Aeroplane Heaven C-47/DC-3 Manual

**triflyman** · March 12th, 2020, 14:20

This week Aeroplane Heaven made their new C-47/DC-3 Manual available online before release of the model (thank you). Being one of those people that likes to read manuals, I downloaded it immediately and dug in.

Found a few errors in the manual, which I have reported to Aeroplane Heaven...however there was something in the manual which I found very strange and wonder if anyone else has seen something like this on a real-world C-47/DC-3.

On the 19th Page they go through an example of Starting the engines as follows:

Fuel tank selector........to choice
Battery Switch............OFF
Battery Cart (GPU)......Attached ON
Fuel Booster Pumps .... ON
Throttle ....... 1” open
Propeller ..........MAX RPM
Master ignition switch...ON
Right Ignition (Magneto) ...BOTH
Mixture control.....AUTO RICH
Engine primer......ON
Engine Starter (energise) .... ON
As the ENERGISE SWITCH is thrown, the propeller will begin to turn - slowly at first and then gathering speed. You should count “15 blades” at
least, before meshing the engine. This is equal to approximately 3 -4 seconds of energising before meshing.
Engine Mesh ...........ON and HOLD
Once the engine is running, return switches to OFF and disconnect the battery cart. (close crew door Shift/E)
Battery Switch........... ON
Fuel Booster Pumps .... OFF

So it sounds like they are using the Propeller as an "Inertia Starter"...spinning that up first and then "meshing" the engine to the Propeller.

I have some experience with, and working on, C-47/DC-3's. Those always had the starter connected to the rear of the engine and you turned 12 to 15 blades before energizing the mags.

Would like to see if anyone has any experience with starting a real-world C-47/DC-3 as Aeroplane Heaven details it...or any comments.

Thanks

Garry

**pilto von pilto** · March 12th, 2020, 16:01

This is a video game. Compromises need to be made to get certain things to work in a certain way. We are however investigating a different method of start procedure.

The email ( which is between you and us and I would not expect it to be copied onto a public forum - And yes I do need to write that as we have found that some people copy complete email correspondence and post onto public forums - And I am not saying that you are a person who would do this , just that it has happened in the past ) has been received and we will reply to your concerns there

The help desk fellow.

**thunderstreak** · March 12th, 2020, 17:20

If the original inertia starter is modelled the blades WILL NOT turn when Energize is selected, you will only hear the Inertia Flywheel spooling up. Allow it to reach it’s full speed, then select Mesh.
Once Mesh is selected, count 15 blades, then Mags on both, Primer On, when the engine fires, Mixture to Auto Rich (from Idle Cut Off), primer off after engine stabilizes.

On a DC-3 / C-47, the right engine is usually started first.
Therefore, right fuel selector should be set to Right Main, cross-feed off and Left selector off when starting the right.

It sounds like from what’s posted (I have not read AH’s manual) some original configuration and some modern configuration have been blended together.
The original aircraft would have had an inertia starter, a hand wobble fuel pump for building initial pressure and a mechanical primer.
Modernized DC-3 / C-47 would have a direct starter, electric boost pumps for each tank and electric primer control.

See attached 1942 POH (Page 40 for start up)

https://www.maam.org/flightsim/enhance/pfoi.pdf

**bazzar** · March 12th, 2020, 17:41

As said, we are at work on getting the start procedure to be more realistic. Unfortunately, as we all know, the sim is not the greatest at allowing such particular procedures, due mainly to the way it is coded. Workarounds are needed for most functions. You can't start an engine with mixture in idle/cutoff unless you have special code. The mags follow similar restrictions unless you use bespoke code. We are working on both of these aspects for the startup whilst still trying to retain an element of "feel" of starting a real one. We'll get there, it just needs patience.

We have, however, correct function of the landing gear latch and hydraulic gear lever, flaps control and have "proper"cowl-flaps that can be set to trail (on the P&Ws).

I should also add that in the interests of sanity and timeframe, we have elected to include some more modern items and procedures to create a hybrid cockpit to suit as many tastes as possible. Yes, you will find two-speed blowers in there even though the aeroplane depicted may be an early model.

We have been able to incorporate GTN/WX integration without destroying the "classic"feel of the cockpit.

Please remember, although we want to achieve something close to authentic, we don't do "study-level"that's not our bag. Neither is it our price-point.

In the meantime we are adjusting the manual - that is the least of our challenges!

**stansdds** · March 13th, 2020, 03:43

Unfortunately, MicroSoft's flight simulator engine was not coded for realistic engine starts. In order to get a piston engine in the MicroSoft based flight simulators to start, the engine must have ignition, fuel, and be spinning at 550 rpm. Anyone who has seen a piston engine start, be it aircraft or automotive, knows that the starter motor will never crank the engine to such an rpm. It takes special programming to create realistic engine starts in these flight simulators.

**UnknownGuest12** · March 13th, 2020, 06:07

Ok, not trying to be funny but for me "ctrl+e" will be enough...
Regards

**triflyman** · March 13th, 2020, 06:35

Thank you Thunderstreak...this is exactly why I posted...to see if anyone in the community knew of this aircraft ever having inertia starters. So learned something new. Obviously any C-47/DC-3/R4D's I've been involved with were newer or been converted. What your describing is exactly what Wing42 modeled in their Vega 5. They even have the lever modeled...push in to spin up the flywheel, than, when to speed, pull out to engage the engine. A little of a challenge to get the engine to "catch" the first time.

Again...thanks for the input.

Garry

**YoYo** · March 13th, 2020, 08:22

I see also mistake with description of cockpit - GNS and GTN. Page 38.
With GNS description you have GTN 650 gps, not GNS 430.

GNT 750 and 650 only:

This is GNS (430 exactly):

Cant wait for this model!

btw.
do we have any desert camo skin?

***ColoKent*** · March 13th, 2020, 12:01

Originally Posted by Beaufighter

Ok, not trying to be funny but for me "ctrl+e" will be enough...
Regards

Completely agree...release it now for the majority of us, then wrestle with the rivet counters and release an update later.

This is a first day buy!

Kent

**YoYo** · March 13th, 2020, 12:56

Originally Posted by ColoKent

This is a first day buy!

For me too!

I hope this weekend + in PCAviator in the same time

.

btw. here is the link for this AH's manual https://aeroplaneheaven.com/img/prod...hRAnYW6bUMRhRU .

**pilto von pilto** · March 13th, 2020, 14:33

Originally Posted by ColoKent

Completely agree...release it now for the majority of us, then wrestle with the rivet counters and release an update later.

This is a first day buy!

Kent

ahhh.... no. Not sure if you have noticed the way that the community reacts to rushed releases. Lets just say it isnt good. So we'll be making this as good as we can. Like AAA gaming as well has seen a shift from a " ship it and then fix it " to a " take your time and ship it and hope the fixes are smaller less game breaking ".

To all:

CTRL+E wise is the reason why there are compromises in the starting procedure. EG the mixtures. Rivet counters are great in some cases but can actually be detrimental to a projects development which is when the discretion of the dev comes in. Which is why sometimes things dont get " fixed " as they either cant due to other code complications/Sim capabilities or cant due to time/ROI considerations. Luckily if you're after an Aeroplaneheaven DC-3 then we are making an aeroplaneheaven DC-3.

***ColoKent*** · March 13th, 2020, 18:43

On second thought, maybe not...

K

**pilto von pilto** · March 13th, 2020, 20:23

Originally Posted by ColoKent

On second thought, maybe not...

K

Not sure If I got the wrong idea on this comment. So you aren't after an aeroplaneheaven DC-3 made by Aeroplaneheaven ?

Ok I guess

**thunderstreak** · March 14th, 2020, 02:32

There are numerous FSX/P3D aircraft out there that have a relatively realistic start sequence. They range from freeware to the above mentioned “study level” aircraft. With the limitations of the host sim, on most of them you must have the mags on and mixture rich before cranking. Otherwise the sequence is quite realistic. There are even a few out there that allow a primer only (mixture at idle cut off) start, so it can be done. What I appreciate even more is when a developer gets the sounds and airframe vibrations right during start up and shut down. A radial engine is a shaky, rough running beast when first started.

**thunderstreak** · March 14th, 2020, 02:47

A nice little start up video to share, modern DC-3 with direct starters.
https://youtu.be/cOwY-FvhVWc

...and a radial with an inertia starter for comparison.
https://youtu.be/Tli5NG4HBsQ

***ColoKent*** · March 14th, 2020, 10:54

Originally Posted by pilto von pilto

Not sure If I got the wrong idea on this comment. So you aren't after an aeroplaneheaven DC-3 made by Aeroplaneheaven ?

Ok I guess

You misunderstood. But I certainly didn't ask to be insulted.

Later.

K

**pilto von pilto** · March 14th, 2020, 13:31

Originally Posted by ColoKent

You misunderstood. But I certainly didn't ask to be insulted.

Later.

K

Now I think you misunderstood my comment.

If you can tell me what is insulting about the following please tell me.

Not sure If I got the wrong idea on this comment. So you aren't after an aeroplaneheaven DC-3 made by Aeroplaneheaven ?

Ok I guess

Lets break it down.
1. First sentence is me saying I am not sure if I got the wrong idea or not. At no point did I say that you had got the wrong point. Your comment was open to mis understanding.
2. Second sentence is asking about your comment. As you have said I misunderstood however at the time I thought you were reacting to " Luckily if you're after an Aeroplaneheaven DC-3 then we are making an aeroplaneheaven DC-3. ". Which is a legitimate thing to say. You replied with " On second thought, maybe not..." which I took to refer back to your previous reply which was " This is a first day buy! ".
3. Ok I guess confusion pop. I truly dont understand but see point 1. I did misunderstand your comment.

I am not insulting you. I am not insulted by your inference that I insulted . no one is insulted about anything at all. It is purely an insult free situation. 2 people misunderstanding each others posts. It happens. So.... what did you mean by your comment.