|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 28, 2017 15:52:49 GMT
Got it! Great ! (for both bug fix in v11 and the prop controller issue) I've re-tested it again, and the propeller is not windmilling in version v002, even when performing aerobatics (forbidden...). So...everything is 'back to normal' regarding the propeller's behavior
|
|
|
Post by dannhaue on Mar 28, 2017 18:26:46 GMT
Many, many thanks for this excellent and beautiful A/C! Its a joy to fly! But...;-) As taildraggin68 already mentioned maneuvering on the ground is quite tricky. The only really point of criticism is the efficiency of the speedbrakes. As a glider pilot I know about the efficiency of these type of spoilers and they are much more effective! Nevertheless this aircraft is excellent!!!
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 28, 2017 19:23:23 GMT
Many, many thanks for this excellent and beautiful A/C! Its a joy to fly! But...;-) As taildraggin68 already mentioned maneuvering on the ground is quite tricky. The only really point of criticism is the efficiency of the speedbrakes. As a glider pilot I know about the efficiency of these type of spoilers and they are much more effective! Nevertheless this aircraft is excellent!!! Hi! Thanks Some notes: Ground handling is one among few aspects that will be fine tuned in the upcoming update. Regarding the spoilers - the Phoenix is not an ordinary glider. It is heavier two or even three times from an ordinary glider and it has a different ballistic coefficient (Ballistic coefficient of a body is a measure of its ability to overcome air resistance in flight). Although airplanes are not 'ballistic projectiles', their flying characteristics are affected by this aspect. I'm not talking about 'drag' because the fuselage/wings etc are, give or take, similar to those of an 'ordinary glider'. But when you add extra mass to the equations, you get the idea of what called 'ballistic coefficient'. Example#1: same aircraft, different weight (min/max), and you get different acceleration (mainly deceleration through air) behavior. When you compare a similar airframe, but with with two or even three times bigger mass...you will get a "different aircraft" behavior, especially in the light weight category. Example#2: comparing the braking distance of a drogue chute assist aircraft (a jet fighter for example), when the aircraft is 'clean' and light, and when the aircraft is fully loaded with 'dirty' configuration. braking distance grows dramatically, even with the use of the same drogue chute. Furthermore, pilots are having difficulties to identify if the chute was deployed or not during the braking phase (in a heavy configuration). Back to the Phoenix...The real Phoenix spoilers have greater effect on sink-rate, than on actual deceleration (based on real flight reports of real pilots). I'm still reviewing the performance of the Phoenix in different weights and flight phases, and the spoilers are one of the aspects that I'm monitoring. But I can say surely that after this review, I'm not expecting any dramatic change in deceleration using the spoilers, but only a really fine tune to the accurate increase of the sink rate when using them in different weights and speeds. I hope that it wasn't boring... Keep up the (great) feedback. I really appreciate the fact that you are taking the time to write it, and I take into consideration every input I get. Thanks again
|
|
|
Post by dannhaue on Mar 28, 2017 19:45:57 GMT
You are completely right concerning the ballistic...but...;-) I typically fly the Scheibe SF25 motorglider with ordinary spoilers. The A/C has a similar weight as the Phoenix but the Spoilers at the "Motorfalke" are more effective as the Hirth-Spoilers at the simulated Phoenix. A Schleicher ASK 13 has an empty weight of about 300kg and even with 100kg passenger (Total weight 480kg) the spoilers have an fantastic efficiency! Your explanation is absolutely correct but we are talking about aircrafts of the same weight!
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 28, 2017 22:18:31 GMT
Hi dannhaue, oh! my apologies for writing this long "lecture"! A few notes though: ASK 13 - As far as I know, it is featuring spoilers that extract both on the upper and the lower surfaces of each wing, what contributes to the greater effectiveness as "air brakes" (rather than "lift killers"). Scheibe SF25 motorglider - has 'split-flap spoilers', which are practically more effective as aerodynamic airbrakes than the Hirth-Spoilers. In the simulated Phoenix with the current settings, there is a plausible, accepted reduction in lift to drag ratio when extracting the spoilers, but the actual effect on deceleration is low, as you have noticed. I've read an article of a Phoenix flight review, stating that the spoilers effect is somewhat "disappointing" in terms of speed management (I'll try to recall where did I read it...). Anyways, your remarks are very relevant, especially when based on practical experience with motor gliders, and I will get deeper into this matter. I'll post my findings here (and in the various updates to the package), and will be glad to hear your opinion regarding the flight qualities. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 29, 2017 6:41:53 GMT
Hi again (dannhaue) Link you may find interesting...it is in French.It is a flight review of the Phoenix: www.ulmag.fr/mag/essais/phoenix.phpIf you go down the page, you'll find a headline "construction details" (translated to English). Under that headline, there are photos. One of the photos is of the Phoenix Spoilers. Here is a cut/paste of the translation of the caption of that photo:"The effectiveness of the air brakes is noticeably felt in terms of fall rate, but their deployment does not break the speed as expected with this type of device." Anyways, I am still working on turing the flight envelope of the Phoenix for the upcoming update, including spoiler effect.Thanks for the good discussion
|
|
|
Post by dannhaue on Mar 29, 2017 6:50:52 GMT
You are right! Additionally the effect of the Spoiler at the ASK is dramatically increased by the pressure compensation as their is a hole in the wing...;-) The spoilers of the Phoenix have holes in the plates. This generates vorticies to increase drag, as a result these flaps have much higher drag coefficients as split-flap spoilers. As for the aerodynamics around a cylinder I'm pretty sure that size, frequency, etc. of the vortices are strongly depending of the Reynolds-number, resulting in a complex correlation between drag and velocity. Maybe they are only effective in a very narrow velocity band. I did a lot of approaches yesterday in comparison with the AVIA71 RF5B(which is also a wonderful A/C in xp11) and the Phoenix behaves very comparable. Probably you are right and we only need some fine tuning (AND lower speeds at the approach...;-))))))))) )
Ahh...I forgot...I clicked on the boarder of the speed indicator as for the EUROFOX but nothing happened. Do you plan to implement a switch-able speed indicator (knots-km/h) in the Phoenix?
Nevertheless the Phoenix is an outstanding A/C and as more as I fly I get more and more excited!!! MANY THANKS!!! I'm looking forward to your upcoming projects...;-))))))))
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 29, 2017 8:29:10 GMT
Hi! I will probably add the switchable ASI in the Phoenix, but not in the upcoming update. Thanks again!
|
|
jhk
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by jhk on Mar 29, 2017 12:21:03 GMT
JetManHuss and taildraggin68: Most of my real world flying behind a Rotax was some years ago in Diamond DA20s. They certainly had carb heat levers, and I had no idea that the real Phoenix doesn't have one (to be fair, the model does not!), nor did I read their checklist! I should have done! I remember that instructors were very insistent on using carb heat in the Katanas, but other internet sources say that they never found that these installations were particularly vulnerable to carb icing........ Well, the propensity for carb icing will vary on the climate/conditions that the plane is being flown in. Quite difficult, I would say, to get it perfect in a sim, as experiencing it in real life is by no means guaranteed on any day. So many variables, including the obvious one of throttle setting! Also, noted was the ground handling issue. Very difficult! Until it's sorted, only I will know how and where I got into the air
|
|
|
Post by taildraggin68 on Mar 29, 2017 15:24:23 GMT
On the v11 carburetor ice issue, although it's not in the release notes, R1 shows improved behavior on the timing of the carb ice warning. So that's a plus.
Looking forward to updates as it will only make this plane even better.
|
|
|
Post by taildraggin68 on Mar 30, 2017 18:23:15 GMT
2.1 is a nice update. Thanks for the continued tinkering and tweaking. Ground handling is improved, the model does seem a bit more refined, and I hope the duct tape doesn't come off with the yaw string ( nice touch, I like it)
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Mar 30, 2017 18:42:02 GMT
Thanks:)
Ground handling is (I think) an issue of XP11. I've issued a bug report to LM. It seems that in XP11, as you try to keep the centerline in a crosswind, the tires starts to side-skid in a very early stage, almost instantly (plus sound and smoke). During this side skid, the tires loose friction/traction of the runway, including a huge reduction of braking power (during the skid). Although braking power should be decreased while skidding, it shouldn't be eliminated in a 0-30 degrees of side-skidding. Also, in a 90 degrees skid, while the braking power is irrelevant, the traction of the gears is high enough to break the landing gear struts in some airplanes. The "traction to skid angle ratio" should be recalculate, in my opinion, as well as the traction in skids of above 40 degrees.
Currently, the result is airplanes that skids sideways very easily, and lose traction/control (ground steering is not effective). The problem is dramatically noticeable in lightweight models and taildraggers.
The reason that I divided the tuning of ground handling into two phases is that I don't want to detour a bug (if it is indeed a bug), by fixing non-accurate settings. I'll wait for response from LR/Austin, and then will decide how to tackle this. It is a problem with all light aircraft in XP11...
|
|
|
Post by taildraggin68 on Apr 2, 2017 23:32:01 GMT
Nice update with v3. Thanks. Question on painting, I take it the black areas don't need to be covered now for future paints as the default is white in those black areas? Thanks
|
|
|
Post by VSL-Admin on Apr 3, 2017 7:04:48 GMT
Nice update with v3. Thanks. Question on painting, I take it the black areas don't need to be covered now for future paints as the default is white in those black areas? Thanks Thanks! Oh...they (still) do take part... Down the road (and not too long) I will re-arrange the UV map and create a clean, ordered template for repaints. By the way...what do you think about the vibration of the aircraft with motor running? In my 'test bed' I've tried it two times stronger and it takes the whole screen into a really realistic feeling. But I've noticed that it might get one's eyes to become 'tired' after a while...so I did it much weaker...
|
|
|
Post by taildraggin68 on Apr 3, 2017 12:56:40 GMT
I like the vibrations, although it took a little bit to notice them. Subtle is good though.
Thanks for the info on the painting and I look forward to those updates as well.
|
|