A Lockheed "Rounder"

[menef]

Thank you Milton for both Harpoon and Lodestar! Elegant, big and beautiful old twin-engine birds. I like them!
Only the Lodestar has the radio ( Nav/ADF ) issue. I've added stock C172 radio stack to put frequencies. ( I don't know if there's
a fix for this bug. I haven't lot of time to read all in the forum). Thank you for these gifts!!!

[Milton Shupe]

To all who had a hand in this project: THANK YOU! It turned out great. Milton, thank you for the radio fix. I was kind of wondering what was wrong. I have worked up some FSX Views for the Lodestar and will post them below. Just copy and paste into your Aircraft.cfg below the General section.

Thank you Sir; I'll add that to my FSX cfg.

[Milton Shupe]

Thank you Milton for both Harpoon and Lodestar! Elegant, big and beautiful old twin-engine birds. I like them!
Only the Lodestar has the radio ( Nav/ADF ) issue. I've added stock C172 radio stack to put frequencies. ( I don't know if there's
a fix for this bug. I haven't lot of time to read all in the forum). Thank you for these gifts!!!

Thank you Sir.

Yes, the fix was posted earlier in post#2215 (and the download zip was updated in the library). You may also have to change the Electrical section Avionics bus entry as follows:

From:
avionics_bus = 1, 10, 17
To:
avionics_bus = 0, 10, 17

and change the Radio section per the link.

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...l=1#post978359

[menef]

Thank you Sir.

Yes, the fix was posted earlier in post#2215 (and the download zip was updated in the library). You may also have to change the Electrical section Avionics bus entry as follows:

From:
avionics_bus = 1, 10, 17
To:
avionics_bus = 0, 10, 17

and change the Radio section per the link.

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...l=1#post978359

Thank you for the support!!! I'll fix all ASAP.

[Maty12]

Yes Milton,

Will probably still revert to the 'Beta' Lodestar air file as it still (to me and my set up) has a nicer feel.

Mal

I agree with that. With the beta, I found the plane only nosed up drastically on the first flight, but with the new one it seems to always do that. There's also a slight problem with manual starting: Engine No 2 will not, no matter the mixture, throttle or other settings, start. No. 1 seems to start very easily.

[Milton Shupe]

I agree with that. With the beta, I found the plane only nosed up drastically on the first flight, but with the new one it seems to always do that. There's also a slight problem with manual starting: Engine No 2 will not, no matter the mixture, throttle or other settings, start. No. 1 seems to start very easily.

For engine starting, adjust the starter torque value in the Piston Engine section to your liking:

Here is an example of an increase:

normalized_starter_torque = 0.2

Take it higher or lower depending on your preference.

In FS9, manually starting requires you continually click the starter switch.

In FSX, that is very hard to do; you might wish to crank up the starter torque to .5 or .6

Sorry I do not have a gauge programmer to help out here. I do know with a 2D gauge, starting is no issue. The xml 3D switch that everyone prefers these days, well, this is what we get. :-)

As for the nose up issue, drop the gear and flaps as soon as possible and it should not be an issue.

Nose up after take off is normal if you use flaps (you shouldn't unless absolutely necessary-read the docs) but once you retract flaps and gear, she settles in as it should. This is normal behavior for this aircraft per the docs.

I may look at this further after vacation.

[Blackbird686]

Enjoy your time off, Chief... you deserve it.

BB686

[Milton Shupe]

For those who do not read all the thread details, I wanted to ensure that you got this scrape point change.
The issue this morning was regarding scrape points around the tail wheel causing sparks when landing.

In the aircraft.cfg Contact point section, please replace point 7 with this line:

point.7 = 2, -33.5, 0, -0.0, 800, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9

The issue was that the point was too low. This should work for you and still allow belly landings.

My apologies for the inconvenience.

[Moses03]

Just wonderful. Thanks to all

[Maty12]

Milton, the nosing up issue isn't a simple "the aircraft is nosing up" issue. Instead, the gauges seem unaware of the plane's angle of attack, showing 0 climb with a nose up attitude. To better explain, these two were taken at the same time, with the game paused:

[Maarten -]

Milton, the nosing up issue isn't a simple "the aircraft is nosing up" issue. Instead, the gauges seem unaware of the plane's angle of attack, showing 0 climb with a nose up attitude. To better explain, these two were taken at the same time, with the game paused:

Hi Maty,

Looking at the speed you're flying (103 mph = 89.6 kts), while no flaps used and undercarriage retracted, I think it is not surprising that the Lodestar flies in a strong "nose up" attitude with the altimeter showing 0 climb. The speed is way too low, all lift has gone and the Lodestar is just about to stall.
It seems to me that this is not related to the model/FDE, but to the way the plane is being flown and of course the weight of payload and fuel.
During the entire test period I haven't experienced this kind of flight behaviour, nor with the Lodestar as released (v1.1).
Just my two cents, of course.

Cheers,
Maarten

[Andre19]

Thanks, it was great being part of the team. As Maarten said, if you keep your speed up it doesn't have much of a "nose up" issue.

Apologies for the scrape point problem, that was my fault. Thanks to Milton for correcting it.

I have finished all the other registrations for my paints and uploaded them to my website.

http://www.arpaints.causewaysystems.co.za/Lodestar.html

[Maty12]

Hi Maty,

Looking at the speed you're flying (103 mph = 89.6 kts), while no flaps used and undercarriage retracted, I think it is not surprising that the Lodestar flies in a strong "nose up" attitude with the altimeter showing 0 climb. The speed is way too low, all lift has gone and the Lodestar is just about to stall.
It seems to me that this is not related to the model/FDE, but to the way the plane is being flown and of course the weight of payload and fuel.
During the entire test period I haven't experienced this kind of flight behavior, nor with the Lodestar as released (v1.1).
Just my two cents, of course.

Cheers,
Maarten

The plane maintained that altitude for over 30 minutes after the picture. Also, Milton, I believe the trouble with engine start is related to the boost bumps. I momentarily replaced the aircraft.cfg file for that of the beta and had no trouble starting.

[Firekitten]

I've got around 20 odd hours flying that plane and have never had that nose up attitude, are you leaning the mixture enough to have the engine power at cruise? I don't get any nose high attitude at all... in any stage of flight.

[expat]

Prop RPM's set right? I find this one a joy to fly + like most of Milton's you can trim her out and let go of the controller and just watch her fly straight and level. Great short field performer as well!

[manfredc3]

I have finished all the other registrations for my paints and uploaded them to my website.

http://www.arpaints.causewaysystems.co.za/Lodestar.html

Andre,

Nothing happens when I click on either one of the download links on the box website. I attempted to download different paints, all with the same result. in IE as well as Chrome.

Am I missing something?

[Maty12]

Plane seems to be behaving a bit less wild now, not sure why. Anyway, Milton, I tried adjusting the normalized_starter_torque, but all that changed was that now the left engine starts faster, while the right one still refuses to start.

[mrogers]

Maty, in your screenie of the cockpit, the prop rpm gauge reads 1950 rpms with the mp gauge at 26" mp so it seems you had it at cruise settings, and was it with a full load of pax and fuel? You would need to use higher mp settings ( i.e. more throttle plus some more prop pitch) than that for a fully loaded aircraft.

[Andre19]

Andre,

Nothing happens when I click on either one of the download links on the box website. I attempted to download different paints, all with the same result. in IE as well as Chrome.

Am I missing something?

Hi Manfred

Please check the downloads again. I've just downloaded on another PC and it looks ok.

[Maarten -]

Thanks a lot, Andre! Great paints. (as usual)

Cheers,
Maarten

[Maarten -]

Hi Maty,

I did two check flights this morning trying to stay as close to the situation (manifold pressure 26" and - inadvertedly - 1,850 rpm instead of 1,950 rpm, so even a bit less power) with the FS2004 Lodestar v1.1. (as released at SOH). The flightsim settings: realistic (= hard).
I took off at a payload (incl. full tanks) of 18,771 lbs (= 271 lbs gross overweight).


With both engines 26" MAP at 1,850 rpm auto-lean, at 2,420 ft altitude, 0 ft climb and at 160mph (= 139.2 kts) the (slight) nose up pitch was only 3 degrees. A normal attitude for a taildragger (real world DC-3/C-47 shows the same attitude at cruise speed). The Lodestar felt in that situation absolutely stable.

Have you considered a re-install of the Lodestar?

Cheers,
Maarten

[Maty12]

Hi Maty,
Have you considered a re-install of the Lodestar?

Cheers,
Maarten

Just reinstalled, seems to be working fine now. Engines are also starting normally, but that might be 'cause I changed the location. Will do more tests.

[manfredc3]

Andre,

The downloads are working now.

Not sure what is different now from yesterday, but I am glad I can now add your great paints to the Lodestar.

[Firekitten]

I think Andre's schemes are already in the release pack

[Maarten -]

Hi Rachael,

There are many variations of Andre's release-pack paints (different registrations etc.) which he has available on his own site only. Must be over fifty paints. They represent the entire fleets of South African Airways, Comair, East African Airways and DETA in different liveries.

Cheers,
Maarten