Total disappointment with the connie |
Post Reply |
Author | |
wulfgar
Check-In Staff Joined: 17 Sep 2009 Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 17 Sep 2009 at 1:08am |
Hi All,
I have just made a small flight with it and it is a huge disappointment.
Lots of bugs
1) leftward tilt even if you center the joystick.
2) Poor performance.I cannot believe that a four engine propeller aircraft cannot climb above 11500ft , speed doesn't go above 112 kts IAS .In the tutorial I am supposed to climb to 13000ft,for me it is impossible.Throttles are at full power.
If you have advice
Thanks
yves
|
|
Aircraft Aviation
Chief Pilot Joined: 15 Mar 2009 Points: 2149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You're probably overweight.
Also, I hear the tilting problem is due the misplacement of the fuel tank. You could adjust it in the cfg. if you like.
|
|
Martyn
Just Flight Staff Development Manager Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: Huntingdon, UK Points: 7615 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Are you leaning the mixture as you climb? If not, you will be lucky to get about FL120
|
|
Martyn
Just Flight Ltd |
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Right, you have to lean mixture as you climb. You can see the exact leaning quantity by looking at the Engine Performance gauges on the engineers panel.
|
|
flythelimit818
Check-In Staff Joined: 28 Aug 2009 Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Indeed with proper leaning you will keep your engines running but the manufold pressure will drop to a point where the engines will no longer give any power. This happens in our Connie way lower then the normal cruising altitude. Simply because the atmospheric pressure drops at altitude.
What happened is that Aeroplane Heaven made an aircraft with a very nice visual model but with the sofistication and depth of a cessna 172. In no way a match to the A2A Boeing 377/accusim, the Aerosoft PBY and indeed the latest freeware L1049 series (with very nice documentation!!!).
In the latter three aircraft massive attention has been given to simulate the real aircraft systems and performance.
About the fuel tanks: there is nothing wrong with their position, they are NOT of the centre line, but ALLl at equal distance from it, so in balance. But check your fuel load, and the centre of gravity in the graph to the right. It should be on the centre line.
I feel the turning left is a FSX glitch as so many. I could solve it by changing to the default c172 in flight. Check if it flies straight (this more or less resets parameters in FSX) and then revert back to the connie.
If you use FSX-accelaration there is a solution for the altitude problem.
With this you can fly at the normal cruising altitude above FL200. It simple activates automatic supercharging with is now available with accelation (e.g. P-51D). The freeware connie has a gauge which allows you to do this manually from the engineer's panel.
Change this in your aircraft.cfg file:
[piston_engine]
power_scalar = 1 cylinder_displacement = 185.95 compression_ratio = 6.5 number_of_cylinders = 18 max_rated_rpm = 2800 max_rated_hp = 2200 fuel_metering_type = 1 cooling_type = 0 normalized_starter_torque = 0.033 turbocharged = 0 supercharged = 1 supercharger_boost_low_end = 1.00 supercharger_boost_high_end = 4.0 supercharger_power_cost = 0.22 max_design_mp = 46 min_design_mp = 5 critical_altitude = 13500 emergency_boost_type = 0 emergency_boost_mp_offset = 0 emergency_boost_gain_offset = 0 fuel_air_auto_mixture = 0 auto_ignition = 0 emergency_boost_duration = 0 number_of_magnetos = 2 max_rpm_mechanical_efficiency_scalar = 1 idle_rpm_mechanical_efficiency_scalar = 1 max_rpm_friction_scalar = 1 idle_rpm_friction_scalar = 1 This will give you 33 inches manufold pressure at FL240, 175 KIAS with QNH 1013 hPa (29.92).
I'm now merging the freeware connie flight model with the Just flight visual model and it seems to work! Now with the correct fuel tanks, superchargers, performance, aircraft systems and failures.
Happy flying,
Paul
PPL-TMG (EHHV)
|
|
wulfgar
Check-In Staff Joined: 17 Sep 2009 Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
thanks for the info.
The problem was incorrect leaning on my side.I am using FSX acceleration.Can I use the supercharge thing you mentionned?What will it exactly change in the behaviour of the aircraft
Regards
Yves
|
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I do not agree with the above statements.
I have always been able to fly to the normal connie cruising altitudes (FL160-FL200) using the proper settings on prop/mixture, with a cruising speed of 192/193 KIAS, which was pretty normal for the L-049. I've been using all the nice cal-classic connies, using the same techniques. Never flown higher than FL220 even with the L-1649. That was her cruising altitude, why fly higher? I rather think that the cause of the low altitudes is a wrong fuel planning. You will never reach FL200 with full tanks and payload. Props are not jets, and for a prop there is absolutely no gain in flying at FL300. Obviusly, my two cents, but I think that besides some effective issues (fuel flow, pitot heat and others), the connie flies as the real one should. Ciao! |
|
flythelimit818
Check-In Staff Joined: 28 Aug 2009 Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yves, With the alteration you will get manufold pressures (so engines performance) as it should.
All other things remain unchanged. Just try it and see if you like it.
As far as I can see the pressures keep dropping when climbing. At a certain point (now set at 13500 ft) the superchargers kick in, and the presures will rise. In the real world the engineer would manually adjust the boost slowly to maintain a certain boost.
As said you have to burn off fuel before you can reach proper altitude and speed. But I always will keep save margins.
Rosariomanzo,
Can you please give exact data:
Fuel load, Altitude, QNH, throttle setting, prop setting, mixture. I would like to compare my data. Maybe there is somehow a difference?
Paul
|
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi Paul
I use manifold/RPM values as suggested by the manual for each phase of flight (t.o., climb, cruise, descent), which are pretty the same when compared to the other models I used to fly (cal-classic). I fly the connie since 3 yers with my virtual airline, with legs which generally are 400-500 NM. We have flown long hauls some times, 1600-1800NM. First, you have to correctly plan your fuel. The Connie was made for long ranges, so full tanks are not ideal for a 300NM leg. I generally use the fuel amount suggested by the FS flight planner, adding a 20-30% for route contingency. You will find that for short legs, your tanks will almost be empty. As for mixture, you have to lean while climbing. But how much? You have to look at the two engine performance gauges on the engineer panel. You will notice that the values of this gauges will lower as you climb. Leaning mixture will make these values raise. So you have to lean until they don't raise anymore. Further climb, same steps. More, you will find that a certain altitude, the engine performance gauges won't raise anymore, and the manifold pressure will start to drop. That is your ceiling related to your payload. As a consequence, climb by steps and watch your gauges. I use to climb FL100/110, check the gauges, use the proper leaning value, give power and climb 4000 ft higher, lean, check instruments and proper leaning. Then start climbing 2000 ft higher, keeping in mind that my ceiling is FL220. I find F160/F180 for short legs gives me the best speed. Remember that we are in the 50s, that you are flying a big iron piece which was made for long ranges, and that each attempt to fly it as a jet (or as a cessna) will lead to a disaster. Hope this helps. Ciao! |
|
flythelimit818
Check-In Staff Joined: 28 Aug 2009 Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi,
Thanks for your answer. Being a real world pilot at EHHV I'm well known with maintaining correct mixture and pitch setting. Aerodynamics and aircraft performance (weight and balance, density altitude-performance calculations) are subjects for the PPL exams.
So no problems there. What I want to achieve is an aircraft that flies and works by the book, not optimizing the performance by empirical flying. So also aircraft systems that work; if there are superchargers levers (right of the throttles) then they should work. Supercharged air heats up, so intercooler flaps shoud be there and working. In the A2A B377 real detonation can take place when the intake air is too hot (carburator heating/cooling). You HEAR the bangs, the engine runs rough and eventually fails. Overspeeding the turbo's leads to hot bearing also leading the failures. Overheating the engine during takeoff will lead the fire and failure (visible!), water injection is modeled and also the cooling effect of full-rich mixture. And indeed all normal switches (pitot heat), lights and knobs should be there and working. Shock-cooling when decending is modeled, so is overheating on the ground and sparkplug fouling. In summary a real simulation of the Constellation is still a far cry from the B377/accusim.
This is what you call a "professional " aircraft, and again A2A shows that it can be done.
Although with a different price tag! How about the connie with the accusim pack?
Indeed as you say, correct leaning the mixture will keep BHP at maximum while opening throttle to maintain manifold pressure with altitude. When fully opened the pressure will drop until BHP equals drag and the absolute ceiling is reached. However this is true for a atmospheric aspired engine (standard FSX), in a supercharged engine this will also happen but at a much higher altitude because manifold pressure can be kept at a certain level at will, until the limitations (rpm) of the superchargers are reached. So you will climb higher with lower throttle setting and lower fuel consumption. For the L049A this would mean above FL230, which is the service ceiling (different definition!). At lower altitude you will have the risk of overboosting the engines! It is not the question whether you want to fly that high, but if the aircraft could do it, it should also in this simulation.
Try e.g. the older A2A B29 with the normal cfg settings. You will not be able to reach 30.000ft which was a normal operational altitude above Japan. With the FSX supercharger setting you will reach it. Same with the Justflight Lancaster and Mosquito.
Also for a very good example of real engine management try the A2A P47/ accusim.
I will start a set of test flights with equal fuel and payload settings with and without changes to the cfg file. See what comes up!
But still what a beautifull aircraft she is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Paul
|
|
Herky
P1 Joined: 05 Jul 2009 Location: Great Britain Points: 792 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
So, to summarise, at the moment, if you purchase the Connie Professional, in order for it to resemble the aircraft described, you first need to have FSX WITH Acceleration? ( I do not, I have FSX de luxe, SP1 SP2)
AND
Then apply a fix to the .cfg file to enable the superchargers?
AND
Then apply a fix (another post in this forum) to correct the panel lighting, exhaust effects, fuel tanks position.......................?
The boxed version, which I was eagerly awaiting, is to be released now in October? Will this have the required patches or do we have to do them ourselves?
Also it appears we have to pay extra, to "unlock" the extra liveries in the boxed release?
Just wondering...................
May I mention my PBY, which has complete authenticity (free extra model downloads), a full comprehensive manual and a reproduced pilots manual from the era.
PLUS a pair of Pratt and Whitney Twin Wasp R1830-92's aaaaaaaaaaaahhh
|
|
You Tube at HERKY231 or David Herky
|
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Paul,
as you asked, I would like to share with you and everyone in the forum an almost complete flight, showing the various settings. Sorry for my bad english... that's not my first language! The flight is from RPUO to RODN (ROAH as alternate), 483 NM. We have loaded 8.700Lbs of fuel (about 30% full). This is an online flight over IVAO, weather by ActiveSkyX. Ready to start, radios set: Ready for takeoff roll, you can see a friend who will fly with me (and another guy is behind). Now is time to look at the various settings. Here we are on the first climb segment: Still climbing, passing FL120: And finally we are cruising at FL150, notice the speed, pretty high: Apart some clouds, we have tailwind and fine weather: Here are the cruise settings on the engineer panel. Look at BMEP and fuel flow, we are flying at 198 KIAS: Still flying while writing this post, the remaining part of the flight should not be interesting. Maybe I will stepclimb at FL170. Hope this may help to appreciate this old lady, beside some minor issue which I am sure will be soon solved. Ciao! |
|
flythelimit818
Check-In Staff Joined: 28 Aug 2009 Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi,
Got it sorted!!! Same here about the language...
Did the test flight with and without the adjustments. And what! Up to FL200 it did not make much difference. Both settings gave:
Cruising as in the manual
31 inches 2300 rpm 170KIAS 6gal/ min
28 1800 138 4.75
25 1800 becoming unstable
This at 40% fuel, 2500 kg payload, QNH 1013
However at FL240 thre is a clear difference in remaining power, however too much. So a further tweak is needed (simple!)
As for normal flight you were right, proper management does it all, if you want to fly higher (maybe more appropriate in the B29) you need the tweak. But I think this also means that Aeroplane Heaven somehow incorporated supercharging in their flight model.
Pity they did not implement all the goodies as in accusim. Maybe with our feedback in a update?
I also noticed that many it the gauges on the engineer's panel are not working. I'm going to check whether the same gauges are used as in the front panel. I think that incorporating
a pitot switch will be possible. More later...
What's your opinion on the wing surface textures, do the look OK to you?
Anyhow, this aircraft will give us hours of pleasant flight,
Enjoy,
Paul
|
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The wing texture look somewhat ugly, but it is the last thing.
I have noticed too that some gauges do not work, or give improper values. Hope A.H. will fix all. Something like Accusim would be wonderful indeed, did you see the Cub? Now I have to land, thanks for your response, have fun with the Connie (and let's wait for some fixes!). |
|
Tail_Spin
Check-In Staff Joined: 02 Jun 2008 Location: Abbotsford, BC. Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't want to get into a competion here, (I'm flying a different conni than the Just Flight one), just contributing to this thread because of my love for the Constellation. I saw someone had posted some pictures of their constellation trip and it reminded me of one of my favorite trips that I used to take with Cargo Pilot in my Constellation. Keep up the good work guys, I'm sure you'll get it all working 100% soon and the more real you can make it the better Check out the pics here:
For a challenge, try this trip sometime guys, it's a blast (CYXX to CAR3) B.C. Canada
|
|
Martyn
Just Flight Staff Development Manager Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: Huntingdon, UK Points: 7615 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The update will be ready shortly, which will address the remaining issues found in the Connie
|
|
Martyn
Just Flight Ltd |
|
rosariomanzo
Ground Crew Joined: 18 May 2008 Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Martyn, this is good news, thank you and all Just Flight team.
As for the flight above, will try it for sure, thanks! |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |