Has anyone does tweaks for the following Ito aircraft?

[mikezola]

I've just uploaded them to the 'Other' category of FS2004 add-ons... Come and get it!
-Mike Z.

[AndyG43]

.....although Andy had a hard time making it stall, otherwise he says it flies pretty much like the A2A version..

And, believe me, I tried. Gear down, full flaps, engines off and she stayed controllable all the way down from about 10000 feet; the A2A version, in the same configuration, lost it at just under 100 KIAS.

Andy- how do the MOI values compare between what I have vs. the A2A Uhu? There was a substantial difference between what I got with Tom Clayton's MOI Calculator, and the values in the original CFS3 files...

-Mike Z.

I'll check later Mike, and let you know.

BTW folks, don't forget to check out Lawdog's DB603 soundset in the archive. The panel is on my to do list, but the C-27J has priority (real world has distracted me) and the Greif is after that.

[AndyG43]

OK, here's a good one for you. I find myself with a little time on my hands (mainly because I have just been made redundant) so I'm picking up on a few projects, mainly Ito-related. So I should finally get the C-27J panel done, among other things.

One aircraft I would like to look at is the SR.A1, but all my attempts to date have been fruitless, because the balance is totally out. So I guess the datum points need adjusting, but I have absolutely no idea where to start. Any suggestions gratefully accepted.

[napamule]

Andy,
I just downloaded Ito's SARO and will work on cnt pts (and anything else you like) tonight. It won't be ready until 11 pm (2300 PST/0500 GMT) or so. Will zip up cfg (and air if necessary) and post it here LATE tonight (Thur). Might even be as late as 1 am. I don't have anything pending (yeah, right!) except the rest of Ito's models on Obio's list-ha. I'll BE BAAAACK.
Chuck B
Napamule

[mikezola]

Figuring out how to make the datum adjustment work was the biggest key for me to making other FDE file sets work for Ito-San's aircraft. Here's the thing:
Most developers create their models so that the co-ordinate origin (0,0,0) is approximately at 75% MAC with respect to the length of the a/c, centerline of the fuselage for side-to-side, and somewhere between what's been called the 'waterline' and the thrust centerline for the vertical axis. What Ito seems to do is set his zero point for the lengthwise axis to the midpoint of his fuselage. What I do is add a line to the 'lights' section of the a/c.cfg file and set its co-ordinates to 0,-3,0 to show me where his c/l is located. I can then figure out how far I've got to offset the reference datum. Once I enter the difference into the 'reference datum position' line, that usually puts the rest of my points pretty close, assuming that I am using a cfg file from the same plane by some other author.
In the case of his A5M4 Claude, for example, adapting the air and cfg files from the CFS2 1% version of the plane was pretty painless. Both planes used c/l of the fuselage for the side-to-side axis, and both used the thrust c/l for their respective zero points. Only the lengthwise axis origin was different. I moved it by entering a value of '6.5,0,0' to my 'reference_datum_position'. Then, because I pasted in the 'lights' section from Ito's cfg file, I simply had to shift the position of the lights back to compensate for the 6.5 feet I moved the datum. That was really about all I needed to do for this plane. The next step, if need be for the particular aircraft, would be to nudge some of the contact points and light points around to adjust for small differences in the models' dimensions. This was the case when I adapted Piglet's air and cfg files for the MS 760 to Ito's model.
The biggest trouble I had adapting files this way was doing the He 219. There was an entry in the air file the over-rode the datum shift- number #1547 (I think), which defined a center of lift. The point did not move with the datum shift, which made the center of lift too far back on the fuselage for her to fly. I deleted the entry from the air file and the problem was gone.
-Mike Z.

[napamule]

Andy,
(And, anyone else that's interested). I came up with a nice set of FDE's. It makes it a more powerful, but easy to handle, jet. Took me longer than I thought. Had to fly it. Couldn't quit. I changed a lot of things, so just plug the cfg and air file and go see. You must use together. Otherwise all bets are off. (It still amazes me how you guys fly with half of the cfg all messed up (especially in CFS)). No bueno.

There is a short readme in the zip for reference. You can edit the cfg and/or air file as you wish. You need to add you paints? Just make a copy first, just in case. Also, any feedback is welcome. Oh, I forgot to reset the lights (after the ref datum change) but it's too late already. Tomorrow I will fix them (sorry). Will talk later.

These FDEs are no for upload to any site that charges to download (or to look at) files. Neither should these files be included in any payware (all media). They are freeware, and they must remain freeware. Respect my rights. Thank You.
Chuck B
Napamule

[Rich]

Actually did my own when it was released originally so will stick with that but will check yours too

Out of interest where do you get this (especially in CFS) Ito banned his work in CFS and I do'nt remember a CFS release

[OBIO]

napamule

There are huge differences between the way FS9 and CFS2 (the only combat flight sim that I have any degree of experience with) uses config and air files. FS9 relies primarily on info in the config file for the flight dynamics. CFS2, on the other hand, relies primarily on the air file for flight dynamics. Much of the info contained in an FS9 config file is unused in a CFS2 config file, and in most cases that info is not even a part of a native CFS2 config file. This is the reason that a CFS2 config file seems to be missing half the bits and pieces.

Rich,

There is no CFS2 versions of Ito's planes.....you are correct in that he never released any of his aircraft for CFS2 and in that he prohibits the conversion of his aircraft for use in any combat sim. I think that napamule was simply making a comment about the config files in CFS, not about Ito's planes in CFS particularly.

OBIO

[napamule]

I actually did the cnt pts (and whatever else I saw needed change) for Andy. But since I figure the original files were 'ok' to fly, I 'customized' it. You can always go back to your original cfg & air file. Right? Right.

I am well aware of Ito's wish that his models not be used in CFS as he don't like the thought of people 'killing' each other, as is in a war, even if it's pretend. I don't 'do' CFS and was under impression that this was the FS2004 tweak forum thread (hehe). I never said my FDEs are suitable for CFS use, either. My comment about flying with half the cfg missing 'parts' applies to FS9 too. Like older (2004-2007) files. A purist would not want to even hear that his warbird has an autopilot. But, I pretend that these 'warbirds' are of the restored (ie: civilian) 'type', and not killing machines. And, I don't do shoot-em-ups (ie: video games). I am just a mechanic. And test pilot. And chief bottle washer. I just have a ball doing dynamics edits. 1st thing I do is check out the cnt pts. Then I get 'sucked in' and wind up doing the whole thing. Last night I got the Nardi Riviera, by Mario Noriega, in FSX, and got it 'squared away'. Took all night but I was cooking, so time just flew by like nothing. So I hope someone does enjoy the FDEs and that they don't cause any problems with relations. I am GOOD at dynamics. But that, and $4.50, will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Ha. It's just a hobby I enjoy. I don't mind sharing. But I don't offer 'support', or care to argue about the changes I make, and/or 'why'. Take them or leave them. It's copesetic.
Chuck B
Napamule

[AndyG43]

Andy,
(And, anyone else that's interested). I came up with a nice set of FDE's. It makes it a more powerful, but easy to handle, jet. Took me longer than I thought. Had to fly it. Couldn't quit. I changed a lot of things, so just plug the cfg and air file and go see. You must use together. Otherwise all bets are off. (It still amazes me how you guys fly with half of the cfg all messed up (especially in CFS)). No bueno.

There is a short readme in the zip for reference. You can edit the cfg and/or air file as you wish. You need to add you paints? Just make a copy first, just in case. Also, any feedback is welcome. Oh, I forgot to reset the lights (after the ref datum change) but it's too late already. Tomorrow I will fix them (sorry). Will talk later.

These FDEs are no for upload to any site that charges to download (or to look at) files. Neither should these files be included in any payware (all media). They are freeware, and they must remain freeware. Respect my rights. Thank You.
Chuck B
Napamule

You're not joking about it being more powerful - wow!!! Like you said, keeping the power at about 60% makes it more controllable & nearer to spec. I did make an attempt to 'dial in' some numbers with AirWrench, which brought the performance close to spec, but I then ended up with the same porpoising issues I had before, so I guess a lot more attention would be needed to other areas of the dynamics. Still got me stumped, which is irritating.

[Rich]

Slight overspeed me thinks and where did the wheels come from it was a flying boat not a amphib, pure what if and will stick with my own FDE, deleted after a 2 minute test flight

http://hud607.fire.prohosting.com/un...ra1/index.html

[AndyG43]

Would you be prepared to share yours Rich?

[napamule]

Andy,
Whoa nelly. It sure is TOO fast. What happened is that I did not comment out one of the engine sections, so essentially you had 'mucho power'. Too much. I flew it just right now and went and looked at cfg. So I made changes/corrections. My apologies. Mistake-mo (Senior Moment). So copy/paste the info below. Be sure to comment my engine section(s) and keep for the 'Air Show' performance only (ha). I put back the correct fuel load, too.

//UPDATE: Had bad sections (duplicate engines), and wrong
//fuel load. Still slightly fast (380 kts -vs- 342 kts, 60% pwr, for cruise)
//The range ('endurance') is correct (my main aim) at 2.2 hrs.
//FOR:
//title=Saunders-Roe Petrel FR.1 RAE
//sim=SRA1cb
//Useful Load=17000 Lbs(Fuel=2428 Gal/16028 Lbs)(Bal= 972 Lbs)

[fuel]
//Center1= 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 600.000, 0.000
LeftMain= 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 914.000, 0.000
RightMain=0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 914.000, 0.000
LeftAux= 0.000, -5.333, 0.000, 300.000, 0.000
RightAux= 0.000, 5.333, 0.000, 300.000, 0.000
//Fuel Total= 2428 Gal/16028 Lbs
fuel_type=2
number_of_tank_selectors=1
electric_pump=0
//
////--- Below is the 'Updated' engine section(s): ------------
[GeneralEngineData]
engine_type=1
Engine.0=-2.500, 1.800, -1.500
Engine.1=-2.500, -1.800, -1.500
//Engine.0=-6.000000,1.000000,1.083333
//Engine.1=-6.000000,-1.000000,1.083333
fuel_flow_scalar= 0.600 //1.0
min_throttle_limit= -0.35 //0.0
//
[TurbineEngineData]
fuel_flow_gain= 0.010 //0.002
inlet_area= 20.860 //o=30.068760
rated_N2_rpm=29920.000
static_thrust= 22592.000 //15599.000
afterburner_available=0
/reverser_available= 1 //0
//
[jet_engine]
thrust_scalar =1.0
//---------------------------------------------------------------
//Note: Press 'I' (smoke) key for rockets (from '3/7 Charlie' repaint). effect name is: 'fx_rocketp'.OPTIONAL. Just for fun-too cool-so I couldn't resist. Cheers.
Chuck B
Napamule

[AndyG43]

Scenery gurus, can I ask for some pointers please?

Having just been made redundant, I have a chunk of free time on my hands (in between the search for a new job) so I've been playing with ACM and Air Wrench. I thought I'd look at Itosan's Wyvern for a number of reasons:

1) I've always found it a fascinating aircraft
2) It will fit neatly with another project I'm working on
3) There is an obvious 'donor' in the form of the Flying Stations Wyvern

So, I've plugged in the FDE's; unmodded they caused porpoising all over the place; so I've tried my best to amend them to better fit the Ito model, correcting the contact points, flying surface locations, fuel tank locations etc. And now she remains resolutely earth bound!!!!

I guess it all hinges on the datum point/CoG issues, can somebody please give me an idiots guide to where that should be, so I can try to get this one sorted? Obviously if I can lick this one, then I will be able to aplly the lessons learnt to some of the others.

Thanks in advance.

[mikezola]

Andy-
OK, so you have the Flying Stations Wyvern... it flies to your satisfaction, right? If so, then open its aircraft.cfg and add a line to the 'lights' section:
light.'x'= 3, 0, -3.0, 0, fx_navwhi,
Now fire up the sim, select the Wyvern, and turn on its lights- look for the extra light somewhere along the port side of the fuselage. That is showing you where the reference datum is with respect to length and height (if you made the light co-ords 0,0,0 you wouldn't see the light inside the fuselage). Make a mental note of where that light is along the model.
Now- repeat all of the above for Ito's Wyvern using his original aircraft.cfg and air files. You will most likely see a considerable difference in the position of that light. This difference(usually length and height, not centerline) is the amount you need to change the entry called 'reference_datum_position' in the weights and balances section of aircraft.cfg when you replace Ito's FDE files with the Flying Stations FDE files. Make a folder in Ito's folder called 'Orig FDE' or whatever you like and move the cfg and air files there. Then copy the FS Wyvern air and cfg files into the folder for Ito's, rename the air file appropriately, and over-write the title sections of the new aircraft.cfg with those of the original. Now change the values in 'reference_datum_position' to shift the location of that light to make it appear in the same place along Ito's model that it appeared along the Flying Stations model(this will probably take a few tries).
Following these steps should get you close, unless there's an entry in the FS Wyvern's air file that over-rides the entries in the aircraft.cfg (I ran into that with the He 219). The air file entry in particular is called 'center of lift offset' or something like that- if need be I'll find the number for you. Otherwise, if all goes well, you should only need to move the contact points a little and move your lights as needed.

This method has worked for me on a number of his aircraft- give it a try!
-Mike