Pulling what hair I got left on starting the B-52 Driver

[papab]

I should of guessed...Capt Sim real life like aircraft and for the life of me I can not get it started....

Have read all three manuals with no luck.....
Would someone be so kind as to direct me on how to get this beast to light up?

I was able to figure out the Iris A-10 & Vulcan, but this is just frustrating..

Thanks for any input..

Happy Holidays
Rick B

[wilycoyote4]

The Captsim website has a thread for starting.

[Pepere]

I wish they would put a "real" "not so real" button in them. Seems like that's not asking to much and in return they may get more sales. I have their 767 but it's not installed because it's too real for me. Have not purchased their 707 or 727 or B52 or their upcoming 737 because their just to complicated.... four planes I would purchase if "not so real" was a option!

My .02$

David

[papab]

The Captsim website has a thread for starting.


Thank you!

Rick

[wilycoyote4]

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1292118704 long thread

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1292173117 video might help

qoutes from CS---
Most likely all issues here have been caused by wrong throttle/cutoff positions.
This is a magic formula from Bill Gates:
Ctrl+Shift+F4 then F1 then Ctrl+E

You can start engines short way (using FSX hotkeys) of a long way (using cockpit controls), whatever it is but fuel cutoff must be OFF (Ctrl+Shift+F4) and trottle at IDLE (F1) BEFORE ignition.

Again, most likely all issues mentioned here have been caused by wrong throttle/fuel cutoff valve positions.
-------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkZppl-3KWo another user video
-----------------------------------------
posted by Markoz reply #1 ---

Try this:

On the Co-Pilots Side Panel.

B14. BATTERY SWITCH PANEL -
Turn on the Battery Switch (Shift+M) - Pressing Shift+M also turns on the 4 Generator Switches listed in the next section.

B01. ELECTRICAL PANEL -
Turn ON the Main External Power Switch.
Turn ON the 4 Generator Switches.
Turn the Frequency And Voltmeter Selector Switch to CENTRAL TIP BUS

B07. ENG START CONTROL PANEL
Turn on the Starter Switches for the engine you want to start first, they are in pairs (1 & 2, 3 & 4, 5 & 6 and 7 & 8).

I'm working on something more substantial, but I can and did get them started that way. Also. I did pull all engines into reverse (F2), then I returned them to the stop position (F1). I do this when N2 reaches 20%.
-------------------------
CS has asked those who still have problems to contact by ticket or forum.

[spotlope]

I wish they would put a "real" "not so real" button in them. Seems like that's not asking to much and in return they may get more sales. I have their 767 but it's not installed because it's too real for me. Have not purchased their 707 or 727 or B52 or their upcoming 737 because their just to complicated.... four planes I would purchase if "not so real" was a option!

My .02$

David

David, I completely agree about overly complex planes that require an advanced degree to get going. Realism is great, but it'd be nice if there was a shortcut for those of us with limited time or patience.

I've got their 727 though, and you might want to give it another look. It's actually not that complex to operate. That's probably true of the 707, too... if you set it up with the engines running as your startup flight, you can get it airborne with a minimum of fuss. And man, does it ever look good!

[Pepere]

I've got their 727 though, and you might want to give it another look. It's actually not that complex to operate. That's probably true of the 707, too... if you set it up with the engines running as your startup flight, you can get it airborne with a minimum of fuss. And man, does it ever look good!

Ya - I will probably will get the 737-100 because it's not modeled anywhere else. As for the 707 and 727 I managed to get CS707 and 727 FS9 running in FSX with smoke and mirrors.

David

[warchild]

welllllllll, i dont own the b-52 ( but may just so i can paint a pan am livery on it ), but it is a boeing, and should have some things in comon with the other boeings. For other boeings (and hopefully this will help ), start with the top of the overhead panel and working your way down, switch on the battery power and check that its providing power. If not select EPU/GPU. If the battery is supplying power, make sure your busses are turned on. if the busses are all turned on, select the APU and start it up. Once the APU is started, bring your throttle to idle and ensure that the fuel is turned on. select engine 1 and press the starter.. that SHOULD get you going, but not having the plane, i cant be certain.. my apologies..

If you need to start with ground power, simply select ground power and then select each engine to start them up. Dont forget to go back up to the overhead and turn on the generator switch as well once the engines are running..

Pam

PS:: Battery should be on the DC switch and generator should be on the AC switch.... sorry

[papab]

I thank you all for the help...
I am still not able to get them to light-tried all he suggestions in the forum, even uninstalled and reinstalled, nope not working...

I guess I will go back to the Buff for now....

Thanks again for the help!!!


Rick

[razor61]

I too cannot get off the ground in the B52.
I can start Engines and they all idle at 20% but fuel flow says 0 and i cannot throttle up.
Tried the video instructions to a tee and his fuel flow starts but mine doesn't.
All my fuel switches are in the same position as the video but nothing. The dials keep reading no fuel.

Have given up, i have tried for several hours using all the different methods.

[expat]

I wish they would put a "real" "not so real" button in them

I always prefer a manual start - immediate immersion and sense of anticipation - and have their CS C130 and 727. Sadly I don't fly them much because they are so finnicky to start. I HAVE gotten both to start, less than half the time, in which case the more fully modelled systems and steps are that much more satisfying. What ruins it is that the next time doing the same thing it's a no go. I have searched and found all the step by step instructions on their forums but still have inconsistent results.

Sometimes re-loading the entire a/c works, sometimes not. Even if it works that kind of kills the mood though. Sometimes banging on the fuel open/shut keys, i.e. Ctrl+Shift+F4 works, sometimes not. I think in FSX this often stymmies portovers from starting manually but also suspect it can open as well as shut the valve and you can't often tell which way it's switched.

What I can't afford - I don't have much time for flying - is going through all the steps and then the engines don't light. Time to select another aircraft. Otherwise, CS stuff is high quality.

[PRB]

Why is it referred to here as a B-52 "Driver"? What's a "B-52 Driver", if not the pilot?

[IanP]

Well their B707. 727, etc. packages are referred to as "Captain". Presumably they decided to use "Driver" as the military don't tend to use "Captain" as the person in charge of the aircraft? They'd normally use "Aircraft Commander", but that's not particularly catchy, I suppose. I don't know - I'm only guessing.

One thing I can say though, which is wrong with all three "classic" CS aircraft I have tried to start (C130X, B707X and B727X), is that in order to get the engines to light, I have to introduce fuel before activating the start switch. This is very wrong - if you did that on a real aircraft, you'd have a fire on your hands (a damaging hot start at least) - but it's the only way I can get any of them to start. Therefore, try pushing fuel levers forward and possibly pressing shift-ctrl-f4, before you start turning the engines. If I do this, wincing every time I do it, I can get the engines to light and run every time.

I'd be interested to know if this works on the B52 as well.

Cheers,

Ian P.

[Warrant]

Though the BUFF looks really great, it has not elevated to the status above "museum piece". I got power in the cockpit, got the windshield whipers working but that's about it! No engines running at all, not even a small puff!

Not happy with the bird so far. Hope CS will make a patch for quick start and make it a real "Fun Line Product"!

[warchild]

I'm curious..
Does this thing have fuel boost pumps on it that have to be turned on before you start?? And does it need the apu running even with ground power before it will run??

[bstolle]

It's not only the engine start, they screwed up the flight dynamics and the wing flex animation as well.
As is one of my favourite planes IRL it's really sad that this one is a no-go for me :(

[expat]

in order to get the engines to light, I have to introduce fuel before activating the start switch. This is very wrong - if you did that on a real aircraft, you'd have a fire on your hands

Precisely! Such a shame, as on e.g. the Herc, you have a great simulated electrical panel and APU start up and sound. Makes it seem all so real. You get ready to start the engines . . until you have to intentionally "hot start" it with the opposite of the correct procedure. Anyone familiar with the Aeorworx King Air will know how accurately that aspect of adding fuel to a turbine - and crucially, when - was modelled.

[Warrant]

Now i have the engines puffing and running (sort off). The moment i increase the throttles a little bit two, four or all engines quit. Also when starting the plane starts to drift either left or right (with parking brakes applied and throttles to idle!?!).

Nope, gonna delete this bird from FSX! No fun for me! :gameoff:

Will await patches and or updates before i install this bird again, otherwise it will be 25 Euro's down the drain!

Edit: I know CS has realism as a high priority (and i can appreciate that with the C-130 for example, which is still one of my favorite planes). But the BUFF advertised as a "fun line" (not a pro or experience-line) aircraft i do expect eyecandy with at least the option of a stable and fully functional quick start. Perhaps a misjudgement from my side :-(

[IanP]

Anyone familiar with the Aeorworx King Air will know how accurately that aspect of adding fuel to a turbine - and crucially, when - was modelled.

Or the DodoSim B206, which will quite happily blow a raspberry and a lot of flame at you just for having the wind blowing in the wrong end of the engine and slowing down the airflow through it.

Call me a systems freak, but I love evil aircraft that bite back if you mishandle them - I really miss the Aeroworx King Air in FSX.

Ian P.

[Pepere]

The CS b52 sounds like a "failure simulation"

David

[JIMJAM]

Well if history tells us anything, their B-52 will probably be updated and most issues fixed in,uuumm,I dunno. Maybe by 2015?

[IanHenry]

Criky, I was just about to buy this! I think I will save my money. Personally I hate sims where you have to go through an entire start up routine, that’s ok when you have the time & willingness to do it, but most times I like to “get in and go”.
One really frustrating example of this is the DCS A10C Warthog, a wonderful simulator, but so many of the missions require you to go through a lengthy start up (try watching the start up training video and remember all the buttons that need clicking, and in what order). Maybe it’s my poor memory (never been a problem before), but I have got to the stage where I have virtually given up with it.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>
Regards,
Ian.

[Quixoticish]

Has this been updated recently or something? CTRL+E works fine for me, or at least it did on the day that it was released.

[StormILM]

Reading about these issues is interesting. I haven't had a single issue with what has been described here. Engine startup hasn't been an issue not once. I wonder if this has anything to do with the default flight (FSX startup) aircraft selected? I made some changes to my startup aircraft/flight and it wreaked havoc on some other aircraft models causing odd engine startup issues and the fuel tank burn was noticeably out of sequence. When I resent to the default Cessna and restarted the sim, the issues mentioned were no longer a problem. It's worth a try to see if it might clear up the issue some here are having.

As to the systems, this week I have been flying the model on a global circumnavigation flight with no issues at all. Normally I climb burning the tip tanks and outboard wing tanks with a reduced load(50% or less fuel). Once at cruise alt, I switch to the fuselage tanks and burn them down in sequence of fore/aft, wing, center and then the left and right main wing & aux tanks. I normally perform the takeoff, climb to cruise alt and once setting the autopilot in nav and alt hold, I move over to the right seat to manage the fuel burn/transfers.

I found it best to fly the climb out and descents by hand rather than climb or descend on speed using the autopilot.
Setting up for ILS and hand flying the needles is easy. The beast handles like a truck though which is normal.

The flight dynamics aren't botched. In FSX this is pretty close. I've known enough Buff drivers over the years who have described in deep detail how "heavy" the plane feels in the yoke. The attempted "translation" to a PC stick controller isn't what I would call the most optimum means of recreating something even close to the feel of a heavy's yoke". I know my X52 doesn't feeling like any of the real planes I have flown!

One thing I can say is that I adjusted the elevator to be a bit more effective but not too much more. I made very minor adjustments to the drag factors. The model may seem overpowered but truth is the TF-33 engines gave the H model a huge boost in power and speed over the J-57 variants. Aerodynamically the Buff is very clean(when in clean config) and doesn't decelerate all that fast when power off. The drag factors for gear and flaps are fairly consistent for each setting.

As far as the wing flex animation, it is right. The G & H model 52's had wet wing tanks which greatly reduced flex/arc from the earlier models which had 18 feet of wing flex(vertical tip movement) under high loading of fuel and payloads. The consequence of the wet wing tanks on the G & H was that it added a 60% increase in overall stresses to them which had to be dealt with in later Tech Order Inspections/ MSIP Structural Updates.

Overall, I am very happy with this model. Wish it had even more systems programming for the cockpit!

BTW, here's a good video of a 52H making a low fast pass. He doesn't even have the throttles maybe a 3rd open judging from the sound passing by and he's still hauling A!. When he passes and starts his climbing turn, you hear 2 distinctly separate throttle increases.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt4xxVyZvwM






<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[Roger]

I think Storm must have it. My default flight used a default aircraft engine running. I have never had any problems with systems. I choose the aircraft, location and weather and there I am engines running and ready to roll.

[b52bob]

I also have had no problems with it and I'm loving it. Best exterior I've seen and the pit is also well done. I love it, especially for the price.

I guess everyone's setup is different. Right now, I can't use UTX or ORBX as my terrian turns to pea soup after about 5 mins. Can't figure that one out!

Bob

[Akatsuki]

I think Storm must have it. My default flight used a default aircraft engine running. I have never had any problems with systems. I choose the aircraft, location and weather and there I am engines running and ready to roll.

Same here, no problem at all.

[JIMJAM]

I have mellowed with age with my expectations not as demanding as they were. With CS the bar is very low which is another story. They have gotten alot better btw which is why I even dared this purchase.
I neither really have the time or desire to cold and dark especially a complex multi engine behemoth like this. I also agree with the above poster that I use to love the insane complexity and attention to detail of the Blackshark and A10 but no longer. I simply cannot sit down and fight both the sim, the computer and hotas configs just to get blown out of the sky.
But back ot.
My biggest gripe with the Buff is that I can take off and be at my cruise alt of 30 thousand look back and still see the airport I took off from. I can pull the power back and over take F-16s! All which hopefully are being solved with simple edits. Btw if you have a few power edits to slow this speed demon down post them. Other than that and in my case a very wonky autopilot I have enjoyed the B-52. Best B-52 for FSX there is....... And probably ever will be.

[bstolle]

>1. The flight dynamics aren't botched.
>2. One thing I can say is that I adjusted the elevator to be a bit more effective but not too much more.
>3. As far as the wing flex animation, it is right.

1. That's strange as even CS themselve write in their forum that they weren't able to reproduce the correct performance with the B-52...the old problem..either too fast down low and correct at high altitude or vice versa.
I noticed a lot of complaints that the CS B-52 has to be rotated like a normal plane and the few videos from the CS B-52 I've seen seem to confirm that.

2. You sure? The elevator has only 10% chord and isn't even capable to counteract a full speedbrake extension because it's so tiny.

3. I'm again referring to the CS videos where the tip gear stays on the ground until lift off which is totally wrong as the wings start flying a lot earlier.

[StormILM]

1. That's strange as even CS themselve write in their forum that they weren't able to reproduce the correct performance with the B-52...the old problem..either too fast down low and correct at high altitude or vice versa.
I noticed a lot of complaints that the CS B-52 has to be rotated like a normal plane and the few videos from the CS B-52 I've seen seem to confirm that.

2. You sure? The elevator has only 10% chord and isn't even capable to counteract a full speedbrake extension because it's so tiny.

3. I'm again referring to the CS videos where the tip gear stays on the ground until lift off which is totally wrong as the wings start flying a lot earlier.

I am sure there are a lot of complaints regarding the model. Sure it isn't perfect but what FS model and FDE are? Having been in beta testing on a number of FS models, I have discovered it is virtually impossible to recreate the flight model verbatim as it is in the real plane. The work that goes into an FDE is incredible. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the very difficult work that goes into them but in reality, they are a limited facsimile of the real flight dynamics. I'm no stranger to real flight dynamics having flown real planes for 20+ years now but I have a reasonable expectation of what I will experience in an FS flight model and systems.

Today, I did consult a local former B-52G Command Pilot who has a lot of hours on the type. The dynamics as they are on this model are in the ball park albeit not perfect. Regarding the small elevator chord, it has considerably more authority than many might think and heavy +/- pitch inputs in the medium to high speed envelope can easily overstress the plane . The elevator effectiveness adjustments I made were very minor and one would notice the effect mainly at lower speeds.

Regarding the rotation attitude, at EWO fuel weights you will have to rotate conventionally to get the plane off the ground. At lower weights and full flaps, it will fly-off almost unassisted rotation. Here is a 15 plane MITO depature from Minot AFB and you can clearly see the conventional rotation take place of an EWO weighted B-52H

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ7niLYSVFo

As far as the wing flex, the upward flex is fairly correct and the at rest wing sag is as well. I do see that the outrigger wheels are in scale about 6 inches off the ground which wouldn't be the case unless the tip tanks were low or empty. A full tip tank will have those outer strut wheels on the ground. This appears to be a contact point issue or animation issue. I wonder if the outer contact points can be adjusted to fix this. I will give it a try and post the results here.



Here is a quick adjust to the flight tuning section to help with the elevator effectiveness and drag factors a little.



[flight_tuning]
cruise_lift_scalar = 1.0
parasite_drag_scalar = 1.2//or 1.5
induced_drag_scalar = 1.5
elevator_effectiveness = 1.5
aileron_effectiveness = 0.3
rudder_effectiveness = 2.0
pitch_stability = 1.0
roll_stability = 1.0
yaw_stability = 1.0
elevator_trim_effectiveness = 1.0
aileron_trim_effectiveness = 1.0
rudder_trim_effectiveness = 1.0

Update- I have gone over the contact points and the outrigger gear can be leveled on the ground easily. What I am not sure about is if the wing flex animation is dynamic for simulated lift only or both lift and weight changes. Somehow I suspect the dynamics have a parameter limitation due to FSX constraints but that is only my guess at this point. I will continue to test and investigate all of it soon when time permits.




<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[wilycoyote4]

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1292338611 thread for the flight model started by CS

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1292118704 thread on starting engines----
CS made a post---
Re: Starting Engines on B-52 Driver
Reply #19 - 17.12.2010 at 22:28:50
-
To sumup: a few people have issues with engines, while most people don't. To consider this issue we need detailed tickets from these who have the issues. Thanks.
---------------------------------------
My 2 pence---watch out for saved flights, Just a guess, the BUFF as exterior is one release and perhaps using the new release causes a conflict ??? Deleting an old flight may help ?

Anyway, something similar happened to me in the past twice.

[wilycoyote4]

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1292118704/30#30

Re: Starting Engines on B-52 Driver
Reply #30 - Yesterday at 09:16:51 I was also unable to start and keep engines running and my control colum was locked. Also, the side windows wouldn't close.
I did a complete uninstall (including the registry), then downloaded the exterior, then downloaded the B52 Driver update, installed both, now all is fine. Looks like there was originally a problem with my online verification which as a security feature, kept everything locked.
Hope this helps
----------------------
found this post this morning, perhaps it is a help