Four Russian WWI aircraft released for CFS2! - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 54

Thread: Four Russian WWI aircraft released for CFS2!

  1. #26

  2. #27

    Porokhovschikhov Bicoque

    Hello Folks,
    As this thread is about unusual Russian models, perhaps it would be interesting to upload
    a CFS2 upgrade of the sesquiplane I mentioned in my previous post, the Porokhovschikov
    Bicoque, the first twin fuselage in history.

    The upgrade would comprise a hollowed-out cockpit and gunner well, with crew, machine-gun
    and bomblets hanging on the side added with Dped.

    It had a 7-cyl 50 Hp Gnome pusher rotary engine, and had a maximum speed of 62 mph.
    The weight of the pilot, observer/gunner, machinegun, ammo and the hand-bombs was almost
    the same as the planeīs empty weight.

    Porokhovschikhov had presented his project to the military for series production, but the
    military couldnīt reach an agreement amongst themselves, so he built it himself, at home!

    Here are some screenshots and a photo of what appears to be the original 1914 aircraft.
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Bicoque screenshot 2.jpg   Bicoque Screenshot.jpg   Porokhopvschikov Bi-Coque 1914.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; May 9th, 2019 at 04:16.

  3. #28

    Komendantīs Airfield is now corrected!!

    Hello Folks,
    Iīm sorry to say that the FS98 Komendantīs Airfield scenery I attached yesterday does
    not work well with CFS2, because of an unfortunate altitude discrepancy between the
    two simulators, that I failed to take into account.

    I had mistakenly taken for granted that it would work, as there was no problem for it
    between FS98 and CFS1.

    It appears that the CFS2 altitude for St Petersburg is different. Itīs at 56 ft, wheras
    for FS98 it is at 134 ft, so Iīm afraid it is of no use.

    Update: Itīs fixed now!
    As I was busy trying to re-install my Airport 2.16, the usual directory problems started,
    and it wouldnīt work, but suddenly an e-mail from Kdriver arrived, and he has fixed it by
    flattening the area.
    So, thankfully it works now. Here are the new .bgl files attached, that correct the old one.
    To install: In the Scenery folder, delete the old "Comendant.bgl" and put in the three new "Komendant..." files,
    keeping the old bitmap in the texture folder, which remains unchanged.

    Hello Kdriver, thanks a lot!!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; May 9th, 2019 at 13:12.

  4. #29
    Hi Aleatorylamp,

    Great work with these very interesting models.
    Well Done
    Cheers
    Stuart

  5. #30
    Hello Stuart277,
    Thanks for your good words, and Iīm glad you like them! These models are a bit
    different from the usual ones. At that time there was much need for experimentation!

    Iīve just finished done the model upgrade and Dpīs for the Porokhovschikov-2 Bicoque,
    and right now Iīm fighting it out with the flight dynamics.

    Apart from the Aircraft.cfg, which is going fine, the .air file seems to work a bit differently
    in CFS2. I got the engine and propeller parameters right, but there are certain problems
    with lift and drag - itīs not gliding as well as Iīd like, but Iīll get there in the end!

    Letīs see when itīs ready to upload!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  6. #31
    Thank you and Kdriver for the airfield.

  7. #32
    Library Staff
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Age
    70
    Posts
    1,768
    You're welcome Stephan and Roxane.

    It might be worth experimenting with grass textures so it blends better with CFS2 textures, in particular Sander's EurW ones. You are a bit limited with the .r8 format.

    Allen made a good set of WW1 airfield layouts but I can't find their location in the library.

    Kevin

  8. #33
    Hello Roxane21,
    Kdriver commented to me by email that
    "Alexander Belov has made some beautiful airship and navy bases on the Eastern Front for FS2004. They display correctly in CFS2. There is even a Gotha at Wainoden airship station in the Baltic states of the Russian empire. You can find them on AVSIM."
    ...so you may like to have a look.

    Hello Kdriver,
    Maybe the limiting R8 Format is the reason for the dirt-textured apron not showing up in the Komendantīs scenery.
    Perhaps itīs just as well! All turf looks better!
    Anyway, my Airport for Windows is still giving SCASM problems and wonīt work.
    Iīve had this before, but I donīremember what the solution was.
    So, I think Iīll see to the Sander's EurW textures when I have more time after the uploads of the pending upgrade projects.

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

  9. #34
    SOH-CM-2023 Ravenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Age
    71
    Posts
    2,355
    Quote Originally Posted by kdriver View Post
    You're welcome Stephan and Roxane.

    It might be worth experimenting with grass textures so it blends better with CFS2 textures, in particular Sander's EurW ones. You are a bit limited with the .r8 format.

    Allen made a good set of WW1 airfield layouts but I can't find their location in the library.

    Kevin
    That's because they're not there. Allen made them for me months ago. I really have to take the time to learn how to make a flatten as the WW1 airfields sometimes cas shadows when viewed from the air.
    It would be good to have them in the library.

  10. #35

    Now there are four.

    Hello Folks,
    Hereīs the link to the Porokhovschikov-2 Bicoque (twin fuselage) sesquiplane Iīve just uploaded:
    http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...d=124&id=25463
    It will be available in the warbirds library as soon as it is approved.

    Here are some screenshots.
    This was the precursor of all dual-fuselage aircraft including the Lightning!
    It was an aerodynamic improvement over the lattice-fuselages of the time, the pusher-engine
    layout being preferred by pilots because of the clean air they could breathe, and also because it
    offered a clear field of fire forwards.

    Thanks to Ravenna and Kdriver for their ongoing help and cousel with the intrincacies of CFS2,
    and also to Roxane21 whose query after Russian sceneries spurred me on to decide to do this
    fourth Russian upgrade.

    I find it is a quite nice-looking and unusual design, and easy to fly, just like the original was
    reputed to do.

    I hope you enjoy the plane. If there are any problems, let me know and Iīll try to put them right.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Bicoque-3.jpg   Bicoque-2.jpg   Bicoque-1.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; May 11th, 2019 at 05:19.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  11. #36
    SOH-CM-2023 Ravenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Age
    71
    Posts
    2,355
    Nice work Stephan! Thank you.

  12. #37
    Glad you like it!
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  13. #38

    A new twin-boom pusher model

    Hello Folks,

    In context with the Russian twin-fuselage / twin pushers in this thread, some time ago I
    made an interesting German twin-boom pusher design for FS98/CFS1. I think an upgrade would
    be well worth having in CFS2: The 2-seater AGO C.I armed observer, of which about 20 units
    were made. With a 6-cylinder Mercedes DIIIs engine, top speed was an impressive 90 mph.

    Another nice aircraft which was nimble, easy to fly and also let the crew breathe clean air!

    It was built by Gustav Otto in his Johannisthal branch, where he obtained wartime contracts
    for his aircraft. He had started before the Great War near Munich, in what represents the
    origin of the BMW company, producing his own aircraft engines, as well as his successful
    series of Otto Pusher biplane trainers, which trained a number of German pilots like Ernst Udet.

    Here are some screenshots!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails AGO CI-3.jpg   AGO CI-2.jpg   AGO CI-1.jpg  
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  14. #39
    SOH-CM-2023 Ravenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Age
    71
    Posts
    2,355
    My goodness.....you are on fire! Great work Stephan.

  15. #40
    Great job, thank you!

    It is always surprising how the AGO C.I sits on his tail skids.

  16. #41
    Hello Roxane21,

    The Viosin and the Ivanov-Voisin sat on their 4 wheels, but the AGO C-1
    had a more delicate balance and tended to sit on its tail. The front wheels seem
    to have been more for landing, and for elevator-down taxiing.


    Hello Ravenna,

    I decided to be quite prolific these days, and keep my nose on the grindstone,
    because work on the twin-boom/fuselage model upgrades wasnīt arduous.

    They came through with less work on the conveyor belt than other models, as I had
    more building experience when I built them originally. Thus, they didnīt contain any
    serious flaws to correct before starting, so the process was really quite straight forward.

    Nevertheless, I donīt know how they will behave as AI planes, so it may be necessary
    for someone who knows more about that to tweak the AI .air files a bit.
    I wouldnīt like them to just be easy-to-shoot-down sitting ducks...

    Anyway, Folks, thanks for your enthusiasm!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  17. #42

    The German twin-boom pusher

    Hello Folks,

    Iīm fighting it out with the flight dynamics on this one - with similar problems to what was going on with the Porokovschikov twin-tail, but Iīll manage in the end.

    One thing about the bombs, is that the slim French ones would probably be incorrect, as in the picture, and fatter ones would probably be more in order. I have to see if there are any better vertical bomb .bglīs for this purpose.

    Would anyone know?

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails AGO CI-4.jpg  
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  18. #43

    Contradictory information - what to do?

    Hello Folks,
    As usual with a lot of aircraft, it seems that Iīve run into a bit of contradictory information on
    the German AGO twin-boom pusher.

    Almost all internet sites mentioning this aircraft have it simply as a well-performing reconnaissance
    aircraft with a machinegun in the nose, that was in service in the first half of 1915.

    Photos show the C.I with nacelle and booms darker than the wings, possibly dark red or dark brown, wings
    most probably canvas-beige, and then the C.II with an overall lighter colour, possibly light blue or even yellow.

    Models mentioned are the AGO C.I with the Mercedes D.II or Benz III engine, with a production of 15 units,
    and the AGO C.II with a more powerful 220 Hp Mercedes D.IV engine and a production of 18 units.

    Another site mentions a total of 50 C.I and C.II units being built.

    Then, one site mentions it carried bombs, but doesnīt specify which model it was, or how many or what type
    of bombs it carried.

    It is interesting to note, however, that top speed for the lower-powered model was 90 mph, and 84 mph
    for the more powerful C.II. The reason for this seems to have been the weight, although there are sites that
    give the same weights for both models, and other sites donīt mention the weight of the C.I.

    Could it have been that only the C.II that carried the bombs, and the C.I didnīt?

    On the other hand, thereīs nothing to stop any gunner in an observer-plane from dropping hand-held bombs
    or grenades hanging from the sill of his gunnerīs-well.

    All quite confusing, and a bit brain-racking. So what shall we do?
    Stick five French hand-bombs onto the gunner well sides like on the Ivanov-Voisin Anatra, or leave it without bombs?

    Update: I just found a new site mentioning both models as being able to carry a small number of bombs, but without
    specifying number of bombs or the type.
    At least it looks like we could be back to the initial plan of carrying hand-bombs.
    Would ten hand bombs hanging on each side be OK? Unless there are any objections, I think Iīll go for that.

    A lot of tiring back-and-forth, all this, but at least itīs a bit clearer than before.

    "It was as clear as mud, but it covered the ground,
    and the confusion made me brain go round."
    Harry Belafonte in "The birds and the Bees"

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

  19. #44

    Icon9 Porokhovschikov-2 Bicoque Panel .cfg correction.

    Hello folks,
    Iīm awfully sorry for an unfortunate glitch in the Panel.cfg in the uploaded Porokhovschikov-2 Bicoque.
    It still contained the Beckwith Test Gauge Set for performance tuning, with restly gauges pushed out of the way to make space.

    The correct file was Panel_backup001.cfg, that I forgot to rename correctly when I finished.
    Itīs crazy that I missed such an obvious thing.

    I have just corrected the mistake in the Warbirds library, and I do indeed apologize!

    For those who donīt want to download the whole file again, it will suffice to delete the Panel.cfg file in the panel folder of the
    old upload and rename the file "Panel_backup001.cfg" to "Panel.cfg".

    Thereīs always something that goes wrong, isnīt there...
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  20. #45

    Icon9 More problems, but strange this time.

    Hello Folks,
    On my computer the Porokhovschikov-2 BiCocque behaves well, except for a little forward-lunging and two small jitters on engine start-up, and after that everything is stable and docile.

    Nevertheless, Kdriver has reported extreme abnomalities like a high-jump, and a summersault followed by an inevitable crash. So on some computers obviously there seems to be a problem. Strange that itīs not on all computers, because Iīd have noticed. (...probably...!)

    More proof to confirm that imformatics and computers are by no means an exact science.
    They seem to me to be even more aleatory than Pixarīs animated desk lamp.
    I am already sufficiently erratic too, (Aleatorylamp), so maybe the combination of the two factors gives a dire result.

    Perhaps itīs the contact points. Iīm not very good at that part of the .air file.
    Also, the attitude seems to be a bit tail heavy, but thatīs not a problem, as I corrected that easily by halving the value of the Pitch-moment at AoA=0. Now, on my computer itīs flying horizontally with no problems.

    Itīs such a light plane, with only 975 lb empty weight, so itīs a difficult one, this .air file. At first, when the gunner got in, the nose went down to the ground! Really crazy.

    Anyway... Just to say, Iīm working on it and will update the .air file once Iīve managed to cure this.

    But come to think of it... How can I improve the .air file if on my computer the aircraft flies well?
    Iīll dig out my old Pentium 4, install a minimal CFS2 on it, and test it there... Hopefully it will have problems.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp

  21. #46

    AGO C.I twin-boom observer with no bombs after all!

    Hello All,
    At the end itīs probably better to have the AGO C.I without bombs.
    It seems historically more correct to keep it at being strictly an observer.
    With the scarce information available, one may venture to say that most probably
    only the more powerful and slower AGO C.II that carried bombs, and itīs not the plane
    Iīm building - I donīt know if it was beige, light blue or light yellow... even more unknown
    factors than the colour scheme of the C.I!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails AGO-C1-no-bombs.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; May 21st, 2019 at 00:11. Reason: spelling

  22. #47

    Porokhovschikov-2 BiCocque flight dynamics fixed!!

    Hello Folks,
    I have been a bit under the weather recently, but have managed to fix the Flight Dynamics on this Twin-tail pusher, that was having problems on some computers, but not all.

    Thanks to Kdriver for testing at least three different Flight Dynamics!

    I also managed improve other things, mainly the contact points. I looked around and found a more extensive description by Milton Shupe here in SOH, with extra explanations on how they work, and have finally been able to understand this
    set of confusing numbers more fully, especially those regarding the suspension.

    Thanks to Milton Shupe for his post!

    Additionally, by comparing values applied to a number of other similar models, I managed to put in better entries for things like "Pitch Moment due to AoA Rate", "Lift due to horizontal stabilizer", "Pitch Moment Coefficient at AoA zero", "Prop effect on elevator". Then, in the Aircraft.cfg, the CoG also got a fine-tune, as well as gear-positions, and all this appears to have fixed the problem.

    Now I have to do the Checklists for the Kneeboard, as I noticed that the CFS1 ones donīt work the same way...
    Also, I want to put in an extra loading option in the Dp files, so that it can be flown with only one pilot and no bombs.
    Most probably the weight difference will be quite noticeable, and should be quite interesting.

    As soon as Iīm done, Iīll update the model in the library, and also attach the flight dynamics to a post here for those who already have the model and donīt want to have to download the model yet again.

    Note: The AGO C.I upgrade will also be released soon, as its Flight Dynamics were also pending improvement.

    New Update:
    Incidentally, Iīve just discovered something interesting for rotary engine control in CFS2:
    Rotaries only have two throttle positions, Off or Full Power, and the only way to operate in lower revs is by by "blipping" the magnetos, i.e. switching them off and on again repeatedly.

    Unfortunately, CFS doesnīt provide keystroke control for magnetos. Only mouse-clicking the magneto gauges on the instrument panel will switch them off and on again, but this is very cumbersome indeed when you are flying.

    However, rotary engines were also controlled, or "blipped" by cutting off the fuel supply, and turning it on again, and
    CFS2 does provide a keystroke option for this in the Controller Assignment Menu:

    There are two Engine Control keystrokes that do exactly what is required:

    Set Mixture to idle cut-off: Default keystroke Shift + 3
    Set Mixture to rich..........: Default keystroke Shift + 4

    Tapping the keys alternately will keep revs low. It seems easy and realistic, and Joystick buttons can also be defined.

    Could be interesting, I think...
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; May 29th, 2019 at 12:54.

  23. #48
    Hello Folks,
    In my last post, I was mistaken about rotary engines in general being run at full power all the time. I found
    out that later rotaries such as those on the Sopwith Camel and Sopwith Pup for example, had some degree
    of RPM control between 800 and 1200 RPM.

    This thread: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26336 explains the subject very well,
    and also makes for an interesting read!

    The system of controlling RPM by "blipping" only, would then apply exclusively to very early rotary engines like
    the one on the Porokhovschikov-2 BiCocque.

    Although this "blipping" technique I described can be done realistically in the sim, and without too much
    complication, it is debatable whether this kind of thing could be practical for simmers!

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp


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

  24. #49

    AGO C.I is back on the conveyor belt.

    Hello Folks,
    After some very busy work on other aircraft, itīs the turn of the AGO C.I again to be in the production line again.

    My doubts about the colour scheme have finally dissipated, as I have found evidencethat pale-yellow and pale-blue
    only seem to apply to the AGO C.II and C.III.
    For the C.I there is photographic evidence for two liveries, both for land and floatplane versioins:

    A) all-round beige, clear-doped or possibly light grey, or
    B) Beige clear-doped wings and tail surfaces, and dark fuselages. The latter could either be dark red or dark brown,
    but judging by the shade of the dark fuselages on the b/w photos, interpretation favours the dark red.

    Thus, there will be no change in the planned CFS2 upgrade for this model.

    I only have to finish the flight dynamics, which are still a bit obnoxious!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  25. #50

    Flight Dynamics upgrade for Porokhovschikov-2 BiCoque

    Hello folks,

    I have just put in an improved .air file for the Porokhovschikov-2 BiCoque twin-tail aircraft:

    This is the correct link now - Iīd got it wrong before:

    http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...d=124&id=25463

    As mentioned earlier on in this thread, some simmers had been reporting problems with the previous "zero or full power" rotary-engine throttle control, as well as some ground handling problems. It turns out there was a contact-points problem, that I have also put right.

    Historically, "zero or full power" only applied to very early rotaries, and very soon they did have throttle control over the 800-1200 RPM range. Only for slow flight, as in approach and final approach, "blipping" the engine with magnetos was done. Thus, the aircraft now has a more progressive throttle control. Also, to make it more practical for simmers to fly, elevator trim and brakes have been included.

    I do apologize for the time it has taken to correct the two flaws.

    As they say... better late than never, I suppose :-)

    Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Bicoque Screenshot.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; August 28th, 2019 at 10:10.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

Members who have read this thread: 1

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
  •