    If we are just worried about the rear bulkhead obstructing the view of the enemy,
    and donīt mind restly visible elements like wings, tail, nose, etc., then the perfect
    solution is just to use the AF99 modelīs CFS1 un-SCASMed VC, that offers a transparent
    fuselage, useful for shooting at the enemy with TG2 in Padlocked Chase View.

    The problem is that Iīm afraid I donīt really understand what the suggested visual
    model to be used for the internal Virtual Cockpit View should look like, or what
    elements it should show.

    Sorry to be such a bother!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; February 24th, 2018 at 11:05.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  5. #205
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    Stephan and Kwong, i find the past few posts very interesting.
    unfortunately, i'm currently involved in a home project
    and am unable to multi task...where have i heard that word before?
    anyway, i'm on a roll with the home project
    and don't want to set it aside for now.
    i might forget where i'm at.
    old age has it's drawbacks.

    anyway, i'll try to reply as soon as i am able.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  6. #206
    Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan,
    OK, Smilo! As it is, thereīs more to life than just warplane building anyway!
    Good luck with the home project, thumbs up definitely!!

    After the progressively more successful ventures using Dp gun definitions
    and
    changing on-board viewpoints, thanks to suggestions and hints to this
    respect from both of you, the main thing is clear:

    TG2 works perfectly with swivelling guns if the enemy can be seen enough
    to
    be fired at.

    Two minor improvements to perhaps counteract the disadvantage of a
    slow-moving auxiliary bomber, could be to improve the hit probability value
    to 8 instead of 12 or 14, and also, the firing angle can be made steeper,
    without being totally unrealistic, of course.

    The only thing yet to determine, is exactly what the Padlocked Chase view
    should show. ...or rather views, if we use an added one with the Spoiler Key,
    s
    o thereīs not really much more to decide.

    Iīll be trying out different things in the mean time anyway!

    Update:
    A normal cockpit-crew view without the aft bulkhead, or alternatively a view
    from just aft of the bulkhead (itīs only visible from the front), gives an acceptable
    view aft.
    However,
    lateral-down views are blocked by wings, and if lower, also by undercarriage.
    Then, the forward view is blocked by the dashboard, and by the fwd engine if lowered.
    The view-point would
    have to be really low to be useful, e.g. between the wheels.
    Thatīs why they had the "Stew Pot" there in the g3e!!
    That view could then toggle with an upper-gunner view.
    The enemy has a predilection to come from below-rear though, nasty buggers!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; February 24th, 2018 at 14:48.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  7. #207
    Hello Ivan,
    Regarding the differentiation between the normal Virtual Cockpit View and
    the Padlocked Chase View Virtual Cockpit View, Iīm afraid I havenīt been
    able to keep them apart. At best, both views appear simultaneously...

    I found a convenient "battle station" view point for the Padlocked chase view,
    behind the cockpit aft bulkhead a bit below the engine, that gives convenient
    views all round, especially from below-aft and sideways.

    ; Pilotīs view point inside cockpit: 221 -780 -1313
    ; Fore Gunnerīs view point outside above: 0 -1300 -1170
    ; Inside fuselage behind bulkhead, under roof dome, below engine: 0 100 -700
    ;
    :MAINIVC
    Transformcall( :MAINSTR 0 100 -700
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Transformcall( :COCKPIT 0 100 -700
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Return
    :COCKPIT
    CALL ( :L0056D4 ); Dashboard +
    CALL ( :L0026D8 ); Cabin main floor +
    CALL32 ( :L0068AE ); Co-pilot body +
    CALL32 ( :L008EEC ); Co-pilotīs turning head
    CALL ( :L006106); Cabin Back
    Return

    ;*** Start of Main Aircraft Code ***

    etc...

    This would be the code at the moment, and the question is where the normal
    not-padlocked-chase-view VC code is in the listing.

    I wonder if you could help?
    Thanks in advance!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  8. #208
    Hello Ivan,
    Well, for the moment Iīve managed two battle station view points for the padlocked chase view.
    One from the cockpit gunnerīs view above the cockpit, and another extra one from behind the cockpit bulkhead, a bit below so as not to have the front view blocked too much by the engine, and sideways, to see through the wing.
    Front, aft and side screenshots for both attached below.

    What I havenīt been able to put in yet is a Free Flight Mode normal Pilotīs Virtual Cockpit view.

    For now, Iīm afraid, to me it looks like the same point of view has to be used for the normal Virtual Cockpit view as well as for the Padlocked Chase View.

    :MAINIVC
    ; Pilotīs view point: 221 -780 -1313
    ; :1STVIEW = Fore Gunnerīs view point: 0 -1300 -1170
    ; :INSVIEW = Inside fuselage, behind bulkhead, under roof dome, below engine: 0 100 -700
    ;
    IfVarRange( :2NDVIEW 7C -5 4096 )
    ; Skips to :2NDVIEW if Spoilers/Dive Brakes (0 = up; 32767 = Down) not in Range -5 to 4096
    ; The following displays with Spoilers OFF
    ; ---------------------------------------
    :1STVIEW
    Transformcall( :MAINSTR 0 -1300 -1170
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Transformcall( :COCKPIT 0 -1300 -1170
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Return
    :COCKPIT
    CALL ( :L0056D4 ); Dashboard +
    CALL ( :L0026D8 ); Cabin main floor +
    CALL32 ( :L0068AE ); Co-pilot body +
    CALL32 ( :L008EEC ); Co-pilotīs turning head
    CALL ( :L006106); Cabin Back
    Return
    ; ***** Dummy Jump *****
    dwx( 00D 8000 )
    Return
    :2NDVIEW
    IfVarRange( :INSVIEW 7C -5 4096 )
    ; Skips to :INSVIEW if Spoilers/Dive Brakes (0 = up; 32767 = Down) not in Range -5 to 4096
    Jump ( :MAINSTR )
    ; The following displays with Spoilers ON
    ; ---------------------------------------
    :INSVIEW
    Transformcall( :MAINSTR 0 100 -700
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Transformcall( :COKKPIT 0 100 -700
    0.00000 00 0.00000 00 0.00000 00 )
    Return
    :COKKPIT
    CALL ( :L0056D4 ); Dashboard +
    CALL ( :L0026D8 ); Cabin main floor +
    CALL32 ( :L0068AE ); Co-pilot body +
    CALL32 ( :L008EEC ); Co-pilotīs turning head
    CALL ( :L006106); Cabin Back
    Return
    ;*** Start of Main Aircraft Code ***
    :MAINSTR

    Well... so far, so good!
    At least this allows to make the enemy get a good beating!
    They do try and ram you, dontīthey?
    By the way, the AI P-38 lightning seems almost invicible!
    Thanks for your time!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails View-aft ckpt.jpg   View-fwd ckpt.jpg   View-side ckpt.jpg  
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  9. #209

    Visuals

    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    I see you understood what I was intending!
    SCASM is fun, isn't it?

    I think you already implemented what I was describing.
    I would actually need to download and install your Tante Ju to see what you are seeing and I haven't done that yet.
    In fact, I do not know where all the gun positions actually are.

    In the case of Tante Ju and this may not work for other aeroplanes, perhaps you can hook yet another variable in for alternate purposes.
    Think about it a bit......

    You have used the Spoiler Control to adjust one view because Tante Ju doesn't actually have Spoilers.
    What else does a Ju 52 not have????

    How about hooking in the Landing Gear controls????
    This would work for the Ju 52, but not for aeroplanes with an actual retractable landing gear.
    Of course you would have to alter the AIR file a bit, but that should not affect anything.
    You already have the basic code for using Spoilers which I presume actually works so it should not be difficult.

    - Ivan.

  10. #210
    Hello Ivan!
    Thanks!
    Yes, SCASM is VERY much fun!

    It took me a few tries to discover that only the AF99 Spoiler Retracted Instruction was of any use, because the Speed Below Animations in AA eliminate the effect of the Spoiler Extended instruction, in the same way as it happens with Flaps.

    OK! Good idea with the retractable landing Gear Conditional that this plane doesnīt use!

    The actual Landing Gear will remain fixed if untagged as Gear Up or Down, so that wonīt be affected, but in the .air file, I have some air resistance on the Gear, that would then have to be added to Zero Lift Drag - I hope it wonīt mess up the propellers...

    I expect that in the same way that on an AF99 model, the Lights On and Strobes On instructions wonīt work for anything else than Lights and Strobes, SCASM wonīt be able to do anything with them for the View Points.

    So: Iīll look into the Gear Down instruction now, or perhaps it will be the Gear Up one - we shall see!

    The thing now is to decypher how to thread in this extra conditional into the SCASM listing, so that it makes sense together with the two existing conditions.

    Thank you for your counsel, comments and suggestions!
    At least, the "Gunship" is more fun to use this way - it now stands a chance against the enemy!
    More later!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  11. #211

    Done! 3 Virtual Cockpit views Available.

    Hello Ivan,
    Iīve just done it!
    It works! SCASM is fun indeed!

    Now there is a Pilotīs Virtual Cockpit view as default on the ground, in Freeflight mode,
    and also when the gear is lowered in Quick Combat Mode in Padlocked Chase View.

    The other two "Battlestation" Padlocked Chase Views are selectable with the Spoiler key
    only when the Gear is up.

    Thus, in Quick Compbat mode, you get to start with the Upper Gunnerīs
    Padlocked
    Chase View, and can select the "less obstructed" view with the Spōiler key, and then,
    just for the sake of form, by lowering the Gear you get the normal Pilotīs Virtual Cockpit view.

    I mean, we canīt fly without a pilot, can we?

    Nice...
    Thanks again for your indications!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  12. #212

    Three VC views for Ju52 with guns - new WIP

    Hello Folks,
    To toggle between the usual Pilotīs Virtual Cockpit view and the two extra "Battle"
    views, use the "G" Key.
    The normal VC appears with the lowered landing gear.

    With Up landing gear, the cockpit gunnerīs view appears, and then you can toggle
    between that and the other "Battle-station" view (for downwards views) with
    the Spoiler Key.


    The .air file adjustments as regards the transfer of the Gear Drag to Zero Lift Drag
    did not affect the propeller or engine performance, and the Cockpit Gunnerīs view
    looking down into the cockpit, is now corrected: You see the pilot, not the co-pilot.

    The plane can be operated quite conveniently, and is definitely defendable!
    As Iīm sure Smilo will be interested in trying it out as soon as he has time,
    here it is, attached to this post.

    Here are also two downward-view screenshots.

    Now Iīll put in the extra VC views into the armed transport night-flier.
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; February 26th, 2018 at 04:01.

  13. #213
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    i had every intention to come in and saying,
    just keep the forward gunner vc view.
    the fuselage blocking the lower aft view
    is just a ju52 design flaw.
    don't worry about it.
    it's just the way it is...right?

    well, i just spent an hour
    test driving the new 3xvc Ju52 gunship.
    granted, i'm not a very good shot,
    but, boy, that was fun.

    who'd a thought multi vc views were possible?
    great idea, Kwong and well done, Stephan
    for putting it together.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  14. #214
    Hello Smilo,
    OK, thanks. Glad you like it! Itīs fun how it works with TG2, isnīt it?
    It makes it a usable airplane!

    This is really thanks to Ivan for having prodded me on to use SCASM to
    this purpose. It is really incredible!

    The AF99 + SCASM is really quite a good Tandem, or, if you include
    Aircraft Animator, itīs a Triad!

    ...and, I got the 3 views into the camo night-flier too!

    The next thing to do is establish if the firing power is enough, i.e.
    the hit probability, which on some stock models is 1 in 14, and on
    others 1 in 8 or 1 in 4.

    I put in 1 in 4, but we could use 1 in 2 as well.... Then, firing range
    and speed is as per the book for each type of gun.

    Gotta rush. More later!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  15. #215
    Hello Smilo, Aleatorylamp,

    I had actually been thinking of the changing VC point of view for quite some time.
    The problem is that with my own projects, there isn't really a good way to fit them in because just about everything uses Spoilers and Retractable Landing Gear.
    Think about it.... I have two Dive Bombers in the works: SBD-3 Dauntless, and Ju 87B Stuka and they need their Dive Brakes.
    I suppose Landing Gear would work for Ju 87B but the problem is that I really don't like the default view being from the Gunner's position because most of the time, I fly them in Free Flight.
    I cheated a bit with the BV 141B by just leaving out the Aft Wall of the Cockpit and without that bulkhead, the all around view is already pretty good.

    FWIW, I don't even have TG2 installed on any of the machines. Neither CFS machine is really stable at the moment.
    I suppose I should install TG2 at some point for testing........
    ....But before that, I should probably finish the Ki 61 that has been sitting around forever.

    - Ivan.

  16. #216
    Hello Ivan,
    Thatīs one advantage I have with my old crates!

    I could even put in more VC views for the different machineguns
    on the Gotha Grossflugzeug and the Staaken Riesenflugzeug...
    they use neither Spoilers nor Retractable Landing Gear.

    The Dornier 17 and the Martin Baltimore donīt use Spoilers, so
    these could also be candidates for an extra VC view. Combined with
    TG2, theyīd stand a much better chance in combat.


    Anyway, to your post:
    I remember you once said you were not a great fan of using nav-lights.
    Save the resources for something else! ...and if needed, use luminiscent
    red, green or white paint on the textures so lights could be made in that
    way were needed.

    So... Hmmmmm... Do you get my line of thought?
    You DO have one possibility for an extra VC view for the Dauntless and
    the Stuka.

    What I said about lights not being useful for toggling something is not
    entirely true. It only applies to strobe lights, that make anything tagged
    with that appear and disappear the same way as a strobe light.

    But a normal nav-light works! Something tagged with the condition:

    IfVarAnd( :L001A68 76 0001 )
    ; *** Nav Lights Control Variable ***

    will appear when you press the "L" key, and disappear again when you
    press the "L" key again.

    How about that?

    I used to use the "L" key on my models to make pilots appear or disappear.
    That way a pilot could park his plane on the tarmac, get out and have a
    coffee or go home and sleep.

    BTW: About your Ki61 - Your recent work in this plane has given great results,
    and it is looking great, so I can only encourage you to continue!

    Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  17. #217
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    I was also thinking along the same lines, but have a few things going on and no fully functional development computer at the moment.
    I also wasn't actually sure that Navigation Lights were implemented in Combat Flight Simulator and haven't tried to test to confirm.
    Are you sure that Nav Lights work in CFS? I actually don't remember commenting about liking or not liking to use Navigation Lights.
    Thanks for listing the code to check.

    Regarding displaying Nav Lights, the way that I do textures now is entirely with BMP files and they already glow in the dark, so I don't believe there is a distinction between night lighting and normal textures. It isn't hard to test, but I need to get a reliable development computer first.
    There ARE a few things I am comfortable with doing at the moment so perhaps I should resolve those first.

    You seem to have no issue pushing a project to completion. I am finding I am getting distracted quite a bit from completing ANY projects.
    It seems like there is always something more interesting to do than to push a project to the release stage.
    I had actually been thinking of starting yet another CFS project aeroplane.

    Regarding the Ki 61: Its texturing was done in a rather odd fashion (via a spreadsheet), so at some point I want to get that procedure expanded a bit so that it is much easier to use. I actually found some texturing "errors" via use of the spreadsheet and I would never have known about them otherwise. That procedure requires way too much user interaction at the moment so if I can make a program work properly, I could easily finish painting a Spitfire IX and a Macchi 205 that have been sitting in the Paint Shop for the last few years.

    Recently I found that my calculations for German ATA Manifold Pressure and Japanese Boost Pressure were slightly incorrect. The numbers are not different enough to notice, but I had to go back and revise my calculations which affects some of the AIR files I was working on.... and of course also affects the gauges. (The Gauge effects are so slight that they are very difficult to notice which is why they didn't compare badly against the stock gauges.....
    In any case, now that I know better, I want to do some corrections to the gauges I have already written.

    - Ivan.

  18. #218
    Hello Ivan,
    Yes, definitely! The AF99 "lights on" option in the "Special Effects (display Conditions)"
    menu works well in CFS1. Apart from turning on lights, you can make anything appear
    and disappear. Just for fun you could have a biplane and turn it into a monoplane with
    the "L" key, and using this conditional with SCASM is probably be even more useful.

    As regards creations with small inaccuracies that are so small they go almost or completely
    unnoticed, I suppose it would depend on the person whoīs creating them.

    Sometimes it simply takes too long to be 100% exact, AND one has to take into account
    inaccuracies caused by the limitations of the tools we use, so there is always a practical
    balance to strike.

    Obviously, quirky hardware can be very off-putting, as it takes a lot of the fun away. I do
    hope you can get a reliable machine soon!

    Anyway, the next step for the two remaining armed Tante Juīs, is to finish the altitude vs
    speed scale on the bomb aimerīs panel. I canīt use the B-17 scale, because of Tante Juīs
    slower speeds and lower altitudes, but itīs coming along.

    Once I finish it the bomb aimerīs panel, the planes will be ready for upload.
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  19. #219

    Alternative Bomber Panel Idea

    Alternative Bomber Panel Idea

    Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan,

    I was wondering: Instead of having a complete separate bomb aimerīs panel,
    perhaps it would be practical to have this position in the main panel on the right.

    This position is at the moment the navigator/communications position, which could
    now be placed into a separate, new nav/com instrument panel.

    So, for the bomb aimerīs panel, a new window would be obtained from the menu
    "Views - New Window - Map New", and mouse-shaped and fitted to get the red
    cross in the middle of the central bomb symbol.

    Just by enlargening it a bit and moving it into position, the top right corner of the
    new window can then be moved to adapt the size so that it fits exactly.

    The bomb aimerīs scale shows two altitudes which can be used - 1600 ft and 3300 ft
    ( 500 m and 1000 m), at 30-minute power, full throttle non-WEP speed, 154-157 Kt
    (285-290 Kph or 177-180 mph) depending on which altitude you choose.

    For this purpose, the default ft altitude/ kt speed reading in red text at the top of
    the
    screen would be enabled, as the airspeed indicator in kph is a bit small.

    Two screenshots show the release and impact moments, aiming for the bottom of
    the white square on the map view.

    The question is, would
    this kind of bomb aimerīs panel be more practical?
    ...or maybe itīs too ugly to have on a main panel - specially if youīre not going
    to bomb anything and havenīt installed the Map View from the New Window option,
    so you are left with just a black square hole in the panel...

    What do you think?


    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  20. #220

    Normal Bomb Aimerīs Panel

    Hello again, Gentlemen,
    This would be the normal bomb aimerīs panel for the two bombing heights
    at full throttle, no-WEP speed. Actual speeds for the 830 Hp Tante Ju would
    in such a case be 152-153 Kt for 1600 ft,
    and 155-156 Kt 3300 ft.

    Update: Now
    Iīve written in the speeds on the scale, next to the altitudes,
    to make it
    more useful. Then, the 725 Hp night-flier speeds come down by
    about 16 Kt (18 mph or 29 kph), so it gets a different altitude/speed scale,
    with cross-hairs for the same heights placed correspondingly lower.

    This panel is probably visually better and probably easier to use. It only
    requires a mouse-drag on the lower map-border border to stretch it down
    so that the centre crosshairs are inside the bomb symbol in the middle.

    Probably this option would be better. Which would you prefer?
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; February 28th, 2018 at 06:49.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  21. #221

    better bomb aimerīs panel

    Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan,
    P.S.
    Hereīs a new screenshot to show the improvement on the bomb aimerīs panel,
    although I was cheating in slew mode... but it shows the new scale.
    This oneīs from the g4e, which is a bit slower, but also has the two heights on
    the scale.

    There are both metric and imperial Altimeters and Airspeed Indicators,
    and with the red HUD text display option, you get the Knots too!
    We cater for all tastes, donīt we?

    Anyhow, I think it will be better to use this kind of panel, and not the other

    combined main panel with bomb aimerīs window included on the right.

    Also, a good thing is that for these relatively low altitudes, Default Zoom is
    used - one cause for confusion less!

    So then, unless you have any further suggestions or ideas, on my part Iīd be
    done, and would proceed to upload the two armed versions.

    P.P.S. A really strong wind-strom is raging outside since late afternoon. Some
    trees have been blown over in parks. Itīs the third storm in less than a week.
    Last Friday and last Sunday were rainstorms, with highways and streets turning
    into rivers, but this one is blowing and howling like mad!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  22. #222
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    no ap hdg adjust gauge?
    or do you want to stick fly the approach?
    dang if i can remember the name of the thing.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  23. #223
    Hello Smilo,
    OK, thanks! I didnīt realize...
    Well, instead of the AP1 autopilot, then the flat, rectangular, default
    more modern, grey FS98 Autopilot can go on this panel, but better
    on its own.

    I have the impression that it will work better than together with AP1
    like on the main panel, where there appears to be interference bewtween
    the two. They wonīt do a speed hold either!

    Iīll change the panel layout and put it in the middle at the bottom, with
    the instructions up along the sides.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  24. #224
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,775
    not that i am an authority on auto pilot,
    far from it. i just know what works for me.

    first, my choices are by no means historically accurate.
    so, if anyone wants to argue the point,
    let's get it out of the way...you win.

    the heading adjustment gauge i mentioned above
    is the stock cessna_182.directional_gyro
    it's simple, straight forward and does what i want it to do.

    for years i have searched for and not found
    an auto pilot gauge i am completely happy with.
    the dash8.apilot is as close as i can find.
    it includes mach hold, nav hold, and back course hold buttons
    that frankly, i could do without. i never use them.
    it also has airspeed hold and yaw damper buttons
    which i've never been able to make work,
    so i don't bother with them either.

    what i am left with are buttons for ap master on/off,
    heading hold, altitude hold and the rarely used wing leveler.
    included are mousable digital readouts for course,
    heading, altitude, vertical speed, and the pesky IAS/Mach selector.
    as i said before, with the exception of the ias/mach readout,
    all of the digital readouts are mouse adjustable.

    finally, i also use JWB. hud_hdg, hud_ralt, hud3_tas and hudvsi
    digital readouts in conjunction with the ap readouts
    just for a little more accuracy.

    it should be noted that the ap1 Stephan mentioned
    is a mousable auto pilot hold gauge.
    basically, when the heading or altitude buttons are clicked,
    the heading or altitude will hold at whatever you are currently flying.
    no adjustment is easily available, except to turn off the ap,
    manually change heading or altitude to what you want,
    then, re engage the auto pilot.

    one more thing, i have all this stuff in a small pop up window
    that i can turn off or on as needed with one keystroke.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  25. #225

    better instrumentation

    Hello Smilo,
    Thank you very much once again!

    Iīm afraid my ignorance in some fields is quite appreciable, and before your
    explanation I was still not clear about the instrumentation in question.

    So it seems that an autopilot needs a directional gyro for heading holds. OK!

    Then, it would sound correct to leave the bomb aimerīs panel as it is, but
    substituting the P51 Heading Indicator for the Cessna Directional Gyro, and
    leaving AP1 in. Correct?

    Update: It seems correct, and the brain likes learning... Itīs fun: With our
    friend AP1 on heading and altitude hold, I can turn the left Gyro button + or -
    and the plane will fly the corresponding curve, in map view too.
    ...or was it the right button?

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; March 1st, 2018 at 05:23.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •