DoughBree L-39C (FSX) - Page 6
Page 6 of 30 FirstFirst 123456789101112131416 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 739

Thread: DoughBree L-39C (FSX)

  1. #126
    Okay, the engine is started and when I give full throttle, it rolls forward a few feet then stops. Yes. the brakes are off.

  2. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    Okay, the engine is started and when I give full throttle, it rolls forward a few feet then stops. Yes. the brakes are off.
    Your throttle is locked, near the base of the throttle handle is a click spot, it will unlock the throttle.

  3. #128
    SOH-CM-2017 DaveB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pelsall, West Midlands
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,533
    I DID advise that you really DO have to ****

    ATB
    DaveB

  4. #129
    I installed the older version and it worked great. Guess I'll try this one (Again)

  5. #130
    Hm. ISA conditions plus EGT limiter yield 305 KIAS or 550-ish km/h at 4500ft. 315 KIAS if I override the fuel governor, but stay just shy of 700C.



    Quote Originally Posted by falcon409 View Post
    Your throttle is locked, near the base of the throttle handle is a click spot, it will unlock the throttle.
    With the throttle lock engaged, he shouldn't be able to start the engine. Or does CTRL+E work?



    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    Okay, the engine is started and when I give full throttle, it rolls forward a few feet then stops. Yes. the brakes are off.
    *Ahem* RT(F)M, especially the "Operational Notes" page.

  6. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
    I DID advise that you really DO have to ****

    ATB
    DaveB
    You did, but I did not read it like it were a NATOPS manual and that I was going to get a certification quiz afterwards.

  7. #132
    Wow, I've managed to smooth out the fuel governor code so much that I get maximum possible engine performance below the EGT treshhold without a notable amount of twitching.
    (You guys should have seen the code I've used before yesterday's revamp. "Fighting the airplane" all the way!)



    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    You did, but I did not read it like it were a NATOPS manual and that I was going to get a certification quiz afterwards.
    Don't give me ideas...

  8. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    Wow, I've managed to smooth out the fuel governor code so much that I get maximum possible engine performance below the EGT treshhold without a notable amount of twitching.
    (You guys should have seen the code I've used before yesterday's revamp. "Fighting the airplane" all the way!)





    Don't give me ideas...
    FYI....It does start with CTRL + E
    I read the install info, "this goes here and that goes there", and managed to pull that off
    After that, I glanced thru the pages of mandates on the button and switch flipping and was a bit intimidated by it all.

  9. #134
    SOH-CM-2017 DaveB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pelsall, West Midlands
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,533
    hahahahaha...

    I have to admit that **** is generally a 'last resort'. I found the throttle locked too which despite Ctrl+E.. still has you going nowhere. I looked all over the place for the lock and kept missing it with the mouse so the manual had to be consulted. When I saw where it was, I couldn't believe I'd missed it with the mouse!

    Your revised fuel governor code sounds interesting. I'm all in favour of maximum oomph with the minimum of flames!! The way the engine spools up seems ok at the moment. These things are notoriously slow to spool and the current settings fit well. One thing I read in that pilots report was that pilots with little experience on the type will often drop the airbrakes on approach thus requiring more throttle and thus.. keeping the RPM higher to reduce the spool up time should things go wrong. Once 'au fait' with the type.. this practice is dropped. I'd love a go in a real one

    ATB
    DaveB

  10. #135
    Autopilot is in. Need to see if I can do something about the drag.



    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    After that, I glanced thru the pages of mandates on the button and switch flipping and was a bit intimidated by it all.
    Just get acquainted with the startup and read up on the rest when you need it or something breaks.



    Quote Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
    hahahahaha...

    I have to admit that **** is generally a 'last resort'. I found the throttle locked too which despite Ctrl+E.. still has you going nowhere. I looked all over the place for the lock and kept missing it with the mouse so the manual had to be consulted. When I saw where it was, I couldn't believe I'd missed it with the mouse!
    Guess what happened to me when I tried to start the engine today...
    "This can't be a bug! My code is perfect! What does the manual say about thi-THROTTLE LOCK!"


    One thing I read in that pilots report was that pilots with little experience on the type will often drop the airbrakes on approach thus requiring more throttle and thus.. keeping the RPM higher to reduce the spool up time should things go wrong. Once 'au fait' with the type.. this practice is dropped. I'd love a go in a real one
    Check the reports for info on whether they fly their L-39s with tip tanks or without. These things - even if empty - do add a bit of drag and inertia.

  11. #136
    SOH-CM-2017 DaveB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pelsall, West Midlands
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,533
    I'll keep an eye out for anything specifically dealing with 39's without tip tanks I found that pilots report I mentioned.. http://www.warbirdalley.com/articles/l39pr.htm

    EDIT: Looking through the images available on the web, the number of 39C's without tip tanks can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I think it's likely that the report above is in an aircraft with tip tanks

    ATB
    DaveB

  12. #137
    I've added a tooltip to the gauge glass for various readouts, like imperial speed and accurate EGT temps.



    Quote Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
    I'll keep an eye out for anything specifically dealing with 39's without tip tanks I found that pilots report I mentioned.. http://www.warbirdalley.com/articles/l39pr.htm

    EDIT: Looking through the images available on the web, the number of 39C's without tip tanks can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I think it's likely that the report above is in an aircraft with tip tanks
    Looks like a tip tank model in the PIREP.

    Here's one flying without tips (not the one having the camera):
    http://youtu.be/foAywOStED0

    Anyway, I've decreased induced drag by 10% and parasitic drag by 5%. Riding the limiter at 4000 ft at ISA yields 330 KIAS or just shy of 600 kph.

    The cabin pressure controller kept up with a 5000ft zoom climb and a loop. It was only with a 6000+ fpm descent that I could make the warning light illuminate.

  13. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    Thanks!

    By the way: Are you doing the textures from the ground up?
    If so, do you want/need bump map support?


    There is no bump map support and I can live without them. I'll leave the decision up to Jafo, as he's contributing paints.
    Essentially from the ground up...as I started from the paintkit adding 'doubled' existing paints [1024 to 2048] which result in even fuzzier details than the original 1024 so they are redefined. Also the originals have shadow 'painting' which isn't needed with your FSX model so the paints are done 'flat' [mostly].
    The T'Bird and Qantas are originals. The SEA is 99% original - working from an existing camo 'pattern'.
    You can sort of 'fake' bump mapping which is sometimes better than the real thing - when the latter is too fat/prominent/out of scale.....which is what I've been doing, so I can live without them too.

    The existing paints are fine in FSX [ignoring the shadows] so I've been playing more with 'what-ifs', but my fiddling with the paintkit means it's relatively simple for me [now] to do just about any a/c paint for it.

    If I could just work out how to shrink my psp file to something more sane I'd upload it too. Currently fuse_t.psp is 571 meg.


    If anything was to be added to the model visually then rather than bumps I'd prefer underwing stores, gun pod, etc...

  14. #139
    SOH-CM-2017 DaveB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pelsall, West Midlands
    Age
    61
    Posts
    3,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    I've added a tooltip to the gauge glass for various readouts, like imperial speed and accurate EGT temps.





    Looks like a tip tank model in the PIREP.

    Here's one flying without tips (not the one having the camera):
    http://youtu.be/foAywOStED0

    Anyway, I've decreased induced drag by 10% and parasitic drag by 5%. Riding the limiter at 4000 ft at ISA yields 330 KIAS or just shy of 600 kph.

    The cabin pressure controller kept up with a 5000ft zoom climb and a loop. It was only with a 6000+ fpm descent that I could make the warning light illuminate.
    Rgr that mate Looking forward to trying the mods

    ATB
    DaveB

  15. #140
    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    If I could just work out how to shrink my psp file to something more sane I'd upload it too. Currently fuse_t.psp is 571 meg.
    YIKES! Tried to consolidate as many layers as possible...?

    (GIMP is much better at compressing image files. Can turn a 400 MB .psd into a ~20 MB .xcf.

    If anything was to be added to the model visually then rather than bumps I'd prefer underwing stores, gun pod, etc...
    The -C has provisions two hardpoints. Adding these with drop tanks attached to them is somewhere on the "To Do" list.
    Another idea is turning the model into the -V target tug, but that requires a bit more work.

    There's not really a chance for a -ZA or -ZO. Next to having to model a whole range of weapons, I'd also have to deal with the gunsight, stores management and the TacPack crowd that would inevitably come whining about if and when there will be support for it.
    Besides, there already is a -ZA, courtesy of Hadi Tahir. It even comes with a working rear cockpit!



    Quote Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
    Rgr that mate Looking forward to trying the mods
    Currently doing a bit more tweaking.

  16. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    YIKES! Tried to consolidate as many layers as possible...?

    (GIMP is much better at compressing image files. Can turn a 400 MB .psd into a ~20 MB .xcf.



    The -C has provisions two hardpoints. Adding these with drop tanks attached to them is somewhere on the "To Do" list.
    Another idea is turning the model into the -V target tug, but that requires a bit more work.

    There's not really a chance for a -ZA or -ZO. Next to having to model a whole range of weapons, I'd also have to deal with the gunsight, stores management and the TacPack crowd that would inevitably come whining about if and when there will be support for it.
    Besides, there already is a -ZA, courtesy of Hadi Tahir. It even comes with a working rear cockpit!

    Currently doing a bit more tweaking.
    I've stuck with psp for decades....only even using PS when I hit the 32bit mem limit in psp [PS handles it better].

    I'll look into recompiling the file...and consolidating layers....should get it down a bit [wasn't too bad with Piglet's A12A kit I made - and that was 4096 res].

    Meanwhile I'll rework one of the standard paints...see what people think.

    Kinda agree re the 'tacpack crowd' ...though I just like the visuals/complexity, not their 'dropping'...

    I have Hadi Tahir's [naturally] but so far I have my head around this one's paint....would have to start over/from scratch with his...

    Here's the SEA as if it might have been in SEA...

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails L39-Camo4.jpg  

  17. #142
    405 KIAS GS at ISA and 16500 ft, as advertised on Wikipedia. (With 17.5% fuel.)



    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    Kinda agree re the 'tacpack crowd' ...though I just like the visuals/complexity, not their 'dropping'...
    Drop tanks are also complex! *Ahem*

    The fictituous SEA stuff has fairly funny implications. As if there had been a rush for cheap solidarity products from Czechoslovakia after 1968...and then another rush for getting rid of them as quickly as possible over SEA.

  18. #143
    Alrighty, here it is.

    - Autopilot
    - Drag and fuel flow: -20something%, control surface effectiveness +25%
    - Tooltip for the gauge glass
    - Time to failure for engine now 33.5 hours


    Link, as usual:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6K...ew?usp=sharing
    ****!

  19. #144

  20. #145
    Here's a mostly-done rework into 2048 with painted shadows removed....and details sharper...just need to source the Russian slogans and other specifics...

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails L39-Camo Ruskie1.jpg  

  21. #146
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    Alrighty, here it is.

    - Autopilot
    - Drag and fuel flow: -20something%, control surface effectiveness +25%
    - Tooltip for the gauge glass
    - Time to failure for engine now 33.5 hours


    Link, as usual:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6K...ew?usp=sharing
    ****!
    I'm sure that RTFM means read the FULL manual right?

    Now, I have a suggestion, after you do your wizzardy and change this, that, and the other, why not just make patches and zip just those files that were changed?
    I have a feeling that your complete re-do's involve just a few files like maybe, I dunno.....the air file or the FULL manual....

    The Pro Dev's even make patches. Now if there were appreciable differences in each and every complete issuance, then yes, I could see the logic.
    If I wanted to repair a minor nail hole in a wall, I would use spackling paste and "Patch" the tiny nail hole rather then buy another piece of sheet rock. Make sense?

    Just my perception of it all.

    I really do appreciate your hard work in your endeavors and your updates. Thank you sir for all that you do.

  22. #147
    I think the idea is to keep it all together...so people can have a fully functioning 'set' rather than mix and match and maybe break something.
    OK, so I'm being selective with what I'm adding to my install...at the moment as all I'm interested in is the model file and how it 'paints'....

    I prefer Bjoern's method of chucking it all together each time...so nothing's missing....

  23. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    I think the idea is to keep it all together...so people can have a fully functioning 'set' rather than mix and match and maybe break something.
    OK, so I'm being selective with what I'm adding to my install...at the moment as all I'm interested in is the model file and how it 'paints'....

    I prefer Bjoern's method of chucking it all together each time...so nothing's missing....


    Well.... you may have something there. So, every time I d/l a complete unabridged version, I just override the previous one, except you know what, I add a date to the zip title file
    so as to keep the progression in check.

  24. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    I'm sure that RTFM means read the FULL manual right?
    In that case, the abbreviation should be "RTFFM". The second "F" is important, because of emphasis!

    Changes from the previous version are marked in the manual.

    Now, I have a suggestion, after you do your wizzardy and change this, that, and the other, why not just make patches and zip just those files that were changed?
    No can't do. I want to avoid a file slipping past the radar and then having to issue hotfixes for updates, which confuses matters any further.
    Besides, I'd have to write specific install instructions for every update. And seeing how even the three-step installation of the main package can go wrong...

    The Pro Dev's even make patches. Now if there were appreciable differences in each and every complete issuance, then yes, I could see the logic.
    If I wanted to repair a minor nail hole in a wall, I would use spackling paste and "Patch" the tiny nail hole rather then buy another piece of sheet rock. Make sense?
    Yup. But still, I'm not a pro dev so I can do that I want.

  25. #150
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    In that case, the abbreviation should be "RTFFM". The second "F" is important, because of emphasis!


    Yup. But still, I'm not a pro dev so I can do that I want.
    I was just offering what I thought were bonafide suggestions, Jafo already took one bite from the apple (responded)
    and I agreed ; now you take the second bite.

    It's your candy store and you have made it very apparent that you're the Bawanna .......


    BTW, I think I'll forgo any future installers. At first, I thought it would be a nice gesture on my part to make one. With the constant updates, I don't want to keep playing jump rope
    updating the installers. If anyone else wants to do that, go for it. I can make my own personal copy when I want.
    Last edited by gray eagle; March 3rd, 2015 at 09:43.

Members who have read this thread: 11

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
  •