David Luff wrote:
The new pa24-250 is a really nice model, and really nice to (virtually) fly -
nice one Dave! It makes a really nice gradual step up from the c172p/pa28-161.
Thanks! I needed that. What motivated me to make this model was the
desire to practice instrument approaches and instrument X-countries with
most all the things I need to do for real modeled as accurately as
possible. Otherwise I found I was reinforcing the wrong behavior. That
is why the keyboard bindings are in the same order as the switches they
control. When flying the actual AC, especially IFR, I reach w/o looking
for the switches.
However, because it's so good, it's likely that you'll get more feedback on
the problems, so here goes...
The cockpit gives a nice immersive effect of being in the plane, but it really shows up the inherent contradictions between a realistic 3d view and usability when projected onto a 2d monitor. The engine instruments are right off to the right, which makes it very hard to set while flying a circuit, and the adf is off the monitor, which isn't so good for IFR NDB work.
Having the real MP and tach so far to the right is an issue in the real
AC. I set the prop by ear without breaking my instrument scan and then
on the next scan, glance at the tach. I am usually nearly right on. In
fgfs, near the end of my cross wind leg, I pull the power to the bottom
of the green (15 in hg). On down wind, I drop the gear and retard the
throttle (by ear) until the speed is less than 125 mph (max flap speed)
and then drop the flaps about 10 degrees (half the white arch on the
flap indicator). As I turn base the prop goes all the way forward and
the rest of the pattern is like the pa28-161 except on short final I use
"GUMP". That is gas-undercarriage-mixture-prop.
The radios aren't so much of an issue, since you can offset the view whilst
setting them and retaining some straight-forward view, which I guess is
somewhat like real-life. It's hard to glance quickly at the engine instruments
or the adf in the sim though.
Presently, I find it comfortable to set my view direction so the adf
dial is in full view to the far right on my monitor as well as the dme
display. That way I can fly all ILS, NDB, and VOR A approaches quite
comfortably. I fly the early part of the approach (procedure turns,
etc.) at 15 in hg MP. I drop the gear on the inbound leg of the
procedure turn and slow up to below 125 mph so I have the 10 to 20
degrees of flaps in and the glide slope speed established before the
outer marker. In fgfs, 10 to 15 in MP is correct for the glide slope
depending on the flap setting.
I wonder if there isn't some scope for moving the pilot view-point very slightly backwards, just enough to get the adf in. It looks to be like this could possibly be justified on the grounds that the pilot is sitting back in the chair, but I guess it might spoil the 'feel' somewhat. I suppose it's not a big problem to look slightly to the right when IFR anyway, since one's not flying in relation to the ground.
I have played with this. I even flew touch-n-goes in the real N7764P
instead of lunch one day to make note of what I saw in the cockpit in a
typical circuit. I find that I normally see the toggle switches just
above the bottom of the yoke when trimmed for level flight at 16 in MP
(similar to 15 in MP in fgfs). I also see just a bit of the front
cowling. So the present location seems very real and by now
comfortable. When I tried moving the view point further back, it is
better for most things, but worse for landing in that with the nose
pulled high enough to get near a stall, the view of the runway is
completely lost. I find in the real AC that I lean slightly forward as
I pull the nose higher to maintain the view of the runway. Could we
bind the viewpoint via an interpolation to the yoke/elevator?
The yokes look nice, but cover up a lot of the instruments and switches. When
flying the sim with a yoke (as opposed to mouse or k/board), there's also a
good argument to be made for not needing/wanting a virtual yoke as well. I
wonder if the pilot's yoke couldn't be made hidable with a key combination on
all the 3D models where possible - do we use y/Y for anything?
Great idea. MSFS does this. Perhaps add a visibility property that
could be set by the render dialogue.
The engine is much nicer now it idles properly, but I wonder if it wouldn't be
slightly easier to set without the instruments in easy view if there was sound
feedback on manifold pressure as well as rpm, since it has a constant speed
prop. You fly the real thing (I presume!) - do you notice any difference in
engine tone when changing manifold pressure setting?
Not really unless the MP change is large enough to change the RPM such
as when I am slowing up to drop flaps on down wind.
What do you think of the current performance compared to the real thing. I
couldn't find any numbers for approach and touchdown speeds in the
aircraft-specific help - what sort of speeds do you fly it at? I found I was
about 10kts quicker on approach with full flaps (80 vs. 70) than on the
pa28-161 in the sim - is this about right?
A lot of POH numbers are in the README.pa24-250 file. Here are the
numbers I fly. 90-100 mph on base and 85 -90 mph on short final. POH
say 95 mph no flaps and 82 mph full flaps for approach speeds. The
cruise and stall speeds are close. The accelerated stalls are more
aggressive in fgfs than in the real AC. But if you sneak up on the
stall, the AC will start to descend w/o a hard break.
It looks like you have a GPS-specific CDI and annunciator panel near the
bottom, but I've got a feeling that it's a non-Bendix-King one, since it
includes the 'ptk' annunciation. Do you have a GPS on yours, and if so what
model is it? Do you have any photos of the panel?
Yes, the real AC has an Apollo SL60 GPS Receiver and VHF Communications
Transceiver. The GPS is enroute qualified but not approach qualified.
Yes, I used many photos of the AC and panel to get the model as close a
possible to reality. I used the radios from Aircraft/Instruments to do
the radio stack to get it in the "air" asap.
Sorry to pick so many holes, but please take it as a compliment that I feel
moved to write about it rather than as a complaint! I always liked the
pa28-161 in FG as well - one day I'll figure out Blender and add the standard
radios to it if no-one beats me too it (hopefully they will ;-)).
Cheers - Dave (another one!)
Thanks for the interest! This is what is great about open source.
As another Dave says,
All the best,
Dave Perry
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
