Martin P4M-1Q Mercator

[harrybasset]

Has this ever been made for FS9 or is one being worked on?

[Tako_Kichi]

I doubt one has been made as Flight Sim does not support mixed power-plants of any type therefore any FDE would have to be totally imaginary.

[Wing_Z]

Vladimir A. Zhyhulskiy would beg to differ...

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/SOH/C123.jpg

[Sunny9850]

I have not had a chance to try out the V3 of the C123 by Mr.Vladimir A. Zhyhulskiy. Did he manage to make the jets fully functional with their own thrust adjustment proportional to the real engine or are they just simulated prop engines somehow within the confines of FS ???
When playing around with the C-119 I had experimented with different ways to combine the engine types but never really did get anywhere with it.

Cheers
Stefan

[SSI01]

I broached this topic some time ago re: the Mercator. It would be a unique addition to the FS9 lineup as it is indeed a mixed power-plant aircraft; Martin very skillfully blended the jet engines into the recip nacelles so it's difficult to see the jet's location. The aircraft uses the Davis airfoil also used on the B-24, but so efficiently two recip engines were sufficient to give the aircraft pretty fair performance - the jets were used for takeoff at high weights, and during emergency situations in flight (i.e., being chased by MiGs). Not many Mercators were built. An electronic reconnaissance PB4Y-2 Privateer was the first Navy aircraft lost to a Soviet shoot-down during a border flight in the Cold War; the second was a Mercator, lost I believe in 1948 or 1949 over the Western Pacific near Vladivostok, scene of several shoot-downs by the Soviets during the Cold War. The aircraft was well-suited to ELINT/SIGINT duty due to its speed and load-carrying ability, I have been told. Although my sympathies and enthusiasms lie very much with the Air Force, I would like to see a Mercator for FS9 as well.

[SSI01]

I have not had a chance to try out the V3 of the C123 by Mr.Vladimir A. Zhyhulskiy. Did he manage to make the jets fully functional with their own thrust adjustment proportional to the real engine or are they just simulated prop engines somehow within the confines of FS ???
When playing around with the C-119 I had experimented with different ways to combine the engine types but never really did get anywhere with it.

Cheers
Stefan

One gets the impression reading other posts about this subject that the easiest way to accommodate a jet engine with recips would be to treat the jet as a third recip engine, as most of them used for "boost" purposes with round engines were pretty low-powered jet engines; maybe making the thrust adjustment similar to one of the recips being run at about 70% power could to the trick.

I downloaded this bird but haven't gotten around to installing and flight testing it. Looks like that's the next task to hand.

[Wing_Z]

Engines are Type 0 as far as I can make out, but there are jet sounds assigned to #1 and #4.
I see jet effects are in the [lights] section.

Good enough for me...

[srgalahad]

Harry, some of us do like the odd, maligned, quirky or those of less-than sparkling history and glamour. Alas, but they are likely low on most builders "gotta do" list. With an unsupported power setup like the Mercator, even more will shy away from the expected snipes and criticisms.

Me, if the flight characteristics are legit. and the model basically sound, I'd be happy to have more of these - without counting too many rivets. Mind you, I'd rather have fewer GOOD flight models than a lot of odd-flying monsters that simply fill a list.

I have, but not yet installed the V3 C-123 so I can't comment on the model except to say it seems a bit remarkable. From the screenshot, it appears that the jets require no air, but do put out a nice flame (running rich will do that) -- note the intake doors on the jetpacks are closed yet there's 2 turnin' and two burnin' :icon_lol:. Now I'm really going tho have to install it to test it out!

[Mick]

Sad to say, the Mercator was very high on my list of planes for David and I to model when we both got burnt out and retired from FS development.

I believe the Mercator was the only plane ever procured (though not originally designed) specifically for the ferret mission.

[pfflyers]

I think the jet intakes are linked to the cowl flaps, they open and close together.

[Wing_Z]

...So the manual says, so far has defeated me!
No amount of Ctrl-Shft-C and -V will do anything.

[Milton Shupe]

Sad to say, the Mercator was very high on my list of planes for David and I to model when we both got burnt out and retired from FS development.

I believe the Mercator was the only plane ever procured (though not originally designed) specifically for the ferret mission.

That is unfortunate Mick. It would have been great to see that come to fruition.

[TARPSBird]

I'd love to see a Mercator in FS9 and/or FSX. Another of the planes on my love-to-see list is the F9F-8P photo Cougar with the big nose. When Ito-san released his F9F-8 I e-mailed him and asked if he'd be willing to do the photo version if I supplied him with the drawings, and he politely declined. That was right about the time his vision was getting worse. :frown:

[AndyG43]

When Ito-san released his F9F-8 I e-mailed him and asked if he'd be willing to do the photo version if I supplied him with the drawings, and he politely declined. That was right about the time his vision was getting worse. :frown:

He is much missed, a true gentleman; a couple of projects he did were from plans I sent him, always open to interesting suggestions. An Itosan Mercator could have been nice; mind you, it would still have flown like an acrobatic jet!!

[hawkeye52]

512375123851239

T'would be nice.......

- H52

[Mick]

... Another of the planes on my love-to-see list is the F9F-8P photo Cougar with the big nose... :frown:

You might yet see that one.

The last thing David and I were working on before we both realized we were too burned out to continue was a Cougar, and typical of our projects, it was going to include multiple visual models. We planned a -6 with the smooth nose, -8 with the bulge below the nose, -8P with the big photo nose, and -8T two-seater.

David had made a good start on the 3D models, though they still have a long way to go. He hadn't even begin to map textures or work on the flight model. I think he started the panel, or at least the instrument package.

This project may yet see the light of day, though it won't be any time soon. We have discussed the idea of finishing it, but neither of us has much inclination to actually sit down and do the work. David has fiddled with the 3D models on and off, but much more "off" than "on." I don't even have FS9 installed and set up on my new computer. I don't even know if the utilities I use for painting will run in Windows 7, and I can't muster up the motivation to check and find out.

We have toyed with the idea of finishing up the Cougars this winter, but as winter approaches I don't feel any increase in my motivation, and I don't know if David does either. I don't know what the chances are of working up that motivation, at least for myself, when I can't even summon up the interest to install and set up FS9. It's occurred to me that I might re-discover some interest in FS if I was to swear off working on planes and scenery, and instead just fly, get a look at some of the scenery I've installed and never checked out, fly some of the planes I downloaded and never flew, and finally fly some of the planes that David and I made that I never found time to fly. But it's hard to look forward to that when the Cougars are hanging over me...

When David first suggested finishing the Cougars I thought of seeking someone else to paint it. I thought I might ask Damian if he'd be interested, but sadly he's no longer with us. I don't know who else to ask. Maybe Markus???

We'll see how I feel over the winter - and David too. Just because he'd done a little fiddling doesn't mean he's got the motivation to dive back into a major project. If he does, either I will paint it or find someone else to do that. There might be just one basic, factory fresh paint for each version, and a paint kit for those who would like to add service markings. We'll see...

[harrybasset]

Sad to say, the Mercator was very high on my list of planes for David and I to model when we both got burnt out and retired from FS development.

I believe the Mercator was the only plane ever procured (though not originally designed) specifically for the ferret mission.


A timely reminder for us who say "Mr XXXXXXXXX could easily make aircraft YYYYYYYYY" It can mean a great deal of effort and hard work for those talented individuals and teams who strive to complete our wish lists. Thank you to all those who utilise their skills on our behalf, your work is really appreciated by the vast majority of flight simmers.

[SSI01]

Hear, Hear!! Concur wholeheartedly with your sentiments. I wish I had a fraction of the talent and, in particular, the patience to do what these folks do, and for free to boot. And all for the enjoyment of others. We are deeply appreciative of all your efforts.:salute:

[harrybasset]

I am still worrying at details of the Mercator having roughed out a panel and a sound package just to see what I can do. As a way round the mixed power problem, given that a sound set can produce piston and jet sounds together, would it work to boost the power of the piston engines. How much extra power would be needed to simulate the jet boost? Or will one of the flight sim maestros take pity on me and build a Mercator?

[SSI01]

Here's a quick explanation from "ehow." I give all the credit to them.


Divide the distance the object was moved in feet by the duration of the move in minutes to calculate the velocity. For example, if the object was moved 200 (http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/#) feet in 5 minutes, the velocity equals 200 divided by 5, which is 40. The velocity is 40 feet per minute.



2 Multiply the amount in horsepower (http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/#) by 33,000 to convert it to pounds per foot per minute, which is the amount of feet the given weight is moved in a single minute and is designated as lb.ft./ minute. For the example, if the horsepower is 10, multiplying 10 by 33,000 equals 330,000 lb.ft./minute.



3 Divide the converted horsepower by the velocity to calculate the thrust. For this example, 330,000 lb.ft/minute divided by 40 feet/minute equals 8,250 lbs. The thrust is 8,250 lbs




Site locator:
eHow.com (http://www.ehow.com/how_7649204_convert-horsepower-thrust.html#ixzz1dyJmmgpo) http://www.ehow.com/how_7649204_convert-horsepower-thrust.html#ixzz1dyJmmgpo


So if the Merc is doing 200mph on climb-out (for example), it's traveling at 1,056,000 ft/hr, or 17,600 ft/min.

If we can find the TO hp rating of the Merc's engines, you can plug that into the horsepower=lbs/ft/min part of the equation. Then do the math to get the thrust. I don't know where to go to get the horsepower ratings at different stages of flight for various engines but I'd bet someone here does. Doing this math for various stages of the flight (excluding landing - I doubt the jets were used for approach/landing but I may be, and probably am, wrong) will give you thrust settings for takeoff, climbout, and maybe emergency boost situations.

[harrybasset]

I am working at developing a panel for a Mercator and many freeware gauges are suitable. I have a copy of NAVAER 01-35EH-501 which shows a panel with a keyed list of instruments. According to this there are two Cylinder Head Temperature Indicators which is logical as the Mercator has two piston engines. However the illustration shows that each guage has two scales. For two engines I would have expected one gauge with a scale for each engine. All the Flight Sim CHT gauges I have found so far are either single scaled or twin scaled so for example a DC6 has two twin CHT gauges for four engines. Did each R-4360 need a twin gauge as cooling for the rear cylinders was dodgy? Also, while I get to grips with mastering gauge editing is there a way of removing the surrounding housing from gauges as the Mercator seems to have had a flat panel with round instruments fitted in recesses.

[SSI01]

One thought that comes to mind is to check the inst panels of any other aircraft that used -4360s. The B-36 comes to mind, and they were rather tightly cowled in that aircraft. If rear cylinder cooling was a worry in any aircraft, one would think it would be in a B-36. Time to check photos of B-36 FE panels and see if a similar gauge was fitted there.

[SSI01]

Just messaged the B-36 museum in Ft Worth, TX asking if their FE's panel shows two reading scales on the CHT gauges. If not, what would reason be for second reading scale. Awaiting their reply.

[harrybasset]

Thanks for the tips SS101. I have the C-124 from FS Berlin which has four combined CHT and Exhaust Gas Temperature gauges. These look similar to the gauges on the real Mercator panel so may be an answer. In the fairly poor Mercator panel monochrome illustrations I have both scales look the same but a combined EGT and CHT gauge for each engine would make sense.

[SSI01]

Will check the email momentarily for a reply from the museum. If I'm not back fairly shortly that means it didn't come yet.

I'm wondering about that raised rim around the gauge - does that means the gauge night lighting was in the rim, or was it backlit?

[SSI01]

Harrybasset - I've still not heard back from the B-36 museum re: your gauge question; I suspect this is because it's not open all the time so maybe they're not in to read their computer email. Not sure of the reason, but will let you know if/when I hear something back.:salute:

[harrybasset]

Thank you for your interest SS101. For the moment I am treating it as a EGT/CHT combined gauge and I am trying to refine a preliminary panel background. I am still hoping some kind modeller will present us with a Mercator as a Christmas surprise.

[this4dave2]

I was just wondering if any one is working on the 3 d model for the Martin P4M-1Q Mercator?

If not I would be willing to give the 3D model a try.

I believe in an earlier post Harrybasset said he was working on a panel for The Martin P4M-1Q Mercator which could be used for it.

I also seem to remmber seeing a post that OBIO had a sound file for the Martin P4M-1Q Mercator which could be used for it.

It could be a joint effort.

Please let me know if somebody is working on the 3D model

David Wooster

[harrybasset]

I don't know of anyone working on a 3D model of the Mercator. I am dipping my toe in the water but have never made a model before. I have just a child type of panel bitmap with an almost full set of gauges and a soundset combining loud radial and jet noises. The main problem with a Mercator is said to be the mixed power not being accomodated in FS2004. I think that could be worked round to get an acceptable result. There are working simulations of the Ryan Fireball, North American Savage and Fairchild C-123. A 3D model from you would be great David.

[SSI01]

Well, David, I have no modeling skills at all but may be able to pull together some research. In the FSim arena unfortunately I'm a "taker," not a "maker," to use modern vernacular. I'd love to learn how to do that, but I'd have to start from scratch with instruction from someone who really knows how, and that's a big drain on anyone's time.

[SSI01]

I was just wondering if any one is working on the 3 d model for the Martin P4M-1Q Mercator?

If not I would be willing to give the 3D model a try.

I believe in an earlier post Harrybasset said he was working on a panel for The Martin P4M-1Q Mercator which could be used for it.

I also seem to remmber seeing a post that OBIO had a sound file for the Martin P4M-1Q Mercator which could be used for it.

It could be a joint effort.

Please let me know if somebody is working on the 3D model

David Wooster

My copy of the ALPHA P-2 seems to have jet sound along with the recip.

[harrybasset]

Well, David, I have no modeling skills at all but may be able to pull together some research. In the FSim arena unfortunately I'm a "taker," not a "maker," to use modern vernacular. I'd love to learn how to do that, but I'd have to start from scratch with instruction from someone who really knows how, and that's a big drain on anyone's time.

I have always relied on other people making models but I have now bought FSDS 3.5 and I am now trying out the various techniques. There is an overwhelming amount of information and tutorials available with FSDS itself and many other sources on the Internet to help me. I don't suppose I will ever compete with the Master Modellers but starting to learn is interesting and challenging, also a chance to keep current on my faithful swear words and curses.

[Milton Shupe]

I have always relied on other people making models but I have now bought FSDS 3.5 and I am now trying out the various techniques. There is an overwhelming amount of information and tutorials available with FSDS itself and many other sources on the Internet to help me. I don't suppose I will ever compete with the Master Modellers but starting to learn is interesting and challenging, also a chance to keep current on my faithful swear words and curses.


LOL I salute you Sir for taking up arms. I wish others would be so inclined.

My only advice is take your time, learn the tool, experiment and play with it a lot, and have fun.
Once the basic tools are understood, then you have a foundation upon which to build and have even more fun. :)

Go forth and conquer Sir!

[harrybasset]

Thank you for your encouraging words Milton. I intend to master this skill, being retired means I have some time to work at this modelling business. My hounds snoring in the background is soothing when I get frustrated at making mistakes, still there is no mess or broken components left on the floor when something does not work out. My first project, which does not seem to have been attempted before has a bulged canopy. I think, using the FSDS documentation, I have found out how to do this, I feel as though Christmas has come early and my brain is getting some good exercise.

[SSI01]

I second Milton's praise for you sir and salute you as well. In fact, as time goes on I would like to check in with you re: insights into pursuing this as a pastime (i.e., cost of program, perceived degree of difficulty, add-on programs that may/will become necessary, and so on). In the meantime please let me know if I can be of assistance to you re: the Merc.:salute: