FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board => Topic started by: hd764jvgd843 on September 17, 2014, 07:58:14 pm
-
This is an aircraft mod and texture pack for FSX/P3D featuring different FA-18 C/D models and versions. The project started as a feature port of Jimi's 'New FSXBA Hornet' to the default FSX FA-18 and the CaptainSim Xload addon, thus effects, FCS, hud, gauges etc. are based on these modifications. Note: For best visual experience FSX or P3D (v1.4) recommended.
Texture packs are based on many repaints I have found over the years on the net and which I adjusted to suit my personal flavour and make them as realistic as I could to the best of my knowledge - some are fictional, but I found them too nice not to be included. So credits go to all the other modders/repainters out there, too. I have also created a bunch of additional textures completely new which you may discover. Maximum resolution of texture schemes is 1024x1024 px, which looks very good even on large HD monitors and in zoom mode. This is in order to facilitate as high as possible and smooth fps during maneuvers and at high speeds even on mid-range systems, so please do not expect some uber-realistic high resolution stuff down to every nut, bolt and screw.
Main emphasis of this mod has been and will be trying to mimic dynamic flight behaviour and the FCS of a legacy hornet as best as possible within the current limitations of the sim. Parameters in the '.air' and '.cfg' files are tweaked to the best of my limited knowledge, based on technical specifications, written experiences and with lots of feedback and help of people from this forum. I hope this mod will be fun to fly and you may enjoy it as much as I did putting it together. The project is pursued for recreational purposes, thus a varying amount of time and effort may go into it which will most likely result in a rather erratic sequence of changes/improvements.
All mods and variants FS(C), CS(D) and NH(C/D) have similar flight characteristics depending on loadout/configuration. Animations like flaps, etc. may differ due to limitations of underlying model files respectively control surfaces. Aircraft and texture mods are made available separately, in order to facilitate the adjustment of flight characteristics and improvement of textures. Uncompressed all four mods including textures will currently require in total about 5.1 GB of free drive space. Download sizes however will be considerably smaller due to high compression ratios, especially for the texture schemes. Denomination of the mod's airplane models/variants is unique, so you can easily keep them side by side with default FSX FA-18, CaptainSim Xload addon and/or Jimi's 'New FSXBA Hornet'. For installation instructions, please check the included readme files of each mod.
Download: Mod version 2.3 for Flight Simulator X (FS) Hornet and CaptainSim (CS) Xload addon.
Required: Flight Simulator X 'FA-18' from Acceleration Pack and/or CaptainSim Xload addon.
(FS) FA-18C airplane mod:
- airplane_v2.3.0_FA-18C_FS.7z: http://www18.zippyshare.com/v/Wh7CLCSO/file.html
Texture pack, for (FS) FA-18C airplane mod (extract textures into corresponding airplane folder):
- textures_v2.3.0_FA-18C_FS.7z: http://www7.zippyshare.com/v/AxQ7IUmp/file.html
Update for FA-18C_FS mod:
- update_v2.3.2_FA-18C_FS.zip: http://www65.zippyshare.com/v/FTFJuH2k/file.html
- update_v2.3.3_FA-18C_FS.7z: http://www39.zippyshare.com/v/5AWGmMlp/file.html (optional/alternative sound effects)
(CS) FA-18D airplane mod:
- airplane_v2.3.0_FA-18D_CS.7z: http://www58.zippyshare.com/v/v0lcKrVW/file.html
Texture pack, for (CS) FA-18D airplane mod (extract textures into corresponding airplane folder):
- textures_v2.3.0_FA-18D_CS.7z: http://www48.zippyshare.com/v/GcbKF91I/file.html
Update for FA-18D_CS mod:
- update_v2.3.2_FA-18D_CS.zip: http://www98.zippyshare.com/v/BRD3Bgx5/file.html
- update_v2.3.3_FA-18D_CS.7z: http://www104.zippyshare.com/v/bHze8E7A/file.html (optional/alternative sound effects)
List of textures for (FS) and (CS) versions:
-texture.BRA-NA_N-1012
-texture.CHF-AF_J-5009
-texture.CHF-AF_J-5011
-texture.CHF-AF_J-5017
-texture.CHF-AF_J-5018
-texture.CHF-AF_J-5238
-texture.ESP-AF_C15-78
-texture.ESP-AF_CE15-7
-texture.FIN-AF_HN-465
-texture.Hornet_Prototype1
-texture.Hornet_Prototype2
-texture.Hornet_Test
-texture.KWT-AF_425
-texture.MYS-AF_M45-01
-texture.NASA_HARV_ANSER
-texture.NASA_HARV_SATFV
-texture.NASA_TestPlane_846
-texture.NASA_TestPlane_852
-texture.NASA_X53AAW
-texture.NASA_YF-17
-texture.RAAF_A21-08
-texture.RAAF_A21-103
-texture.RAAF_A21-105
-texture.RAAF_A21-117
-texture.RAAF_A21-26
-texture.RCAF_409-761
-texture.RCAF_409-765
-texture.RCAF_409-796
-texture.RCAF_410-719
-texture.RCAF_410-720
-texture.RCAF_410-906
-texture.RCAF_410-918
-texture.RCAF_416-789
-texture.RCAF_425-703
-texture.RCAF_425-711
-texture.RCAF_425-738
-texture.RCAF_425-745
-texture.RCAF_425-751
-texture.RCAF_431-009
-texture.RCAF_433-730
-texture.RCAF_440-747
-texture.RCAF_441-740
-texture.RCAF_AETE-907
-texture.USMC_VMFA-112_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-112_10
-texture.USMC_VMFA-115_200
-texture.USMC_VMFA-115_201
-texture.USMC_VMFA-122_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-122_02
-texture.USMC_VMFA-142_209
-texture.USMC_VMFA-212_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-232_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-232_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-232_300
-texture.USMC_VMFA-251_200
-texture.USMC_VMFA-251_202
-texture.USMC_VMFA-312_200
-texture.USMC_VMFA-312_205
-texture.USMC_VMFA-314_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-314_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-314_10
-texture.USMC_VMFA-314_202
-texture.USMC_VMFA-323_200
-texture.USMC_VMFA-323_202
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-121_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-224_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-225_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-225_10
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-225_200
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-332_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-533_00
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-533_01
-texture.USMC_VMFA-AW-533_100
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_200
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_220
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_222
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_233
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_237
-texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_241
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_1
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_2
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_3
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_4
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_5
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_6
-texture.USN_BlueAngels_7
-texture.USN_NAWCTSD
-texture.USN_NSAWC_11
-texture.USN_NSAWC_35
-texture.USN_NSAWC_46
-texture.USN_NSAWC_N-1000
-texture.USN_TestPilotSchool
-texture.USN_VFA-102_200
-texture.USN_VFA-103_200
-texture.USN_VFA-103_201
-texture.USN_VFA-103_202
-texture.USN_VFA-105_400
-texture.USN_VFA-105_411
-texture.USN_VFA-106_300
-texture.USN_VFA-106_334
-texture.USN_VFA-106_335
-texture.USN_VFA-106_400
-texture.USN_VFA-106_405
-texture.USN_VFA-106_45
-texture.USN_VFA-115_200
-texture.USN_VFA-11_100
-texture.USN_VFA-122_25
-texture.USN_VFA-122_52
-texture.USN_VFA-125_400
-texture.USN_VFA-125_401
-texture.USN_VFA-131_400
-texture.USN_VFA-132_300
-texture.USN_VFA-137_400
-texture.USN_VFA-143_100
-texture.USN_VFA-143_101
-texture.USN_VFA-143_202
-texture.USN_VFA-146_300
-texture.USN_VFA-146_302
-texture.USN_VFA-14_200
-texture.USN_VFA-151_300
-texture.USN_VFA-15_301
-texture.USN_VFA-192_300
-texture.USN_VFA-195_400
-texture.USN_VFA-195_401
-texture.USN_VFA-204_01
-texture.USN_VFA-204_403
-texture.USN_VFA-25_400
-texture.USN_VFA-27_200
-texture.USN_VFA-34_204
-texture.USN_VFA-37_200
-texture.USN_VFA-37_300
-texture.USN_VFA-41_100
-texture.USN_VFA-82_300
-texture.USN_VFA-83_300
-texture.USN_VFA-83_301
-texture.USN_VFA-84_104
-texture.USN_VFA-94_400
-texture.USN_VFA-97_200
-texture.USN_VFC-12_10
-texture.USN_VFC-12_14
-texture.USN_VFC-12_23
-texture.USN_VFC-13_06
-texture.USN_VFC-13_12
-texture.USN_VX-30_200
-texture.USN_VX-31_5210
-texture.USN_VX-31_5212
Download: Mod version 2.3 based on Jimi's 'New FSXBA Hornet' (NH) version.
These mods combine different model files C/D and configurations (fleet & BA): AIM, BA, Clean, GBU, Mav, Train, Zuni.
(NH) FA-18C airplane mod:
(NH) FA-18D airplane mod:
Combined v2.3.3 download link for both C/D mods, thanks to 'Azframer':
http://www.mediafire.com/file/x54t7ml6k911m6b/FA-18_C_D.zip
List of textures for (NH) C/D versions:
-Texture.CHF-AF_J-5002
-Texture.ESP-AF_C15-95
-Texture.FIN-AF_HN-419
-Texture.Hornet_Prototype1
-Texture.Hornet_Prototype2
-Texture.Hornet_Test
-Texture.NASA_HARV_ANSER
-Texture.NASA_TestPlane_852
-Texture.NASA_X53_AAW
-Texture.RAAF_A21-23
-Texture.RCAF_409-747
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-225_01
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-251_200
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-251_411
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-333_07
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-333_12
-Texture.USMC_VMFA-333_15
-Texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_12
-Texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_200
-Texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_222
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_1
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_2
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_3
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_4
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_5
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_6
-Texture.USN_BlueAngels_7
-Texture.USN_VFA-27_200
-Texture.USN_VFA-27_202
-Texture.USN_VFA-27_203
-Texture.USN_VFA-27_220
-Texture.USN_VFA-136_300
-Texture.USN_VFA-136_302
-Texture.USN_VFA-192_300
-Texture.USN_VFA-192_305
-Texture.USN_VFA-195_400
-Texture.USN_VFA-204_01
-Texture.USN_VFC-12_06
-Texture.USN_VFC-12_10
Hanimichal was so kind to release a nice paint kit for the 'New FSXBA Hornet', which you can find here:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=5igml7o8t6atmkmepmte2oadm4&topic=6944.465
General changelog of things worth mentioning:
textures: corrected small details, e.g. (consistent throughout the texture package where appropriate)
- weapons and fuel contact points
- tank structures and color
- added lights where missing
- turbine intakes & exhausts
- corrected insignia placement
- slats and flaps color adjusted where needed
- corrected bump and specular maps
- corrected canopy colors where appropriate
- new tweaked hud glass, looks more realistic
- minor color adjustment to make contours visible
- corrected ladder and spill ducts textures
Flight behavior is tweaked and is an ongoing effort trying to mimic the FCS of the legacy hornet as best to my limited knowledge within the current boundaries of the sim. It is done in conjunction with Jimi's Pitch_Auto_Trim logic and Orion's Autoflaps.dll, including G-Limiters and additional AoA-Limiters enforcing a general flight envelope, preventing the airplane from spinning out of control during certain maneuvers.
aircraft.cfg - a lot of big and small changes, just to mention a few:
- aircraft moments of inertia adjusted
- empty weight CG position changed
- airplane balance adjusted, in conjunction with pitch auto trim
- wing_span: corrected for fsx definition of wing_span
- wing_twist corrected
- wing_incidence adjusted
- vtail_area corrected
- elevator_area corrected
- flaps position values corrected including span-outboard values (realistic visualization only with Jimi's 'New FSXBA Hornet' version, although flight dynamics are working correctly for old FSX/CS addon versions too, movements of flaps are not being visualized in all positions correctly)
- turbine engine data adjusted
- contact points modified
- station_load's: gun added and WSO for D version
- weight and balance values adjusted
.air file (compared to out of the box fsx version)
- rudder/aileron deflection function changed
- thrust vector function changed
- drag values adjusted
- various functions and values tweaked
- sideslip due to bank angle reduced
Suggestions and feedback are always welcome.
-
Just some more screenshots...
-
Thanks for putting these all together in one place. Which mods are you using for the CS Delta? Outside of testing Jimi's version of the C, I tend to fly the CS model as well since I can config tank/weps. I did attempt to alias Jimi's new pit into the CS Delta, with limited success.
-
Which mods are you using for the CS Delta?
I do not know what exactly you are referring to - the visual models or textures? Please clarify.
I like to fly all three customizations for different reasons:
- fsx fa-18 for the clear/test plane configuration
- CS for the ability to add different loadouts, especially with two or three tanks
- Jimi's / Jamal's New Hornet model for the correct flaps animations.
You can now move the fsx VC to the New Hornet, and vice versa. I copied all necessary files into the general texture folder. Some inconsistencies concerning inadvertently triggered effects by VC/model files, I have been able to finally work around.
This has been bugging me for a long time, for I prefer the fsx VC over the New Hornet one because the glass hud texture looks more like the real thing...
compare a real FA-18 HUD picture: http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/dc/de/b8/z12115676X.jpg
...to the screenshot below.
Peter
-
Question? Looking for the RCAF 409 Sq. Line, are they included? or Can it be made?
-
Here you go! - I will include it in the next major update pack v1.2 around Christmas.
texture.RCAF_Nighthawk for FSX and CS versions. As I have not yet familiarized myself with the New Hornet paintkit, I won't be able to do any skins for this version in the near future.
Peter
-
Peter, you are the man!!
Thanks....
-
As usual, here is the latest update (version 1.3.3):
Changelog:
- Incorporated latest New Hornet changes for CS and FSX versions. Thanks, again to ORION for his great work on AutoFlaps logic and putting it all into a nice dll!
- Reworked several textures in order to correct small issues, like the Aces on the fins of VFA-41 are showing correct now.
- Added a new texture for VMFA-225 black scheme
- Removed all ladder textures for C/D versions from under the right side of LERX. CS and FSX model files still show some outline, that cannot be removed - at least the textures are correct now.
-
Great job on the CS model, downloading now.
Just checking a typo in the read me:
- fx_AfterBurnerFire1.fx (AB flickering, FSX version affected)
- fx_AfterBurnerFire2.fx (AB flickering, FSX version affected)
- fx_AfterBurnerFire2.fx (AB flickering, FSX version affected)<----this should be the fx_AfterBurnerFire3.fx?
-
BZ, hd764jvgd843! Those are really nice repaints
- Removed all ladder textures for C/D versions from under the right side of LERX. CS and FSX model files still show some outline, that cannot be removed - at least the textures are correct now.
Looks like you have to work with the bump textures?..
And, for goodness sake, please remove those starboard LEX spill ducts (please see the attached pictures) ;)
(http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle2/fa-18d_164688/images/fa-18d_164688_06_of_15.jpg)
(http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle2/fa-18d_164688/images/fa-18d_164688_12_of_15.jpg)
-
Victory103: Yes, it is supposed to be 'fx_AfterBurnerFire3.fx'. Thanks for pointing that one out, it will be corrected in the next release.
Paddles: Thanks for the feedback and the pics. To my shame I must admit that I have never consciously noticed that the spill ducts are on the port side only, although it is quite obvious, like the mistake with the ladder, over which I just stumbled upon by accident. But "when you (me) are in the woods you (I) sometimes do not see the trees".
The remaining 'ladder outlines' under the starboard LEX, do not come from the bump maps, but the specular maps as I just found out. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction, because I somehow assumed that these outlines came from the model files, which was obviously wrong. I will have these glitches fixed in the next release, soon.
-
Update version 1.4
Changelog:
- changed the mod's folder names and structure, to be more compliant with existing FSX, CS and NH installations
- ladder outlines under starboard LEX removed from specular map for all versions
- starboard spill ducts removed for all FSX and CS version textures
- port side spill ducts added for all NH version textures
- some minor color ajustments I noticed on some textures
-
Running your updates on the CS Delta. Just happened to fire up a payware FSX mission for the CS Delta for an initial test, which included ops around the boat and formation. Contacts points reminiscent of early stock FSX-A Bug with the amount of roll on the mains. Trapped and the CS almost flipped over on the roll out.
Noticed the yaw input working pretty hard, +/- 4* inputs as I believe it is correcting for an out of trim condition based on FSX winds, this was magnified on the mission AI CS Delta above 350kts. Pitch trim worked well, allowing one to keep the VV centered in both cruise and pattern flight phases with little input from me, adding to more carefree handling in the pitch axis. Seems over-powered, but doubt the CS Delta had the pylon and tank drag factored in from the beginning.
A/P would not hold BALT turning HDG turns. Not sure if this is an older bug, but landing light remained on until all lights were cycled off, regardless of LL switch position.
-
Victory103, thanks for your feedback!
There are a lot of big and small things I am not fully satisfied with:
- Since the last .air changes and my attempts to adjust loadout contact points I have noticed too that the yaw and roll input is somewhat off, as you have. One problem is that CS gauges seem to have hardcoded long./lat. values for center and external tanks and weapons loadout, that change the airplane's center of gravity quite a lot in comparison to Jimi's default setup. To fix these issues I have some workarounds in my mind, but did not have the time to implement and test them yet: a) removing CS loadout menu, and adjusting loadouts directly within aircraft.cfg with 'neutral' cp values for additional fuel and weapons ('quick and dirty') b) trying to compensate through .air file changes ('long and complex').
- Drag, parasitic and induced: NATOPS compliant values currently do not match with the hardcoded scalars CS uses for different loadouts (CS Loadout parasite drag scalars: A-A: 1.22, A-G: 1.30, Clean/BA: 1.00, Train: 1.06, Max:1.34). My intention is to create a single version for all FSX, CS and NH versions that should be as close as possible to NATOPS.
- Gear contact points: When the airplane is standing on the ground the gear settings seem too high, it should be more compressed. But changing the respective values also limits the compression ratio, so carrier landings will result in much harder 'hits' resulting in crashes, not to mention the graphical animation how the gear extends when you lift off the ground or roll through bumps in the grass.
- Tailhook and launch bar contact points: Currently I have placed these cps where they would be located geometrically correct in the real world. As I noticed later, it made catching the cables much more challenging, compared to what it was before, and may result in some flip overs.
- Trying to narrow an issue down with the landing lights, I forgot to remove the comments for the "gauge42=FX!Lights," in the panel.cfg before the release. This should fix the noticed issue with the landing light. As you may noticed, too, I have disabled Afterburner, Wingflex and Shockcone effects by default for reasons of performance optimization.
-
Here are some up-front screenshots of the new VX-31 'Dust Devils' no. 5210 'China Lake' texture for FSX and CS versions I just finished, and that will be included in the next v1.4.1 update. I wanted to do this textures for a long time, but somehow never got round to it. A new US Navy Centennial of Naval Aviation VFA-122 'Flying Eagles' no. 25 texture for FSX and CS versions will be included too.
Some more changes for the upcoming v1.4.1 release will be:
- Folder structure has been changed once more and hopefully finally, so no more annoying file copying of model files and gauges will be necessary - assuming corresponding FSX- and/or CS- 'FA-18' installations being present in the airplanes folder.
- texture.USN_VX-31_5210 'Dust Devils' China Lake
- texture.USN_VFA-122_25 'Flying Eagles' Centennial of Naval Aviation
- ... will be trying to address some of the issues in the above mentioned post, most likely pitch/roll behaviour in conjunction with cp and balance...
Peter
-
Update v1.4.1
Changelog:
- Folder structure has been changed once more and hopefully finally, so no more annoying file copying of model files and gauges will be necessary - assuming corresponding FSX- and/or CS- 'FA-18' installations being present in the airplanes folder. See readme...
- texture.USN_VX-31_5210 'Dust Devils' China Lake added
- texture.USN_VFA-122_25 'Flying Eagles' Centennial of Naval Aviation added
- airfile entry no. 1534 'Wing Aerodynamic Center' (Longitudinal Offset=0) added. "If R1534 is omitted in the AIR-file, MSFS tries to calculate an 'appropriate' offset itself based on parameters in the AIR-file and aircraft.cfg." that seemed to be the cause for erratic pitching behaviour.
I stumbled upon this very useful document that can be download from the AVSIM library: 'Flight Dynamics in Microsoft Flight Simulator' (2012) by Yves Guillaume
Link: http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/fsx-flight-model-documentation-available.332348/
Direct Link: http://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=170811
Peter
-
Update v1.5
Changelog:
- Due to some issues between aircraft.cfg and .air file leading to irregular flight behaviour, I had to revert back to the old folder structure requiring files to be copied.
- Finally finished sifting through the textures collection. For the CS/FS versions there are now more than 140 textures available, uncompressed size is more than 1.4 GB for each version. Although I am not quite finished tweaking some minor issues and irregularities I noticed, it is good enough for a general release.
- added new USMC_VMFAT-101_222 'Medal of Honor' version texture of my own
- For the NH version I have slightly adjusted the Blue Angels color saturation, and integrated the new textures FIN-AF, RAAF, RCAF and VMFAT from 'Kea' and 'Azframer'. Thanks again.
Peter
-
A question, and a side note, if I may be so bold:
Does v1.5 replace or add-to the v1.4 folder?
And the side note: I worked at VMFAT-101 back when they were the F-4N training squadron at MCAS Yuma, Az. They had 32 birds, give or take (lost 1 to the elevator problem...). BIG squadron, plenty of work, especially with the AWG-10A, which was horribly unreliable...
I was AIMD AVI W/C 630 (I-level radar repair, from the Aero-1A up through the AWG-10C) from Jan 01, 1980 through Oct 27, 1987. Rank of Sgt (E-5), which I held from Oct '81 till I was discharged (Honorable) in Oct. 87. I was, literally, the senior Marine Corps-wide E-5, by date-of-rank. Had it's perks :) The reason was a lack of slots in our MOS. During my 6 years as a Sgt, they promoted a total of 4 persons to SSgt (E-6). I won't go into the politics of that little fiasco. I had 4.0 Fit-Reps almost the entire 6 years, and no disciplinaries, so the lack of promotions wasn't my fault.
Anyway, enough of my whining. Thanks for throwing in the '101 textures. I appreciate it!
Pat☺
-
Pat: You are welcome, v1.5 is a complete replacement otherwise I would have left prior v1.4.x versions in the downloads. Thanks for asking.
The reason behind it for not releasing lots of incremental updates is that in order to avoid conflicting names with duplicate or similar textures, I often adjust tail numbers and corresponding folder structures, in order to keep them both. Because I do not want to discriminate between one texture and an other for various reasons and because one might prefer one over the other or vice versa. Second, I often realize some changes that need to be addressed throughout the list for each texture, so a complete replacement is the most elegant way to do so. Simple updates would leave unused/old folders and files on the system, cluttering it over the time.
-
Update 1.5a
Changelog:
- warning tone for overspeed removed
- shockcone effect temporarily disabled, because it triggers gunfire and smoke effects inadvertently at speeds above mach 1.0
- some more changes to .air file and aircraft.cfg in order to improve flight dynamics
Peter
-
Thanks for the answer :) As they say, the only stupid question...Although I tend to have a plethora (big word for the day...) of questions on nearly every subject. I would rather ask, than stay in the dark...
Pat☺
-
Curious of your thoughts on this Peter, still no spill ducts yet. Pilot is missing his textures too. Getting close, I have to be done in 3 days because it is all I have on my trial. I really like the Corel now that I am starting to get used to it.
-
Nice work, Azframer.
Do not worry about the pilot textures, these 'should' be placed/found in the general folder 'texture' because they are usually identical for all models apart from a few exceptions, e.g. Clean/Blue Angels loadout.
In general one needs to address only five files: CP_F18_x_T.dds, x=1,2,3,4,6 in order to finish a complete texture.
As I do not have the original photos you are basing this texture repaint on, here is what I noticed so far - some of these may not be applicable. These are just small issues and could be addressed later, too, in case you run out of 'trial days':
- transition areas between surface colors on different .dds files
- numbering
- non skid surfaces
- port side spill ducts
You should focus your effort on the transition areas between surface colors on different .dds files because they are usually the most difficult ones to address to, and the numbering in case you still have time.
Best regards, Peter
(Having marked, what I noticed in the screenshots you provided below. Thanks again for your effort, much appreciated!)
-
This is what I have been trying to work off of. Something that gives me all views. The Splinter version I was lacking some views so I improvised a little on it, even found a model of same plane to give me some what of a top view of it. I did find a real picture of another plane from VFA-12 in same color scheme and there are numbers on outer vertical stabs, small but they are there, even the diagram I've posted I can now see them but I overlooked them being blurred really bad.
Picture can be seen here: http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/1/1/7/1600711.jpg
-
Update 1.5.1
Changelog:
- finished adjustments/corrections of textures for FSX/CS versions
- incorporated latest textures from 'Kea' and 'Azframer'
Have fun! - Peter
-
For the life of me I can not find the cause of the strip of dark blue in between the wing and aileron on right wing, I completely painted the gap to the point of no gap being there and it is still darker blue. The grey area at hinge point I have not been able to find where that is as of yet. I am working on transitions of colors and different surfaces on the dds, boy do I wish this was made easier, we need a editing tool that allows you to do editing in full model format. This is a lot harder than some of the Boeing 777 that I have done in the past for sure.
-
Texture update 1.5.2 for NH version:
Changelog:
- added three new textures (Hornet_Test, USMC_VMFA-225_01, USMC_VMFAT-101_222)
- added Azframer's latest aggressor texture with some modifications (USN_VFC-12_06)
Peter
-
Texture update 1.5.2a for NH version:
Changelog:
- added two new textures: Hornet_Prototype1 and Hornet_Prototype2
- small texture adjustments throughout the entire pack
Have fun!
Peter
-
Update 1.6.0
Changelog: CS and FSX versions
- small texture fixes throughout the pack
- hi_alpha flight dynamics adjusted a bit
- smokesystem adjusted, removed need to rename certain effects file names
- sonic boom effect reintegrated
Changelog: NH version
- small texture fixes throughout the pack
- hi_alpha flight dynamics adjusted a bit
- smokesystem adjusted, removed need to rename certain effects file names
- original NH VC reintegrated, HUD position and size adjusted, eyepoint adjusted
- VC mirrors adjusted
- weapons textures for Mav and Zuni changed
- sonic boom effect reintegrated
- wing flex effect reintegrated
Have fun!
Peter
-
I don't know how y'all keep this up. It amazes me how you manage to improve on perfection, but you all seem to keep doing it! Thank you for another pack. I am running out of room on my HD just with all these updates coming so fast-n-furious! Oh well, that's what DVDs are for!
Never slow down guys!
Pat☺
-
Update 1.7
Changelog:
- Canopy glass transparency adjusted (NH version)
- BA colors adjusted (sorry for having screwing that up, got new monitors until I realized how bad it was before)
- Specular maps: reflective & non reflective for different textures
- Bump maps modified / added were missing
- AOA limiters added (preventing backflips during tight turns at slow speeds at high AOAs), better overall compliance with NATOPS
- G limiters slightly adjusted, in order to prevent breaking g limits due to reduced yoke input
- Wing sweep reverted back to 20 deg, due to lowered LEFs at high AOAs - sweep at quater chord is more realistic at subsonic flight (better pitch authority) - sweep at leading edge mainly relevant for supersonic flight performance (deflection 'due to mach' parameters)
- Elevator effectiveness function adjusted, easier to pull high AOAs at slow speeds up to the limits
- Empty weight balance slightly adjusted, giving better pitch authority during flights with low fuel state
- Sideslip due to bank angle adjusted / slightly reduced, resulting in an overall more controlled flight behaviour
- Weight of gun (without feeding system) added to station_load including weight of ammo
- Narrowed shockcone lower and upper thresholds closer around mach barrier
Have fun!
Peter
-
Update 1.7.2
Changelog:
- In my effort to battle backflips it seems that I have misread/misunderstood NATOPS (11.1.3), because I somehow assumed they were talking about AOA 'limiters' when in fact they are talking about 'limits' not 'limiters'. So, as I understand it now, you should not break these boundaries (due to overstress, leaving stable flight envelope, etc.) buy you can if you want/need to. This update will fix it.
Peter
P.S. At least I have had some fun messing with the coding. ;)
-
@hd764jvgd843
this is awesome,
but can you please not use Zippy for a D/L agent. it wants to give spam along with your D/L. maybe use Google as your D/L'er
-
Thanks xmozartx,
glad to hear you like it.
Concerning the DLs I am sorry, but I have not found any better agent that lets you pin files without a dedicated account and unlimited bandwidth. To be safe, I rechecked the links with a naked IE (without AV, but with an adblocker) - worst case scenario - and it did not give my any spam whatsoever, just the files. Just for the kick of it, I verified MD5 hashes too and nothing was changed/injected. So, you should be safe.
In case you are worried about spam, use an adblocker, the 'big G' and the 'small f' should be a no go without saying. Having worked several years in the IT security industry, I tend to have a somewhat strong opinion upon certain privacy and security issues.
Peter
-
this is what im getting. see attached pic
if you have a Gmail acct. use google drive for your d/l and make it public
-
i had asked this question on another post here but it does not seem to get a reply. i am getting these black bands on the DDI's. see attached pic
-
this is what im getting. see attached pic
if you have a Gmail acct. use google drive for your d/l and make it public
xmozartx, I am sorry but I do not have an account with the big G, for the above mentioned reasons. The screenshot you posted shows that this specific ad is triggered as an extension to your chrome browser. So, try using a different browser (i.e. Firefox) for downloading, this might help. Consider using an ad blocker, too.
Peter
-
i had asked this question on another post here but it does not seem to get a reply. i am getting these black bands on the DDI's. see attached pic
The background of my DDIs is completely black, see the screenshot. Have you installed any specific addons that might interfere? Are you using FSX, which edition, addons, etc?
I have had a similar problem a few years back of alternating graphical glitches while flying in FSX, it looked like a faulty graphics driver and it almost drove me mad, until I did a complete reinstall step-by-step and checked each time after I installed an addon, airplane, etc. Finally I found the bug, which was caused by a faulty texture addon installation process, that did not even showed an error. If nothing else helps you might have to consider a step-by-step reinstallation. If you have more than one HDD and enough space, I suggest making a backup copy each time of the fsx folder, before you install something new, so you can revert back to the last known good condition in case anything is messed up during the installation of an addon. This might take some time but it can help you finding the issue.
Peter
-
Pardon the asking of yet another "stupid question", but I was wondering something. Every time there is a new version on page one here, I always delete the old version I have installed, and install your new one. LOVE the way they fly, I really do, and the paints are awesome. Now to my question: I have a few HUD add-ons for FA-18's. Do I need to install any of them into the FSXBA or NH models I keep getting in this thread? There is "NEW_Realistic_HUD_for_the_FSX_Hornet.zip", and "3FA18HUD.zip". I am just wondering is I need to add either of them into the ones I DL and install? I know you all have made an incredible plane and FDE's, including the cockpit and it's sytems, BUT: Is there any need to install an add-on HUD to your amazing work? Is there a "better" HUD made by someone and available for DL? I have NO problem with yours, believe me, I just want the best possible experience, after all.
Thanks for any answer that you may provide!
Pat☺
-
Not a stupid question to me, I quit downloading and making any changes now the come so fast now it seems. I gave up on all now.
Rick
-
Oh, not me. I love this bird, and every upgrade just makes it better. I am amazed every time I fly it, and it just get's better and better. The work they've put into this bird staggers me, as does the variety (and quality!) of the liveries.
Heck, they even made up the livery for VMFAT-101, whom I worked for back from '80 to'86! Of course, they were flying F-4's out of Yuma, Az. back then but it's the same paint job and almost the same insignia. They just substituted a Hornet for the Lead-Sled. Kinda nostalgic for me ;D.
And in case you are wondering, no, I wasn't a Nasal Radiator, no offense meant to the Officers out there wearing the Wings of Gold! I was a Sergeant of Marines, working on the Radar systems at I-Level. Component level repair they just don't do any more. Now they let the computer tell them what board, R&R it and throw the old one away, essentially. Wiring problems need a tech rep. Even then, I had to write the Boolean Equation for a problem they had with an F/A-18 when they first transitioned at VMFA-333, whom I spent a year with. Anyhow, that's where I took my user nae from: The F-4 Phantom, and we were called Tweaks, because that's what we called making alignments. A daily task on the AWG-10A, let me tell you! Hence: PhantomTweak.
Ok, there's my life's story no one asked for...
But that's why I keep getting the updates as they occur. Too good for me to pass up anything!
Pat☺
-
I have a few HUD add-ons for FA-18's. Do I need to install any of them into the FSXBA or NH models I keep getting in this thread? There is "NEW_Realistic_HUD_for_the_FSX_Hornet.zip", and "3FA18HUD.zip"
This mod is based on Jimi's New FSXBA Hornet, and it started as a port of features, including the HUD, for the FSX and CS versions. You do not need to add any additinal HUD add-ons, the ones provided are the latest ones. I have not seen any better/more realistic ones out there, but if you want me to have a look at the above mentioned ones, please post a link where to get them, and I will give it a try - I am always open to suggestions and improvements.
Not a stupid question to me, I quit downloading and making any changes now the come so fast now it seems. I gave up on all now.
This mod is a work in progress, and it will probably never be truely finished - flying like a 'real' Hornet - because the sim has limitations, our time and effort is limited and we learn as we go along, so we have to make compromises in order to achieve something that gets close to the real deal within an overseeable workload. It is a hobby after all, done for recreational purposes, so fun has to come first! This also means, at least in my case, the topic of interest rotates every few weeks, sometimes days, from liveries to flight dynamics, contact points, etc. and back. This might result in frequent updates.
The other reason why I sometimes hammer out many iterations/updates is because I want to share the modifications that I have done, so you can provide feedback more easily concerning certain features that were changed, if you want to.
Best regards, Peter
P.S. Concerning the HUD for the NH version, you might notice, that when you zoom in e.g. for a landing approach, that the quality of the HUD in the VC is somewhat degraded compared to the HUD in the FSX VC. This is a side effect of my effort to adjust the point of view in the cockpit (NH version), I had to adjust the size of the HUD in order to fit it to the HUD glass (shrink and reposition). I did this because I did not like the original VC point of view, because it somewhat felt that my nose would always touch the HUD glass, being much too close. The alternative being porting the FSX VC to the NH version, but that caused other issues, too. So, I finally opted for the adjustment of the original NH VC point of view, resulting in a minor shrinking and repositioning of the HUD. It allows for a more open (broader/widescreen) look around while in flight.
-
Thanks for the reply, Peter, I appreciate the info. http://simviation.com/1/download?file=NEW_Realistic_HUD_for_the_FSX_Hornet.zip (http://simviation.com/1/download?file=NEW_Realistic_HUD_for_the_FSX_Hornet.zip), Originally posted on this forum by a user named Neutrino back in '10 (so much for "new") in a thread by the same name is one and the other I saw right off the bat was http://simviation.com/1/download?file=3FA18HUD.zip (http://simviation.com/1/download?file=3FA18HUD.zip). Both are Simviation, and as I mentioned, the first was published in a thread in this very forum also. Have I tested either one? No, altho I'm now strongly tempted to try out the first one.
HOWever, since they are both for the FSX Acceleration FA-18, I am wondering, given all the updates y'all do all the time, you probably will have already seen them, and improved the HUD into what it is now. I was just being nosey about the HUD, since I fly a lot through it, and I am a panel add-on/modifying junkie :)
But you are most welcome to check them out and see if they might give you any ideas or a base to start another round of updates :D
OK, late edit: I just tried the FS version of mod 1.7. The NH works great, no complaint...yet :) The FS version mod 1.7 references the model.c folder. Unfortunately, there IS no .mdl file in it. There is a Model.cfg, but no *.mdl, like the NH has in all it's model folders. FSX-SE also gives an error message about it, saying "The model cannot be displayed". Am I doing something wrong? Thanks for any answers you may give me :)
Pat☺
-
The New Realistic HUD made by J.R. (neutrino) was further developed into the Combat Hornet HUD, which was further developed for the MadCatz Combat Pilot Hornet, which later became the FSX Blue Angels Hornet and has had additional modifications since then. The current FSX Blue Angels Hornet (as of the time of this post, available here (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,6944.msg90134.html#msg90134)) is the most up to date version and doesn't require additional updates.
-
Thanks for the clarification, Orion.
Since I tend to integrate each new release of FSXBA Hornet into this mod before I make additional modifications, you will always have the latest versions of HUD, gauges, effects, etc. available, based on the current FSXBA release.
Pat: Please, check the readme included for the FS version.
From original FS (meaning, Flight Simulator X) 'FA-18' folder copy/paste from there into the respective folders
- two 'model' files (FA-18_Interior.mdl, FA-18.mdl) from folder 'Model' to folder 'Model.c'.
I abbreviate FSX with FS (Flight Simulator) so it is in line with CS and NH version, sorry for the misunderstanding, I will try to be more specific in the next readme!
-
What, a GUY? Read the directions??? Noooooooo!!
Seriously though, not your fault. It's what I get for thinking i know what I'm doing. I guess I got cocky, but I do appreciate your help.
One more Q if I may be so bold: I installed the NH version as per every readme I can find. Yeah, NOW I read them. I installed the textures for it also, the v1.7 version, all off of page one of this thread. As near as I can figure, it's a stand-alone, separate from the FA-18C_FSXBA2014 FLT15.2. Made from it, but separate from it.
Ok, on to the meat of the problem. I have no textures to view! every different one I've tried shows the same thing, preview and in the world, as it were. To wit, just a grey aircraft with no makings, colors, nothing. Great detail, but kinda dull, IMO :) It seems as though it's "seeing" the S texture bmbs, but not the T bmps, if you see what i'm saying. Like CP_F18_1_S.bmp, but none of the _T versions of the same file...
As I read the directions on page one, each zip file is clearly named (thank you!), IE: NH airplane v1.7, NH textures v1.7, and NH alternate FDE and panel gauge v1.7. I unzipped the airplane to the Sim, np, the textures into that folder just created. Left the alternate FDE till I get this texture thing squared away. I even read through the aircraft.cfg file (not being a total tyro at adding textures) and all seems in order, as far as each texture folder name and all the different variation and title lines for each texture go. I do see the different thumbnails on the selection page (the squadron emblems). But no "different" textures once selected.
If it makes any difference, I am using FSX-SE.
Can you tell me what I did wrong? Even a small hint? I know, I keep messing things up, and I really am grateful for all the time you take getting my tail out of the various cracks I keep sticking it in, and feel dumber and dumber for the silly mistakes I make...
Pat☺
-
As near as I can figure, it's a stand-alone, separate from the FA-18C_FSXBA2014 FLT15.2. Made from it, but separate from it.
This is so you can keep the mod side by side with other Hornet versions for easier comparison, that is why I choose a different naming for the mod versions.
The CS version being the exception from the rule, because the path is hardcoded somewhere.
NH airplane v1.7, NH textures v1.7, and NH alternate FDE and panel gauge v1.7. I unzipped the airplane to the Sim, np, the textures into that folder just created. Left the alternate FDE till I get this texture thing squared away.
I am not quite sure what are you trying to do. What do you exactly mean by the abbreviation FDE?
The corresponding NH textures need to be extracted into the 'NH_FA-18C' folder in order to work. I have checked the downloads and everything seems to be in order, as far as I can tell. In case you want to rename 'NH_FA-18C' folder you will have to rename the path found in each texture.cfg for each texture.
-
What do you exactly mean by the abbreviation FDE?
Y'know, I never thought about it. I know the initials are used to mean "The flight parameters for a particular airplane." in the sim world. Like "Dino just published an update to the F-14 FDE's. He changed the .air and aircraft.cfg to make it fly even more realistically". I thought it was universal, I apologize!. I meant to indicate the airplane_v1.7.2_NH_FA-18C.7z file. Am I wrong in thinking that's just a slightly different set of flight parameters for the airplane_v1.7.0_NH_FA-18C.7z version?
I just found this, in a PDF file on FlightSim: Flight Dynamics Editor (FDEditor)
, which is an .air file editor, basically, included in the file Flight Dynamics for Microsoft Flight Simulator.pdf as a reference to what software he used to help write the PDF.
But anyway, I'll keep working. It may be due to FSX-SE being so many folder levels deeper down, in the Steam folder, than a sim normally is. I did extract airplane_v1.7.0_NH_FA-18C.7z into the /D:/Temp/Steam/Steamapps/common/FSX/Simobject/airplanes (note: That's where I installed FSX-SE) folder as directed in the instructions, the effects in FSX/effects, and textures_v1.7.0_FS_FA-18C.7z into the folder thus created in that location. I am presuming (stupid thing to do, I know :) ) that I did it all properly, and I'll finger it out eventually, you wait and see!!
Thanks very much for all the great help so far! Good luck, and I'll keep my eye open (yeah, just one) for the next great update! Great flights to all!
Pat☺
-
Just a quickie update: I got the NH Blue Angel #2 texture to work. Just picked a random choice, easy to remember (for me), definitely not having any delusions of grandeur (or is that gender??). I copied everything in the FS version's Blue Angel 2 texture folder, and replaced what was in the NH Blue Angel 2 texture folder. I kept the texture's zip file (textures_v1.7.0_NH_FA-18C.7z) as a back-up, of course. NOW I have at least one airplane with functional textures for the NH version.
No way am I going to spend all my time doing this to every texture, but at least one VMFAT-101 texture will come over, since I used to work for them back when they were a F-4 Phantom squadron on MCAS Yuma. Just for my own enjoyment.
I'm still certain I did something wrong, but I'll keep working on it.
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat,
I just can't figure why you would have such troubles getting the mod to work under FSX-SE.
Do you have the same issues getting Jimi's 'New FSXBA Hornet' to work (FA-18C_FSXBA2014 FLT15.2) or is the issue just occurring with my mods (CS/FS/NH)?
If it is of any help to you I prepared a single NH mod upload including aircraft and textures, so you have to copy only this single folder into your airplanes folder. Here you go: (link removed)
Please, tell me if it works, so I can remove the link - this is just a testing version I am working on for comparison of flight dynamics.
Peter
-
SIR! Reporting as ordered! ;D
All textures tested (10 of them) fully operational, preview and "in the world".
You say this isn't an "operational" mod, like 1.7.2, correct? Is there something I can do to make a mix of the two? Like put the non-textural (just for something to call it) .air and aircraft.cfg files in this folder? Or put the textures from the textural folder you just included into the non-textural folder? Move the model folders over, one direction or the other old>new or new>old)?
I don't have the faintest idea where-in lieth the rub, but if I can make 1.7.2 have texture I'll be ecstatic!
To answer your other questions: No, I have no trouble at all with FA-18C_FSXBA2014 FLT15.2, nor do I have any problems with the FS_FA-18C, version 1.7.2. I don't have Combat Sim (CS), so I can't speak to that version, I'm afraid.
I sure do appreciate all the time you are putting into helping one guy, I really do. I know you have much better things to do with it (your time :) ).
Pat☺
-
Glad to hear that I could help!
If you combine airplane mod and texture pack and update the way I intended, all files and folders should be in the same order as in the single folder you downloaded. If you like you can give it a try. Probably my instructions are somewhat misunderstanding, I will work on that.
File structure will be changed in the coming release, in order to facilitate copying of required files for the FS and CS versions, so do not worry about this one. Most of the changes I did have been reverted back to v1.7.2 so there should not be too many differences, for the time being.
I hope you have not been too much frustrated in your efforts trying to fit it all together in the right order. Currently I am, so I can relate to that, because some of my changes of cp's and flight dynamics did not work as intended and I have to get back to square one in order to find a different approach.
Best regards, Peter
-
Nope, no frustration (ok, a teensy bit), except with my inability to figure out where I go wrong :) If something works good for everyone else but not me, in my thinking, it's my fault someplace, and I work it from that angle. I sincerely appreciate the help you've been giving me, and am grateful you spend the time and effort to do so.
I'm sorry I mess up the directions you provide. I honestly thought I was better than this at adding airplanes and their textures to one another, but I'm mostly an FS9 guy. FSX-SE is a bit new to me, and I strongly suspect this is where my mistakes creep up on me.
Ok, as I understand things, I can take and fly the one you just gave me for DL all I like and it's working just fine, yes? If so, then I am more than happy, and will be looking forward to v1.8.0, or whatever it will be :D
BTW: I have Jimmi's Prototype v1.55, for what that's worth, but it has some problems in tight corners and very slow, on-speed AOA problems with sudden jumps of the control positions, causing a jump in the aircraft un-commanded by me. For example, behind the boat, let's say about 5 miles, no wind, gear down, full flaps, and on-speed, on AOA. Fuel about 2.5. Airpseed about 135 or 140 KIAS to hold angels 1.2 to drive to the tip-over point. if I change the throttle even a little bit, the nose will take a jump up or down in response, by about 5 degrees. Other than things like that it's great. I know, this isn't the right place for this but I thought you'd like to see an example.
Thank you very much for all the great work! Keep the updates rollin' in man.
Pat☺
-
Peter,
Thank you SO much for clarifying the instructions on page 1! NOW I can see what goes where! Did you know until I read them a few minutes ago, I thought the CS initials meant Combat Sim? Show's ya how little I know, compared to how much I thought I knew :D
Thanks again, I appreciate it. If it matters to no one else, it sure made a huge difference for me!
Pat☺
-
Upgrade: 1.8.0
Changelog:
Overall:
- Folder structure changed, moved model version qualifiers to the back of folder names
- Moments of inertia changed, in relation to empty weight - better roll authority
- Empty weight CG position moved backwards (-34.2), where it should be
- Sideslip due to bank angle adjusted in conjunction with changed empty weight CG position
- Station + fuel longitudinal position, moved backwards in accordance with empty weight CG
- Gear contact points: overall height lowerd, max compression and more stiff while standing on the ground
- Flaps.N section: added lift/drag/pitch scalars for further fine tuning of flight characteristics
- Wing incidence (at root) and 'overall' wing twist (-3.0) to incidence at wing tip adjusted
- Brake strength slightly increased
- Tailhook length + position adjusted
- Wing aerodynamic center, 1534 table added in order to stabilize/balance airplane in conjunction with pitch auto trim
- Small texture changes throughout the packs: FS, CS and NHs
New Hornet:
- C version Training model added
- D version Clear, Clear_BA, and Training model added, including texture adjustments where appropriate
- C/D versions separated to facilitate texture and panel adjustments
- Various texture improvements, thanks to Ahmenace
- Internal turbine AB effects added
- Small corrections to weapon textures
- Shift+E, 3 will trigger animations (ladder, covers and blocks) now, due to disabled pirouette gauge/pirouette.xml
Note:
Overall these four airplane mods including textures will almost take up to 5 GB of uncompressed disk space.
Have fun!
Peter
-
Two questions, if i may be so bold:
1) I've been using the AHMenace texture files in place of the originals in the NH and FS FA-18C v1.72 models I downloaded most recently. They are great, too. With one teensy little detail (yeah, I'm a pain, I know): at night, the flaps/gear indicator lites below the secondary EIS (I think it's called) stay on all the time if the panel lites are on. Makes it seem as though the gear and full flaps are down all the time. They work normally in daylight. It's a small point, but I like to cross-check.
2) I am guessing that the Pirouette Gauge in Jimi's FA-18C_FSXBA2014 FLT15.2 is not needed in this version? It seems to work great in all the planes I've seen from Jimi, and I understand why you took it out, but how will affect the way the plane flies when in a tight turn? I've seen the Angels pull than maneuver in their shows, and tried it myself in the aforementioned v15.2, and I think it's a great way to pull a reversal on someone. Besides that, it's just plane fun, no pun intended ;D
Just curious. You know me. By the by, thank you very much for all the effort you put into this project. This plane just get's better and better, and more fun to fly, and to see. I sure appreciate all the effort you and all the others put into all this.
Pat☺
-
Thanks Pat for your kind words, and pointing out these issues.
- I've stumbled over the flaps/gear indicator issue at night, too but have not been able to resolve it yet.
- Another thing that has been bugging me for ages are the formation lights at night, but I have not found a way to make upper ones for daylight transparent, so they will not interfere at night when formation lights are disabled.
- Concerning the disabled/removed pirouette gauge I have not noticed any differences in flight dynamics so far, so you should be able to pull these maneuvers even without the gauge. Please report in case you notice otherwise.
-
Still working on the pirouette logic. It has been put on the back burner for now. According to NATOPS, the logic is triggered when the aircraft is over 25 deg AOA (i think), and stick and rudder input provided in the same direction simultaneously.
Advise a word of caution with adjusting flap drag values. One of the primary methods I used for adjusting drag values was landing speeds. Using NATOPS, you should be able to calculate the landing speeds based on aircraft weight. You should also be able to derive an approx. RPM needed to keep the correct glideslope. Make sure the flaps and landing gear drag settings jive so that you are able to achieve the correct numbers.
As for MOIs, be care here, the characteristics I placed on the aircraft are based on results derived from the formula listed in the SDK, from characteristics noted while flying an actual F/A-18 simulator used by the Navy/Marine Corps in Miramar, and by noted documentation from the Blue Angels as they mentioned having to constantly "counter roll" the jet to abruptly stop rolling inertia while doing rolling maneuvers.
Almost done with this long underway at sea. Should be able to get back to work on the jet in about a month. Can't wait.
Thanks for continuing to work on this thing Peter. Much appreciated.
-
Should be able to get back to work on the jet in about a month. Can't wait.
You think YOU can't wait?!? :)
I can relate, though. Been "over there", and getting home was the best feeling! I am glad you'll be home soon. Take some time to BE home, and only then worry about a hobby. It matters. Did for me anyway.
Concerning the disabled/removed pirouette gauge I have not noticed any differences in flight dynamics so far, so you should be able to pull these maneuvers even without the gauge. Please report in case you notice otherwise.
I am still trying to make "good" comparisons. I want a valid comparison, not just "I think that...". I want to be able to point and say "This and that aren't as good, thus-and-so is better." whatever. I am no test pilot by any stretch, but the closer I can duplicate scenarios between the two versions, the more valid it should be. I think.
So I test:)
So far, I've started at 25,000'MSL, 250KIAS, same fuel load, no weight aboard except the pilot and wing-tip missiles, both adjusted in the Fuel & Payload select screen. Why those parameters? Gotta start someplace! What I do is start out in a left bank, about a 2.5G pull. I steepen the bank angle, thus AOA, and the G load while bringing the throttle up to compensate, until I am at full throttle. As far as I can without "blacking out". I hold it at 4.0G almost 90° bank, full throttle, until it departs. And they both always do, once AOA hits about 35-ish, which I expected. Usually after about 2.5-3 complete circles, and of course, the tighter I pull, the lower the airspeed drops, even in full AB, although the G load remains about constant.
So far, it appears to me that the FSXBA bleeds energy faster below the 200 kIAS point, and thus, departs sooner. I even managed, once, to enter an actual "spin". I used the Spin Recovery switch and got it out. Wound up down at about 7,000'. Scared the heck outta me, honestly, especially when running though my head was the NATOPS warning to eject by 10,000' under these circumstances. Not easy to eject from my easy chair, but for a second, I actually thought about reaching for the handle. Still not a member of the Martin-Baker club :)
Sorry, got sidetracked.
One question: All I've read about the F/A-18 says that it should be a "feet-on-the-floor" aircraft to fly, meaning it shouldn't need hardly any, if any at all, rudder input during normal flight. I've noticed that to simulate such a condition I need to use the ctrl+shft+U key combo (auto-rudder). I don't normally ever use auto-rudder, and never have, but in this case...
Is this correct on my part, or should I leave it off? IE: Are the turning characteristics inherent to the aircraft's geometry adequate to require little or no rudder input, or can the sim engine not figure out a way to do that? I've noticed that "normal" turns require only a very small rudder input to stay balanced, but Pirouetee-ing requires a lot, either version. Just curious.
Nothing to do with Pirouette, I think, but I am pretty sure I noticed that the NH version (opposed to FSXBA, for brevity. I'm lazy, sue me :) ) tended to drift left when in landing configuration, on-speed/on AOA. Full flaps, hook down about 147kias. No clue for certain that it wasn't my fault though. Perhaps I rolled a teensy bit left and didn't notice, I am not going to swear I didn't.
So far as I can tell.
Anyway, that's my opinion, and only an opinion, so far. I hope it's of some use to y'all.
Pat☺
-
Thank you all for your suggestions and feedback, much appreciated - it really helps a lot.
Concerning the MOIs, I took the values from the FA-18E which has a much higher empty weight and adjusted these values for an estimated 24700 lbs empty weight of the legacy hornet.
From a physical point of view, as much of the airplane's weight is distributed along the longitudinal axis, it makes sense that the pitch and yaw MOIs have to be within the same magnitude and that the roll MOI should be considerably lower. Thanks to your explanation Jimi, I understand now why these values were adjusted, to achieve the 'counter roll' behaviour, but I would suggest trying to achieve the desired behaviour through easing back on the aileron effectiveness and roll stability instead modifying the fundamental MOI values. I will try to realized a solution for the next update.
Concerning a reference airplane for tuning of flight characteristics, I have always been working with a standard A-A loadout including center tank, for my modding. Its a sort of a compromise considering the different NH loadouts - heavier than the empty loadouts Clean, BA, Training, and lighter than GBU, Mav and Zuni. As my modding started as a port of FSXBA features to the FS and CS versions, I intend to maintain compatibility within the three versions, so they should roughly fly the same based on loadout and configuration. This means working with the given parasite drag scalars due to CS loadout, because there is no way to change them. (parasite_drag_scalars, due to CS Loadout: A-A: 1.22 A-G: 1.30 Clean/BA: 1.00 Train: 1.06 Max: 1.34)
It would be very helping if we could use these values as a common base for future developments and flight tuning.
Since replicating a real FCS in order to dynamically compensate different weight distributions and its changes over time, due to loadout is out of reach (especially mine), as a working hypothesis, I moved all stations and fuel including pilot and gun CGs around the longitutinal axis to the empty weight CG position (-34.2 ft) as a starting point for balancing and tuning the airplane.
I have to admit that my knowledge and understanding concerning glideslope, RPM, approach speeds on aircraft weight, pitch etc. (NATOPS) is very limited, and I am more than happy for your suggestions and feedback on these subjects. What would really help me right now, if you could share some of your own testing scenarios adjusted for the above mentioned reference airplane, that I could base my tweakings on.
I know that replicating the exact flight behaviour throughout the entire envelope will be very difficult, perhaps impossible to achieve - but every described testing scenario, based on NATOPS, would be one step in the right direction.
Concerning the added drag/lift/pitch scalars for the flap.n sections, I could not resist tempering with them, and that they need to be in jive, as Jimi so elegantly put it, in order to replicate a realistic approach. Currently the bird's touchdown behaviour is questionable, and I will try to fix it with the next update.
FCS Auto_Rudder gauge is enabled by default and as far as I noticed it seems to be working fine because usually no additional rudder input is needed durning normal flight.
I usually use additional manual rudder input, without deactivating auto rudder, after a half loop in order to quickly spin the aircraft around - some sort of Immelmann maneuver. If you overdue it the bird will temporary spin out of control until you release the controls and it recovers. Pat, as you have mentioned spin recovery knob and Martin Baker ejection seat, do you know working keyboard shortcut combinations to triggere these?
Peter
-
Thanks for all the info Jimi and Peter!! You guys are a gold mine of data.
Off the bat, to the best of my knowledge, there is no ejection capability in FSX/FS9 at all, I was trying to make a little funny about reaching for the pretty black & yellow "handle" on an easy chair :) As to the spin recovery switch, no I don't know of a KB shortcut but if it's in there somewhere I'll dig it out! I would guess, however, that having said that, if it was up to me, I would bet Jimi would know, since I presume he placed the switch in the plane. I will look through the various gauges and switches in the Panel.cfg and see what I can find.
As to "in-flight" testing, I am still working on it. For some reason I have yet to ferret out (exactly what reason I mean) I can fairly easily shoot carrier traps all day long in the FSXBA version, but in the NH version, I wind up in the fantail every time. I hope the smoking lamp is out, so no one's back there! If I keep enough power on to miss the fantail, I overshoot the wires by at least 100', and if I try a nice smooth approach, starting at 600'AGL at 1 nmi from Mom, I am what seems way high. Any lower, way low. In the FSXBA, 600' @ 1nmi is perfect to trap a 3 wire. I am not certain, but it's probably just me. I am NOT a professional. I am also playing with the view point, ONLY in mine, for my personal taste. I almost always do in planes.
I WILL figure this out though. On land approaches, with a glideslope, I make a perfect touchdown every time, both versions, no problem. None of the carriers I have have a GS available though, why I have no idea. I know RW carriers have them, when the systems are up, anyway. IFOLS only goes so far. No pun intended. I'll figure it out :)
It seems like the NH has a little more engine power, but a slightly slower engine response. It also seems to bleed energy faster with the flaps full at 150KIAS or less. I believe this is due to the adjustments you made to the Aircraft.cfg flaps settings. I may take a look at the .air file also, and see what I can see in it, if it's ok with you. I've done a lot of work on this particular subject on Dino's F-14B in FS9, and as near as I can figure, the flaps react the same to all settings in FSX as well. I mean absolutely no offense to yourself, Jimi, or Dino. I just like to fiddle ;D If it bothers anyone, I'll leave it be. Are the flaps the entire reason? I doubt it, but their settings in the aircraft.cfg and .air files can make a big difference. I'll keep you informed.
I've also noticed that your beefing up the landing gear contact points setting has made a noticeable difference, allowing me to use the proper sink rate for landings. In the FSXBA the gear tend to take a lot more damage a lot more easily during even what I consider an "easy" touchdown on the boat, which isn't right. I know for a fact that about 825 FPS sink rate is correct, but the FSXBA seems to take damage at that sink rate, which isn't right. Anyway, small detail, not critical. I was going to get to it on my own eventually. Like I said, I like to "fiddle" :D
I hope all my rambling helps the project a little bit. This is an amazing bird, in all versions, and if I can contribute anything it's a big honor to me. As the man said, "Ahh'll be bach!"
Pat☺
-
Hey Phantom,
Welcome to the crew of fsx tweakers my friend! Sounds like you are going down the same path that myself, Peter, Sludge, Micro and many others have gone down in the pursuit of perfection in regards to accurate flight simulation.
Just wanted to say that I have no issues at all with changing or tweaking the various parameters of the aircraft. We are all here to learn, have fun and contribute our lessons learned.
In regards to the sink rate, how heavy are you when you are trapping? I remember I had the gear tolerance settings beefed previously, but then adjusted them due to feedback from Peter a while back. Make sure you factored in the weight here. I believe the max trap for Legacies are 33,000lbs. With everything on the hornet such as drop tanks and pylons, you need to be around 8K or below and at the correct decent rate to safely trap without damaging anything. If you are still having issues, let me know and I will re-investigate.
Just ran into this article while doing some research. Talks a LOT about the FCS system in the Super Hornet (which is derived from the Legacy in many regards). Definitely a good read for those interested.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=26&ved=0CEAQFjAFOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dtic.mil%2Fcgi-bin%2FGetTRDoc%3FAD%3DADP011127&ei=tUtTVYiWGYWlNvqmgKgO&usg=AFQjCNFcr5lf99gdDIcB7zRTG0P0woeyLw&sig2=ByIN6MM1COPjNG-EHaBEaA&bvm=bv.93112503,d.eXY
-
Hiyas Jimi, and ty for the warm welcome :)
I will read that PDF asap. Thanks for the referral. Like I said, you all are an absolute gold mine of fantastic data to play with.
I was looking at the gear parameters in the contact points section of both the 15.2 and the NH v1.8 versions of the C model yourself and Peter released. For brevity (and because I'm lazy!) I'll just call then the FSXBA and NH versions, if that's ok. BTW: would the FSXBA Prototype v1.55 be a better choice? It looks like the latest version from you, but I don't believe it's completed yet? I just want to use the best choice for tweaking on :)
Anyway, back to the gear: I have a question or two. I noticed entries 9, 10, and 11, basically the gear data for how they react to landing, especially 10 and 11, along with entry 5, the max descent speed for damage incurred, are a good deal lower that I have ever seen used before. Even the SDK online, which I utilize extensively, https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#mozTocId136011 (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#mozTocId136011), uses 3200 for that entry, even though that seems fast to me. I would think, though it gives me a headache, that that would be a place to start, although I haven't done the math for the descent rate. I guess I should.
I make sure I am at a fuel load of 5klbs for recoveries, so the plane's weight is below 31.5k total, to finally answer your question. I also try to enure my sink rate is below 850 FPM, although it seems more difficult on the NH version, for me. I am beginning to think it has to do with the changes to the flaps Peter has made. Again, still looking :)
I am doing recovery after recovery on a carrier (FCBG_ADE_TM FSXF-CarrierGroupMiramarPUB V4.0) with AICarriers.NET running, trying to see what I'm doing wrong, and perfect my technique, to try to eliminate as many variables as I can. I tried V5.0, but I get a crash messages anytime I'm in the recovery area for some reason. I am thinking of turning crash detection off entirely so I can use v5.0.
I'll keep y'all up-to-date on my progress, if any. Again, ty for the warm welcome, and I hope I can contribute a tiny little bit to this grand project. I an madly in love with both the FSXBA v15.2 and the NH v1.8 versions.
And now, I'm going flying ;D
Pat☺
-
Sorry for the delayed answer but I have been en route the last days.
Thanks for your kind works, Jimi.
Pat, from my side you are welcome too to tweak as much as you like. Feel free to mod yourself! Your feedback and suggestions will be welcome.
All things you have noticed and described so far I can confirm. They are probably in violation of NATOPS, I hope not too much. I will try to fix the most evident ones this weekend, so the plane does not bend the laws of physics too much. This especially includes the beefed up landing gear you have experienced, which is in fact a result of the changed flaps' lift and drag scalars, as the gear's damage thresholds remained unchanged.
Currently, some ideas of a simplistic/basic testing procedure as a starting point in order to get the mod within NATOPS are running through my mind. I will post these later for discussion, too.
Peter
-
Take your time, Peter. I quit being in a hurry many years ago. My feet just hurt too much any more to hurry. Makes more grey in my beard too, and I certainly don't need that!
I'll look forward to your input. Every little bit helps, that's for sure. Like I've always said, I am NO test pilot :) Thank you for the permissions. I appreciate it. Once I make any significant, substantive changes, I'll post then in this thread, or elsewhere, if you prefer. I have started the process, but it's a slow process, especially when I can only give it a few hours each day. But I will keep at it, as best I can!
Talk to you as and when we meet up in here :D
Pat☺
-
Just a short update, and a small question:
I think I may finally have gotten the flaps settings correct in the Aircraft.cfg and the .air file in the latest NH version. It fly's straight and level at 32k lbs weight, about 160 kts (roughly), 1,000' MSL, gear and full flaps down, 89-90% N2. I got this from the NATOPS, the Carrier Landing Pattern picture. It specifies these parameters for the downwind. A1-F18AC-NFM-000, Figure 8-2. Carrier Landing Pattern, pg. III-8-10, to be exact. I am very pleased so far. Now I need to see how they do when making turns at various speeds and the FCS deploys the flaps automatically. We shall see! Still playing with the gear settings, but getting there.
Ok, now the problem: I've found that when I make a right turn, level, 1,000 MSL, any speed or weight, even just bank that direction without pulling to make a turn, the rudder goes right also. Normal, perfectly normal. HOWEVER, when I am wings level again, the rudders stay cocked over to the right. I can re-zero the rudders by a twitch twist (ie: a quick twist and then relax the input back to 0 ) on the joystick, either direction. But I shouldn't have to do that. The rudders should return to 0 yaw when the bank angle does. I know there is a portion of the FCS controlling the rudders, but it seems there is a slight problem with it. I am far from an XML programmer, but I do play with them a little bit. I plan on taking a look to see twhat's going on, but since Jimi wrote the auto-rudder part of the FCS, any ideas or suggestions either of you can provide would be very gratefully accepted.
Thanks again for all your support! I hope I wind up helping make this incredible project just a hair better :)
Pat☺
-
Thanks for the update Pat.
Could you please post your final cfg and air files when you are done, I am interested to see what kind of adjustments you have made in order to get there. Currently I am stuck with some calculations for the flap's lift and drag values I intend to apply. For the legacy Hornet, LEF and TEF combinded should theoretically produce around three times of the original lift of the plain wing. I have to set this in relation to the actual flap sizes, span outboard, and balance it between LEF and TEF.
I also noticed that due to the CG moved backwards, the plane tends to pitch upwards after the touchdown, when you release the controls and do not apply breakes immediately. Trying to fix this issue I moved CGs a few feet forward again, and noticed that the appropriate lon. "wing aerodynamic center" value in order to balance the plane, together with the CGs will always equal -29 (e.g. -34 ./. -5, or -31 ./. -2). Guess what, +29 is the reference datum position value for the model, so I assume they must remain balanced somehow, but do not really understand why, yet - maybe just coincidence.
Concerning your question, I stumbled over a similar issue, too. In some very rare incidences you can encounter visual and/or control glitches, usually after too many resets and pausing the sim. Under normal conditions it does not seem to occur. I have flown in some cases for more than 3/4 hour doing wild maneuvers and stalls and everything worked perfectly to the last second of the flight and final approach.
I found that restarting the simulator, not resetting the sim, heals it. I do not know the cause of the issue, probably some sort of overflow. Like with the pitch auto trim, when during the develpment of textures the sim is reset very often, and is paused, the pitch auto trim will get confused spinning and crashing the plane once you release the sim from pause.
Do you have just a visual glitch or does the plane also drift to the right, control glitch?
Peter
-
Ok, now the problem: I've found that when I make a right turn, level, 1,000 MSL, any speed or weight, even just bank that direction without pulling to make a turn, the rudder goes right also. Normal, perfectly normal. HOWEVER, when I am wings level again, the rudders stay cocked over to the right. I can re-zero the rudders by a twitch twist (ie: a quick twist and then relax the input back to 0 ) on the joystick, either direction. But I shouldn't have to do that. The rudders should return to 0 yaw when the bank angle does. I know there is a portion of the FCS controlling the rudders, but it seems there is a slight problem with it. I am far from an XML programmer, but I do play with them a little bit. I plan on taking a look to see twhat's going on, but since Jimi wrote the auto-rudder part of the FCS, any ideas or suggestions either of you can provide would be very gratefully accepted.
If you have the new FCS that I programmed, released with the FSX Blue Angels Hornet 15.2 version (from this March 29, 2015 post (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,6944.msg90134.html#msg90134)), you can adjust the RudderPID section in the aircraft.cfg file. The value of Sideslip should contain three comma delimited numbers representing the proportional, integral, and derivative constants of the PID controller for the rudder.
The first value is a scalar for the amount of correction due to the current error (proportional). For example, at some given instant if we have 5 degrees of sideslip and want our sideslip angle to be 0 degrees (to have coordinated turns), the current error will be the difference between the value of the sideslip and the desired value, or 5 degrees. With the current error at 5 degrees, if the proportional value is 1, the current error is multiplied by 1 and we'll get 5% rudder input. With the current error at 5 degrees, if the proportional value is 2, the current error is multiplied by 2 and we'll get 10% rudder input.
The second value is a scalar for the amount of correction due to the sum of all the previous errors (integral). For example, if we consistently have 1 degree of sideslip and we want 0 degrees, each run of the PID controller loop will keep track of the error, adding it to the previous errors, so after 10 iterations we'll get a sum of 10 degrees. With the sum of errors at 10 degrees, if the integral value is 0.5, we'll get 5% rudder input. With the sum of errors at 10 degrees, if the integral value is 0.25, we'll get 2.5% rudder input.
The third value is a scalar for the amount of correction due to the rate of change of the error (derivative). For example, if the previous run of the loop had a current error of 2, but the current run of the loop has a current error value of 1, by subtracting the previous error from the current error, the rate of change of the error will be -1 degree per second (assuming one second constant intervals between runs of the loop). With the rate of change of the error at -1 degree per second, if the derivative value is 1, we'll get -1% rudder input. With the rate of change of the error at -1 degree per second, if the derivative value is 2, we'll get -2% rudder input.
The three rudder input values from the proportional, integral, and derivative calculations are added together to create the rudder input value sent to the simulator. This loop repeats on a per frame basis, continually performing the aforementioned calculations with new values to attempt to reach the desired value (in the case of the rudder, zero sideslip angle). For more information take a look at Tom's post here (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,6944.msg90219.html#msg90219) and do some research on PID controllers and control theory.
When you bring the rudder out of the neutral position (your quick twist), the FCS disables its control over the rudder resets the sum of all the previous errors back to zero. When the rudder returns to the neutral position the FCS resumes control based on the PID concept with the aforementioned parameters.
Anyways, long story short, try setting the second value of Sideslip under RudderPID in the aircraft.cfg to 0 and see if that helps. You may lose some of the auto-coordination effectiveness, though, so you may want to play with the other parameters as well.
Concerning your question, I stumbled over a similar issue, too. In some very rare incidences you can encounter visual and/or control glitches, usually after too many resets and pausing the sim. Under normal conditions it does not seem to occur. I have flown in some cases for more than 3/4 hour doing wild maneuvers and stalls and everything worked perfectly to the last second of the flight and final approach.
I found that restarting the simulator, not resetting the sim, heals it. I do not know the cause of the issue, probably some sort of overflow. Like with the pitch auto trim, when during the develpment of textures the sim is reset very often, and is paused, the pitch auto trim will get confused spinning and crashing the plane once you release the sim from pause.
Do you have just a visual glitch or does the plane also drift to the right, control glitch?
While that will happen when you reload the flight or aircraft too much, I don't think that's Pat's issue. See above.
-
WOW!! Thanks to you both for the help. Whoooo-eee! I wasn't quite expecting such a technical discussion of the PID system, Orion, but hey, I'm game to take a look and see what I can see! This will, of course, slow me down a ways while I learn this, but I was always a quick study (at least in schools, anyway, civilian and military), so I'm hoping...
As to the frequent resets, yes, I've been doing them a lot while working the Flaps, I call it Reloading to prevent confusion. I Reload an aircraft after .air, Aicraft.cfg, or Panel.cfg file, and I Reset the Sim, or Game, only as a last resort, usually after a Crash to Desktop. SE- seems too have a lot fewer of those, at least on my system, than either FS9 or FSX seem prone to. I will remember your advice, though, Pter, and apply it to my methodology (big word for the day). By the by, I understand entirely why you commented out the Pirouette gauge, but I had a thought: could it have to do with my rudder problem? I know it does afftect the rudders etc during "the" maneuver. So I re-enabled it (uncommented it), and haven't had a problem since, but not enough tests to be sure yet. More to come on that.
I will definately take a look at Mr. Orion's PID controller too. I've read some on PID controllers, and I comprehend the basics, now I'll have to get my hands dirty, as it were, and really get hard into them. Thank you for the guidance on that, Orion. Edit: The way I read this, by the way, my "quick twist" or sudden rudder pedal input/removal, causes the FCS to reset the PID controller for side-slip. Is that ALL rudder controller PID systems, or only the Side-Slip one? I am going to presume all until further notice. If there even are more than one in existence, that is. I will study :)
I will do my best to really work on this, but I do have a small real-world life, and my lovely wife comes first and foremost, so my progress is a bit slow. I will give you a head's up when I finalize (to my satisfaction, anyway) a section, like Flaps, or the Rudder thing, gear settings in the Contact Points, whatever. Which reminds me, on MY system, and it may just be my problem alone, I noticed that my wheels were sunk in about mid-hub level deep in the runway. I have fixed that little problem by changing the vertical setting of the gear's contact points, and the Static CG Height setting. A minor detail but hey, I can fix this for sure, so I did :) No criticism or complaining meant, just a minor, teensy little detail I know how to fix, that's all.
Thanks again to you both!
Pat☺
-
Ok, 1 last question, for now. The link you just provided is to a plane that shows up as "Prototype" in the ui_variation= field. Somewhere, and don't ask because now I can't find it, I got ahold of one labeled as "Prototype v1.55"
Which would be the latest release, please. I know it's a work in progress and not ready for release, with the PIDs yet to be perfected. No problem. I can play with them, no sweat. I wasn't though. I was working on Peter's v1.8.0 version. I can switch efforts if you prefer, but I strongly feel I am making progress, at least on the flaps and gear settings. Peter's doesn't have the PID controllers at all. Should I try to integrate them? It seems like a lot of changes to make...
Ok, ok, I'll stop before I go all the way down the rabbit hole here...
Pat☺
-
Edit: The way I read this, by the way, my "quick twist" or sudden rudder pedal input/removal, causes the FCS to reset the PID controller for side-slip. Is that ALL rudder controller PID systems, or only the Side-Slip one? I am going to presume all until further notice. If there even are more than one in existence, that is. I will study :)
Only the one controlling the rudder based on sideslip angle. There are three other PID controllers under the ElevatorPID section: AoA, PitchRate, and GForce. I think the AoA one might not be in the currently released version, though.
Ok, 1 last question, for now. The link you just provided is to a plane that shows up as "Prototype" in the ui_variation= field. Somewhere, and don't ask because now I can't find it, I got ahold of one labeled as "Prototype v1.55"
Which would be the latest release, please. I know it's a work in progress and not ready for release, with the PIDs yet to be perfected. No problem. I can play with them, no sweat. I wasn't though. I was working on Peter's v1.8.0 version. I can switch efforts if you prefer, but I strongly feel I am making progress, at least on the flaps and gear settings. Peter's doesn't have the PID controllers at all. Should I try to integrate them? It seems like a lot of changes to make...
Ok, ok, I'll stop before I go all the way down the rabbit hole here...
Pat☺
I'm not sure what 1.55 is, but the most recently released version I know of is in the post I previously linked to. You may need to edit the panel.cfg to remove duplicate/conflicting gauges -- remove Autoflaps and keep HornetFCS. HornetFCS includes all the functionality for the flaps in addition to the PID controllers for the fly-by-wire.
The only changes necessary for the PID controllers are the new ElevatorPID and RudderPID sections in the aircraft.cfg file and the entry in the panel.cfg for HornetFCS. However, the flight dynamics are adjusted in the FSXBA version to allow the PID controllers to more effectively control the aircraft. Without the adjusted flight dynamics, the flight controls may not behave properly with the FCS gauge running.
If you want to adjust the PID controller stuff, I'd recommend using the version posted by Jimi in the previously linked post.
-
The reasoning why I haven't switched to the latest prototype version yet, is that I wanted to properly understand MOIs, CGs, sideslip, the balancing and how it affects pitch, roll and yaw, before adding an other level of complexity in form of PIDs.
My intention was to set up a plane within the current configuration limitations that comes as close as possible, and then trying to use PIDs in order to overcome certain issues that cannot be fixed the conventional way.
The prototype version in its current state feels weird because PIDs are not properly tuned, and I am currently still struggling with the entire understanding of the conventional setup so I would not really know in what direction to tune certain PIDs and what else they might affect.
Pat, if you think it is worth a try, I can offer putting together an 1.8.1 version integrating PID functionality based on Jimi's prototype version. If you want to work with the prototype directly, that is fine by me, too. Let me know what you think.
Peter
Suggestion for an other issue: Currently we have many different loudouts, Clean/BA, A-A, GBU, etc using the same MOI and parasitic drag values, etc. One way fixing it is to create a new airplane for each loadout, but this will quickly blow required space out of proportion as the number of textures may increase.
The CS version has a gauge that changes between loadouts/models in our case, and changes certain parameters in the aircraft.cfg file.
If a similar solution could be realized via a gauge (switching between models) containing certain parameters (moi, drag, weight, etc.) for each model/loudout, we would have to make less compromises and could tailor flight performance more easily to the loudout/models.
Jimi, Orion, what do you think of it? Do you think such a gauge could be realized with a reasonable amout of work, or is such a thing out of reach?
-
Hey Gents,
Below I have posted the lasted on the PID bird. Little progress, but not too much since I've been out of pocket for a while. But I did play a little bit with it while I has in town this weekend. Some improvements here and there but still more work needs to be done. PIDs include AOA for landing and high AOA configurations, G for normal flight regimes, Pitch Rate for hands-off 1G, zero pitch rate trimming, and Rudder for yaw/turn coordination.
Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3So3WwTLPRZODVvalVtbWdLM3M/view?usp=sharing
In regards to working a solution that will allow one jet and multiple loadouts, I WISH. Creating this capability is currently beyond my reach, and for those that do know how to do such as thing, it will require A LOT of time energy and effort since we do not have the source files for this bird. That means having to decompile, make needed changes, and then recompile everything. Which means having to re-animate EVERYTHING. Something most aren't willing to do. I agree though, that will same a lot of space and make things a lot easier if we had that.
Thanks again and good luck.
-
My intention was to set up a plane within the current configuration limitations that comes as close as possible, and then trying to use PIDs in order to overcome certain issues that cannot be fixed the conventional way.
Isn't that like trying to simulate fly-by-wire flight dynamics without using a fly-by-wire flight control system? I mean, it worked fairly well for Dino's F-35, but if we're going to have an FCS, why not use it?
Suggestion for an other issue: Currently we have many different loudouts, Clean/BA, A-A, GBU, etc using the same MOI and parasitic drag values, etc. One way fixing it is to create a new airplane for each loadout, but this will quickly blow required space out of proportion as the number of textures may increase.
The CS version has a gauge that changes between loadouts/models in our case, and changes certain parameters in the aircraft.cfg file.
If a similar solution could be realized via a gauge (switching between models) containing certain parameters (moi, drag, weight, etc.) for each model/loudout, we would have to make less compromises and could tailor flight performance more easily to the loudout/models.
Jimi, Orion, what do you think of it? Do you think such a gauge could be realized with a reasonable amout of work, or is such a thing out of reach?
You can alias or reference models, panels, sound, textures, and even AIR files. You could simply set up multiple aircraft folders for each aircraft you want different flight characteristics for, and reference everything that doesn't need changing without duplicating anything. This way there would be minimal overhead (the only extra space would be the additional aircraft.cfg file, essentially).
-
In regards to working a solution that will allow one jet and multiple loadouts, I WISH. Creating this capability is currently beyond my reach, and for those that do know how to do such as thing, it will require A LOT of time energy and effort since we do not have the source files for this bird. That means having to decompile, make needed changes, and then recompile everything. Which means having to re-animate EVERYTHING. Something most aren't willing to do. I agree though, that will same a lot of space and make things a lot easier if we had that.
I know that we cannot touch the model files anymore from prior discussions, but I meant something slightly different. A gauge that could switch between the model files we currently have (changing the relative path and pointing to a different model), and as it does overwriting a few specified parameters (like: MOIs*, drag, etc.) in the aircraft.cfg. Like referencing/aliasing models, panels via a gauge. I know that it can be done, because the CS version uses it, although not for all parameters we need.
If someone could be interested in writing a sample gauge as a template that could switch between two models and changes a single demo parameter in the aircraft.cfg (like CS does for the parasite drag, stations and fuel) I could probably work my way from there adding all needed parameters and model paths we would need. The solution I have in mind would not require a separate GUI: Trigger the gauge via a key combination (like Shift+8 for the data gauge) and select from there via pressing e.g. 1,2,3,4... from a predefined list of available models the desired one, and when done trigger a reload of the aircraft to effectively switch via the changed references/paths in aircraft.cfg.
My problem is that I have no experience programming a gauge from scratch, and I admit that this is way out of my league, but I am good at tweaking things and working my way from there once I got a template to work with.
This is just a suggestion in order to get one step further with the New FSXBA Hornet towards more specific and realistic flight characteristics for each model we currently have.
Simply referencing/aliasing different models (as Orion suggested) could be a viable approach - even one I could realize. I cannot say why but I do not like the idea, yet, to create an aircraft folder for each model file, although textures could be referenced for all C/D versions separately, not to blow up required space. Currently I consider a gauge to switch between models being the more elegant solution, probably because it is out of my reach - like the grass is always greener on the other side of the river. If you think from your point of view that I am barking up the wrong tree here, please tell me so - awaiting your opinions on the subject.
My intention was to set up a plane within the current configuration limitations that comes as close as possible, and then trying to use PIDs in order to overcome certain issues that cannot be fixed the conventional way.
Isn't that like trying to simulate fly-by-wire flight dynamics without using a fly-by-wire flight control system? I mean, it worked fairly well for Dino's F-35, but if we're going to have an FCS, why not use it?
What I meant was getting the underlying physics right before introducing PIDs. To put it into a drastic picture: Not trying to tweak a Chessna via PIDs to fly like a Hornet. Sorry for not expressing myself right, but as I am not a native speaker, I have sometimes difficulties communicating what I mean.
Wait, I can't blame the lack of my linguistic proficiency here - its probably just me. ;)
Best regards, Peter
P.S. Another thing I forgot to mention, that I am currently working at, is that when additional weight is added (loadout, fuel) the sensitivity to pitch, meaning the max AOAs one is being able to pull during a turn, given the same speed, tends to increase with additional weight. Example: clean loadout, max internal fuel, resulting in this case at a max 27deg. AOA during a turn. At maximum loadout it is possible to easily pull more than 40deg AOA, putting the airplane into stall, with the same CGs.
This can be offset to some degree by moving the CGs for fuel and loadout more to the front than they should be, but I am still struggling balancing the aircraft and trying to offset the effect completely.
* Update: As I just found out reading Yves Guillaume's "Flight Dynamics in MS Flight Simulator" (p.15-16) additional payload (stations) and fuel weight are considered in the MOI calculations the sim does, although not being completely correct, as he points out. So, in general for our purposes one set of MOIs for all models (from Clean/BA to fully loaded) should theoretically suffice. This only leaves different payloads (stations) and parasite drag values for each model to be adjusted individually.
-
Simply referencing/aliasing different models (as Orion suggested) could be a viable approach - even one I could realize. I cannot say why but I do not like the idea, yet, to create an aircraft folder for each model file, although textures could be referenced for all C/D versions separately, not to blow up required space. Currently I consider a gauge to switch between models being the more elegant solution, probably because it is out of my reach - like the grass is always greener on the other side of the river. If you think from your point of view that I am barking up the wrong tree here, please tell me so - awaiting your opinions on the subject.
I actually think creating separate aircraft folders is the more elegant solution. While I do concede that it is less streamlined to have multiple folders, and that having all variations shown in the aircraft selection dialog potentially makes selecting things more cumbersome, creating a gauge is not only unnecessarily complex, but technically not even feasible given the circumstances. SimConnect doesn't provide a way to switch the user's aircraft, let alone the visual model.
If you were only aiming to change the flight dynamics, while you could write to the aircraft.cfg to place new values and potentially (you may run into issues of the file being in use) replace the AIR file (side note: this would necessitate the use of a C/C++ gauge or SimConnect client, since you don't have control over the file system in FSX's XML scripting language), you'll need to reload the user aircraft, which, as you know, eventually causes the sim to go bonkers after too many reloads.
With additional aircraft folders, you wouldn't even need to place models or AIR files in a different folder. Take a look at the TBM_Avenger_Ghost in SimObjects\Misc.
What I meant was getting the underlying physics right before introducing PIDs. To put it into a drastic picture: Not trying to tweak a Chessna via PIDs to fly like a Hornet. Sorry for not expressing myself right, but as I am not a native speaker, I have sometimes difficulties communicating what I mean.
Wait, I can't blame the lack of my linguistic proficiency here - its probably just me. ;)
Ah, I see what you mean. I agree that it's a good idea, but I'm not sure how you can judge the underlying physics. I assume almost all the data available with regards to the Hornet's flight characteristics have been recorded with the digital fly-by-wire functional and in use. Without non-standard data, it sounds like you'd be trying to match the simulated aircraft without fly-by-wire to data points from the real aircraft with fly-by-wire.
-
Thanks for the update and your valuable feedback, Orion.
So, separate airplane folders it will be. I will get to it the next days, and hopefully be finished before the weekend to release a new version upgrade.
-
Ok, I just made sure I was using Jimi's latest Prototype. The one he just recently posted, was it just yesterday? Anyway, I looked, and it's definately different from the v1.55 I found, so out with the old, as they say. well, the PID entry for the Rudder is, anyhow. It looks a lot more reasonable, as far as the settings for the PID go. And I agree with Peter, the Prototype I first found, and the one you linked so kindly for us, Orion, just doesn't fly at all right. The "notching" during even moderate AOA maneuvering is horrible, I am certain it's caused by the PID settings. Not trying to pass blame anyplace, far far from it. I'm just letting you know what I saw with it, and why I went with the NH v1.8.0.
I've gotten so far into it, to date, however, I'll stick to it until a better something comes along. I just don't want to start all over from 0, as it were. I realize you all are doing the best you can at the best rate possible, as am I. I am never ever in a hurry any more, believe me. My feet hurt too much. As I will, please take all the time you need.
Peter, I know you mentioned integrating the PID controllers into the v1.8.0, thus making it the v1.8.1. Are you still planning this? Or just breaking the miscilaneous load-outs into multiple folders? Me, I just made the "clean", or training setu my default choice, by changing the Station_Load.x= lines to match what I see in the picture for that one. I found the weights for the TER/MER racks on the Outboard and Inboard wing stations, and the Single racks in the hip stations, and the weight of the centerline tank, and I use all those. It's so much easier to me than changing them all every time I load the plane up, or reload it. I also changed the parasitic drag to the setting you specified for it (1.06). All this so I can test easily :) I'm lazy, what can I say?
I also discovered a small issue with the gear. As you recall, I mentioned the mains were showing axle deep in the runway or Deck, but I thought I could fix it. I can, but it took me a while to figure out that I have to leave the static_height in the Contact Points alone, or the launchbar gets messed up. And if I try to change it's positions with a [launch_Assistance] section, it stays down all the time and so does the gear. But the nose gear is pretty close to right, and as long as I just change hte main's vertical positions very slightly I can get it right too. IE not IN the runway, but ON it. It's a small victory, but it's mine :)
Once I get totally staisfied I have everything exactly right, I'll zip up the aircraft.cfg and .air files and post there for you. I sure appreciate your being willing to even look at my efforts, considering the august company I am in around you all.
Talk to you all very soon again!
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, for now I am going to stick with the conventional version (without PIDs) and will try to improve it, in general terms. Once that is done it intend to put my focus more and more on the PIDs.
The next step will be to establish separate airplane folders for each model version, so it becomes possible to individually tweak/setup each model, considering stations loadout, drag, etc.
When Jimi decides to release a FSXBA version with PIDs integrated, he considers good enough for a general release, I will follow that of course. In the past, I did some minor tests with the prototype version trying to adjust PIDs to influence pitching behaviour, but my results were unsatisfactory and showed me that it will take some time to learn and properly understand how to achieve desired results.
Concerning the gear issue, that is a compromise: I was able to adjust satisfactory gear settings that would resemble in height and compression ratio the real airplane, based on technical drawings. This worked fine for the FS and CS models. When trying to adapt these values to the NH version too, I ran into some issues. The visual model of the FSXBA does not seem to be able to vertically compress and 'bend the knees' of the main gear visually as far as it is neccecary to lower the CPs accordingly. The visual result is that all tires would be roughly 2/3 sunk in the ground. This is just a visual glitch, but I does not look nice, so I decided for the FSXBA models to raise the the CPs for the front and main gear a bit, without changing the general pitch. The result, as it is now, will show the main gear tires sunken a tad in the ground.
Side view photo of a FA-18D VMFAT-101. You can see gear compression and height very well: http://atvfotografie.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/F18-VMFAT-101.jpg
Concerning the tailhook length, it seems that the one of the default FSXBA is too long (more like an FA-18E), but as the model and CPs are standing too high above the ground, it is the only way to catch the cables.
Based on the technical drawings, and with the help of good old Mr. Pythagoras, the legacy hornet should have a tailhook length about 5.8 feet, but I have not been able to verify that.
Looking forward to see your changes. I did some preliminary calculations myself for the flaps lift and drag values I currently work with and I am interested to see how they will differ from yours that are probably closer to reality. You can also see the calcs for the MOIs I did in relation to the emty weight.
Some infos on flap lift and drag I based my reasoning upon:
http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/5018/why-and-when-to-use-flaps
An other thing I recenty found out is that in order to determine the pitch behaviour of a wing, the aerodynamic wing sweep is of importance and not the ones of the leading edge (26.7 deg.) or at the quater chord (20.0 deg.). I roughly estimated (visually derived) that for the legacy hornet being around 13 deg. and voila pitching sensitivity is increased.
-
Concerning the tailhook length, it seems that the one of the default FSXBA is too long
Actually, I hadn't looked too hard at the tailhook yet, since the NH v1.8.0 I am working with traps just fine. I had some trouble with the launch bar. Apparently it's coded into the model (not a separate entry in the aircraft.cfg file) changing the Static_CG_Height= in the [Contact_Points] too much will prevent it's operation. All the plane does is sit an bounce when I hit SHFT+I, and no blast shield. So I left that alone, although I did play with the static compression and compression ratio of the mains a little. I didn't change their vertical position yet, to try and get the mains up out of the ground. I'll let you know what I can find. I did read an excellent article by Milton Shupe (smart son-uv-a-gun!) on setting those three settings in the gear's contact points, and am trying to apply his knowledge here.
An other thing I recenty found out is that in order to determine the pitch behaviour of a wing, the aerodynamic wing sweep is of importance and not the ones of the leading edge (26.7 deg.) or at the quater chord (20.0 deg.). I roughly estimated (visually derived) that for the legacy hornet being around 13 deg. and voila pitching sensitivity is increased.
Should I change the aircraft.cfg to reflect your new value in wingsweep? Just wondering. If I do, I'll probably have to start in on the flaps again :D At least the Pitch portion of them. Not a problem, just curious. By the by, looking at you second JPG, you and I have come up with just the same Lift, Drag, and Pitch settings for the flaps. Funny how that works :) We must be on to something here!
Anyway, that's where I am to date. I will absolutely keep you advised (as the cops are so fond of saying) of how things are going! Oh! Did I mention I was with VMFAT-101 when they were in F-4N's in Yuma? They sure have come a long way, both physically (well a good 3-4 hour drive, anyway), and in aircraft advancement. Thanks for the picture of the FA-18 they are in now. It's nice to see what they are up to these days. Is that a D or F model? I am not that great at the physical differences...
Pat☺
-
Could you please link or post the artice by Milton Shupe you are referring to, I'd be interested to get my hands on every possible useful information concerning these gear settings.
The pic for VMFAT-101 I posted is showing the Hornet D version model. I used this one as a template for the textures.
Concerning the changed wingsweep value, you can give it a try. For now I am leaving it at 13 deg. until I find some better intel on it or contradicting opinions.
Thanks for your feedback on the flaps lift and drag values, good to know I am on the right direction here,
Peter
-
It's in a thread on SOH, http://sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?14301-Contact-Points-Tutorial (http://sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?14301-Contact-Points-Tutorial), bottom of the page. Well, from about 1/2 way down all the way to the bottom :) He spelled it out in a way even I could understand it, but not in an insultingly simple way, if that makes sense. I found it very informative indeed! I saved it off as a text file, to go with the pictures he put up for each step. Very helpful indeed.
Concerning the changed wingsweep value, you can give it a try. For now I am leaving it at 13 deg. until I find some better intel on it or contradicting opinions.
Then try it I shall. If I like it, I'll keep it and redo the flaps for it, if necessary.
Thanks for your feedback on the flaps lift and drag values, good to know I am on the right direction here,
I was glad to see it too! It kind of confirmed the way I was going about it was at least close to correct :)
It's going to be a day or so before I can get back to this again. Today, I take my bird to the vet to get her beak ground down. It's "scheduled maintenance" so to speak. I have to get her done every month or so. Town is a ways away, and a stressful bit of a day for me, so after I get home, it's rest & recuperate time. So, I'll be back into it asap! I should be within about 4 or 5 days worth of posting my changes on here, depending on how much the wingsweep changes things for my settings so far.
And now, my usual question: Lately, when I taxi out of the wires and into the bow cats to launch off the boat, in the NH v1.8.0 bird we're working on, it launches great, all the way to the end of the cat (Number 2 to be exact). Good end-speed, flaps are definately set properly, button on the Rudder-trim switch pressed for roper rotation off the cat, everything. I even make sure I "wipe" the controls once I am at 99% N2 for the launch, with the launch bar connected and hold-back working properly. As soon as I come off the cat, the plane rotates to the proper attitude, and then promptly begins an uncommanded rapid roll to the left, unaffectd by the stick inputs. With the pitch "up" this means that very quickly the plane's inverted and into the drink. I can almost, with max control inputs, get the nose to go "up" (down if I weren't inverted) and after a few seconds the uncommanded and uncontrollable roll stops and all is normal again. But I have to be lucky and fast to catch the plane in time and fly instead of swim. Any ideas on this? Did I change a setting someplace I shouldn't have? All I've changed that I am aware of is the flaps lift, drag, and pitch settings in aircraft.cfg, with two minor adjustments in the .air file. None of this, that I am aware of, will cause this. My load-out is symmetrical.
My land-based take-offs are normal, even with the same flaps/weight/pitch command settings. Rotates perfectly to the right attitude, everything. I am totally out of ideas on this one.
Thanks for any help you can provide. I am using an AICarriers.NET boat to launch off of, if it matters. Javier's Nimitz, to be exact. I have NO idea where to even begin to look, although I tend to suspect the FCS we're using to be at fault, although it may well be me doing something wrong...
-
Thanks for the link Pat, much appreciated. Would have take me a while to dig that up by hand.
I don't think you will have to redo the flaps specifically for the changed wingsweep. From my opinion it should not make a huge difference, and as the new wingsweep setting is still somewhat preliminary from my point of view, I would not put too much effort into it. I will leave the flaps settings I got myself so far as they are, and perhaps later fine tune them if necessary, or replace these with the ones you got.
Finding out what is causing the induced roll force after carrier launch, I would start verifying first if it happens with the current out of the box FSXBA 15.2 version (without PIDs), or the current (unchanged) NH 1.8.0 mods too. At a second step I would disable gauge by gauge parts of the FCS and see what happens. Instead of the AI Carriers .NET from Orion have you tried the original Java based version, too? From what you described the induced roll force must be quite hefty. Does it always stop after a fixed amount of time (seconds) after the launch, or does its stopping depend on your first manual stick input after the launch? I hope these questions are of some help guessing where the issue might originate from.
Peter
-
Thanks so much for the troubleshooting suggestions, Peter. I figured out my problems. Hard landings on the boat damaging gear and control surfaces. I apparently have a horrible habit of landing a little too hard, and left of centerline. Not enough for a full "Crash!" message, but enough for damage to occur. Then when I try to launch, the FCS tries to compensate for the damaged control surfaces, buuuut...
At least it was nice being right about something: It was, in fact, my fault entire :) I feel pretty small complaining about it now, though...
Practice, practice, practice! I have a flight saved in the NH v1.8.0, gear, flaps 1/2, 1,000'agl, on-speed, on AOA for the weight of the bird, behind the boat. I just need to make recovery after recovery till I get it right. When I feel comfortable running vLSO, then and only then will I feel I am doing acceptably. Till then, I can still work the flaps settings easily enough. I can only do so many in a row before I start getting stale and making stupid, simple mistakes. Then I do something else for the rest of my available time to clear my brain out, so to speak.
Anyway, enough of this. Thanks again for all the help, I really appreciate it! I will get my versions of the aircraft.cfg and .air file, along with a readme to indicate changes made, in the next few days. Hopefully NLT Saturday, I hope.
Pat☺
-
With additional aircraft folders, you wouldn't even need to place models or AIR files in a different folder. Take a look at the TBM_Avenger_Ghost in SimObjects\Misc.
Hi Orion, I am trying to reference a texture path outside the current airplane folder, and it does not seem to be working. Have you any ideas or suggestions what I am doing wrong here.
Structure:
FA-18C_NH is the folder containing texture folders. I removed aircraft.cfg so the plane does not show in the menu.
FA-18C_NH_AIM is the folder for the A-A version, containing model, panel, sound etc. except textures.
When I reference locally within the A-A version folder, model shows in menu. As soon as I try to reference any other path outside this folder, the plane does not show in the menu anymore. Example:
texture=..\FA-18C_NH\USN_VFA-27_200
Best regards,
Peter
-
I may well be wrong (I usually am), but I don't think you can alias texture folders to a different aircraft's folder. I get this from reading this in this https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#NotesonusingAliasing (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#NotesonusingAliasing) I found on-line:
Notes on using Aliasing
Aliasing allows multiple aircraft, or other objects such as vehicles or boats, to use the same files (panels, flight models, sounds, etc.). This saves disk space and makes file organization more efficient. You can alias an object ’s panel.cfg, model.cfg, and sound.cfg files from any other object. Whereas configuration sets allow objects within a single container to share components, aliasing allows objects in different containers to share components. To alias a panel.cfg, model.cfg, or sound.cfg file, simply change the aliasing object's configuration file to read:
Like I said, I'm usually wrong about stuff, and I hope Mr. Orion will correct any errors I've made on this subject, but it's what I found.
I HAVE seen texture.cfg files inside the texture folders with "fallback.1=" etc in them. I bet they are the way of the doing it. Exactly how, I haven't a clue. It looks to me, maybe, that the main Texture folder is referenced by the individual texture folders, like texture.USMC_VMFAT-101, for example. So perhaps you need to have the one big Texture folder, and then the individual texture.xxxxxx folders for each airplane model variation...?
IE NH_FA-18C has the main Texture folder in it, and the folder FA-18C_NH_AIM has the unique texture folders, like texture.USN_VFA-27_200 etc, with a texture.cfg file in each one referencing the main Texture folder in NH_FA-18C in the fallback= lines. Maybe?
I'm just trying to think about how to do this...
It would still mean a lot of texture folders in each model version of the aircraft's folder, but they seem to have much fewer files within them, so thus saving some space on the HD, anyway. I do hope there's a better way, this is just they way I read the situation...
Pat☺
Pat☺
-
What Pat describes with the fallbacks is the optimal way to share textures between repaints. The note about aliasing is also correct; however, I was thinking you might be able to avoid having to add a texture.cfg with an alias. Try texture=..\FA-18C_NH\texture.USN_VFA-27_200 instead. This assumes both FA-18C_NH and FA-18C_NH_AIM are contained in the same folder.
-
Practice, practice, practice! I have a flight saved in the NH v1.8.0, gear, flaps 1/2, 1,000'agl, on-speed, on AOA for the weight of the bird, behind the boat.
Shouldn't flaps be FULL? Might be part of your problem right there....
-
Thank you all for your help, I've got it working now, although not the way I intended to.
Within each separate airplane folder at least an empty texture folder, for each texture, with a texture.cfg file needs to be present that is than referencing towards the folder where the texture is located, needs to be created. Will keep working on it and post a working release as soon as I am done!
Peter
-
Jimi,
I'll be a SOB, you're right. I can't find the bloody sentence (Note? Caution?) now, of course, but I could have sworn I read someplace that at higher recovery weights 1/2 Flaps setting would reduce the effect of the "burble" in-close. Naturally, I can't find it in the friggen NATOPS now, however.
My way of saying, Yep, you were right. As I say, this is a learning curve, and in my case, obviously pretty steep. But hey! Never feel bad about things like this. When I was learning on gliders back when I was 14, my Instructor, name of Goldie, kept a yard stick in the back seat with him, and was not hesitant to use it...on me of course. Back of my head was pretty sore for the first few days the two weeks it took me to get my liscence. After that, well, either I got better or he decided it wasn't worth the bother :D
Thanks for the advice. it is now part and parcel or my procedures.
By the by, glad I was able to give a hint on your trouble with the textures, Peter!
Pat☺
-
Ok, question of the day: That leftward drifting motion is driving me nuts during recoveries. If I disable the Auto-Rudder gauge, will I then need to use the rudder like a regular plane for turns? Even with it, if I call up the AH with a turn-and-bank under it on the left MFD during flight, it shows I should be using the rudders like a normal plane, but I don't, presuming the auto-rudder is keeping the plane's flight coordinated properly and it's just an indicator problem. I thought (I know I know, I need to stop that) that I read in a NATOPS that the FA-18 is a "Feet-On-the-Floor" type of aircraft to fly, like the F-14, meaning under most circumstances, while the feet should stay ON the rudder pedals, during most flight regimes they are not required for coordinated flight. Has to do with the twin, outboard-canted tails. I didn't delve too deeply into the engineering, but if you want I can try.
That's it, for once :) Talk again soon!
Pat☺
-
Upgrade: 1.9.0
Changelog:
- FS/CS versions: minor texture corrections throughout the pack
- NH C/D versions: folder structure change to allow specific configuration of each model version
- Flaps lift and drag values adjusted
- Anti-skid brakes reintroduced, allowing for a more realistic visual breaking experience
- Empty weight cg moved slightly forward to counter pitch up at touchdown
- Roll behaviour tweaked in conjunction with MOIs (thanks to Jimi's valuable input on the subject)
Happy modding - suggestions and feedback are welcome, as usual.
Peter
-
Pat,
Yes, you are right. The Hornet is designed to be a "feet on the floor" aircraft with minimal use of manual rudder. Exceptions being specific things like executing the Pirouette Maneuver, or if you fly with the Blue Angels (those guys use A LOT of rudder).
Keep in mind that the autorudder that has been created for this aircraft is a little different from the default autorudder from FSX. The autorudder system that has been created for this bird involves a two-part system.
The first, involves trying to replicate the RSRI or Rolling Surface to Rudder Interconnect function as per NATOPS. It basically tries to induce rudder in the same direction of the roll to offset adverse yaw and to assist in inadvertent departure.
The second involves "nulling out uncommanded yaw rate" as stated in NATOPS. I have interpreted this as keeping the turns coordinated. Since using the same "bang-bang" technique that I used on the pitch auto-trim system will not work on the yaw axis (the aircraft wags back and forth like a shark), I had to come up with a basic formula to get the job done. This is pretty challenging considering the amount of rudder needed for various angles of bank, inverted flight, and the increased amount of rudder authority needed at slower speeds (and vice versa). This also has to be "blended" to prevent noticeable rudder wags while in flight.
I thought I fixed that on the latest version of the FLT and BA versions. I still had a problem with uncommanded yaw, but later found out that I was using asymmetric thrust due to a bad calibration of my split throttles.
-
Peter,
Thanks for posting up v1.9.0! I have it an will get into in a few minutes. Looking at it, just a fast glance at the .air and aircraft.cfg files, to make my version changes to the flaps will take some work, but that's most of the fun!
I do have a couple things, real quick: Just glancing at the visual vs the aircraft.cfg for each configuration, you do have the weights of the various weapon configurations 100%, no question. However, on the training config, compared to the BA config, the MER/TERs are on the training config visually vs the BA config, which is correct and proper, but the W&B section doesn't take them into account. IE, both W&B sections are the same, but the visual models are different. I did some research, and have the weight data for the Single Ejector racks (hip positions, centerline tank) and the MER/TER's out on the wing stations. Oh yeah, the empty weight of the centerline isn't in any configuration's W&B. by the way. I can give you the data for the various items if you like or just change all the aircraft.cfg files and post them up in a zip file, if you like, with my flap changes, presuming I ever manage to get them zeroed in, so to speak. They aren't a huge amount of weight, obviously, and may be too small to be significant as far as the flight characteristics of the two models goes, but hey, "as real as it gets!" ;D
Another thing, the Static Compression value in the three Gear lines of the Contact points seems suprisingly small to me. I am far from a professional dev, obviously, I have just never seen a value this low. I believe you have it right, I am just curious about it. I wound up with a 0.196 value, when I set my version up, which isn't far off, but 0.05 seems minute to me. Just wondering, not criticizing in any way! You know how I am...
Jimi,
Thank you very much. Answers my question completely!
and to assist in inadvertent departure.
I am going to presume you meant "helping to recover from" or "preventing" in there someplace :D I wouldn't think one would want to induce an inadvertent departure, but hey, I've been wrong before...LOL!
or if you fly with the Blue Angels (those guys use A LOT of rudder).
After watching them so often, in three different birds (The F-4 and FA-18C, as well as the short-lived A-4) at El Centro all winter, I can certainly believe you on this! Being stationed at MCAS Yuma for many years (at least it seemed like it, I hated that place...), and having a motorcycle let me do a lot of watching :) I know that everything they do is just regular ACM and formation flight maneuvers every wearer of The Wings of Gold does constantly, only amplified (as it were), but I am far, far, far from good enough to try most of them! I am working but with about 3 hours for flight a day...
Anyway, my gratitude to you both for all your help in all this! I sure appreciate you all taking to time to give me so much assistance! I am learning by leaps and bounds, it seems to me, and it's thanks to all the great folks on this amazing forum.
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, concerning the weight of the various weapon loadouts/configurations, these are just preliminary values I took from the CS version for A-A and A-G loudouts. Did not have the time to make a proper research, taking into accout weight of the pylons, too. I will do some calculations in excel not to exceed overall weight etc. because FSXBA model versions have different A-A and A-G configurations than the CS version, e.g. more AMRAAMs and GBUs. Have to dig up weight of pylons, Mavs, Zunis, too. I will also have to do some calculations on the parasite drag scalar due do differences in the loadout/configuration.
There is also the issue described by Yves Guillaume, that the sim "Instead of summing up all station_load.n entries individually, MSFS uses the offset of the average location of all payload stations from the CG position. This means that placing one payload of e.g. 1000 lbs 30 feet ahead of the CG and another one of 1000 lbs 30 feet behind CG results in zero MOI contribution in MSFS, because the average location is exactly at the CG. In reality both stations’ moments would sum up."
He describes a workaround: "As a work around, the real world payload MOI values should be incorporated in the empty_weight MOI values. In other words, the MOI values provided by the designer should be those for a typical zero fuel weight instead of empty weight. One remaining problem is that changing payload directly via the MSFS menu will not adjust MOI values correctly."
When I got the loadout/configuration weights right, I will have to incorporate these into the MOIs, taking into consideration some rudimentary reasoning where these masses are located in relation to the overall CG, not to complicate things too much.
So we are not just there yet.
Peter
P.S. But you should already feel a difference between a Clean or Training and an AIM, GBU, Mav, or Zuni version.
At least we got the underlying folder structure ready to incorporate specific loadouts/configurations in the future, and mess with these to our liking.
-
Hi Pat, it would be very nice if you could post the weight data for ejector racks, empty centerline tank, weapons, MER/TERs (I do not really know what that is, because I lack the military background. Could be the things I called pylons, which obviously seems to be the wrong word for it) everything you can get you hand on in conjunction with the legacy hornet. If you can put it in an aircaft.cfg together with your flaps settings the better, much appreciated.
Concerning the gear static compression: 0=rigid meaning completely compressed, as I understand it, so from the pics I looked at, the gear seemed almost completely compressed when standing on the ground, so I gave it a 5% room for bumps on the runway. When I raised these values the plane became very soft, and would tip to the side very easily. I thought that to be unrealistic, so I changed it - please let me know if you know differently. An example for such a setting would be the default ones from the CS version, where the overall height seems to be ok, but when you move the plane slowly around on the runway it would ridiculously easy tip to the side and crash. I guess they choose this soft setting to better demonstate the asymmetric wing loudouts that are possible to set up through their loudout menu, and that they have an actual impact on the plane's weight and balance, not just being visual treats.
Peter
-
AHA! I knew there was a reason for those super low values of static_compression! I didn't realize the Hornet was that low on the gear when just sitting. I have watched more that a few land, both on a runway and on the boat, and I know they have a good deal of flex during that process, but I never thought to actually go and SEE what they were at when static. This one's going to take some research for me to ferret out, and untill I do, I'll leave things as-is. You seem to have a working solution to a problem, so I'll leave it. By the by, they normally hit the runway as though it were a carrier deck. Navy pilots get "You ever flare, I'll beat you senseless!" (ok, ok, not that bad) from day one 1 flight training.
The main thing is not just amount of flex, but ratio's also. Most aircraft developers seem to assume a 70-80% static compression. Is this correct for the Hornet? Not a clue. I'd have to measure the oleo's (vertical struts) while the bird was on the deck, and while it was jacked to be certain. I should be able to dig this data up someplace, and once we get those two numbers (Max extension and static compression) the rest falls into line :) I think the Airframes shop maintenance directives will lead me to my goal. We shall see asap!
I have all the weights in a small text file for the various "loadable" (?) items, and I'll just zip it up with the other two files, included in this post, if I do it right. Not very big files but a zip file saves time and space.
So you know, MER/TER is the lazy man's shorthand (ME!) for Multiple Ejector Rack/Triple Ejector Rack. It's normal usage in the military, but you know how fond we always are of acronyms and abbreviations :) I made a false presumption that you were military and would automatically know these abbreviations, so I apologize. Essentially, yes, they are what you call "pylons", and pylons they are, but for specific uses. Namely, getting a piece of ordnance off the airplane without it impacting the aircraft on the way. They use a small pyrotechnic charge to kick the item away from the plane. Pilot pickles, charge goes off, pushes a piston in the ejector rack (Hence the name), which leads to a "foot" on the rack touching the item to get ejected (bomb, missile, etc), thus kicking it away. If you get a chance sometime, watch a video in slow-mo of a plane either dropping unpowered weapons (bombs) or missiles. You will see the weapon leave the rack, and a very short time later a little "foot" (circular disc about 2-3" in diameter with a shaft in the center) about the center of the bomb's attaching area and about 4" long, if that, will be seen retracting back into the rack where the weapon was. Very quickly, so you have to kind of watch for them. IE, they pretty much snap back in, so try for a good slow-mo video. They are also used as part of the Jettison and Emergency Jettison system, thus hopefully removing the items, by force, if necessary, as quickly as possible. The MER/TERs are used on the wings (normally) with SER or Single Ejector Rack normally used on the fuselage (like the two hip stations) hardpoints.
Fuel tanks are normally mounted on SER's, wing or fuselage, for weight considerations, but the MER/TERs generally have the wiring and plumbing necessary for fuel tank mounting, so the SER or MER/TER can be utilized. Conformal stations, like for the AIM-54's on a F-14, or the Sparrow missiles on the F-4, just have the hardware of a SER built into the fuselage.
Ok, ok, I am off, but hopefully I do this right and the zip file is attached.
Pat☺
-
The exact length and weight of the Zuni depends on the warhead, but typical values are 2.79 m (110 in) and 48.5 kg (107 lb), respectively
I located the above at http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/5in-rockets.html (http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/5in-rockets.html). There is a chart near the bottom for the different warhead/rocket combinations, listing weight & length.
2.75 INCH ROCKET DIAMETER (IN) LENGTH (IN) WEIGHT (LB)
LAU-61C/A Rocket
Launcher
16.0 59.8 155
LAU-68D/A Rocket
Launcher
10.1 59.8 85
5.0 INCH ROCKET DIAMETER (IN) LENGTH (IN) WEIGHT (LB)
LAU-10C/A Rocket
Launcher
13.9 94.92 113
LAU-10D/A Rocket
Launcher
14.0 94.92 142
Is from a PDF titled ntsp-Rocket.pdf, page I-8.
I don't believe I included any of the above in my weight listing, so here it all is now. Both launchers (2.75 in. and 5 in) fit on the usual SER/MER/TER pylons.
I am still looking for a good reference for the gear struts max extension and compression in the static state, but I will keep at it hard :)
Pat
-
Thanks for your help Pat with the weapons and pylons weight data, much appreciated, keep them coming. I will try to setup some calculations for the various loadouts/configurations the next days and post them when I am finished, so you all may check them for errors or omissions.
Yesterday, I also had a quick glance at he links you posted concerning the fsx gear suspension setup. A lot of helpful information there. I will take that into consideration the next time I redo the gear settings.
Peter
-
Just so you know, all this time I've had the data we needed for weight/DI calculations on my friggen HD, and had forgotten I had it! I have a copy of the FA-18E/F (should be at least really close for the C model) NATOPS Chapter XI, Flight Characteristics (F18-EF-200.pdf), not to mention the rest of the NATOPS in a separate PDF (F18-ABCD-000.pdf and/or F18-EF-000.pdf) all of which I found on-line by punching in the pub number. The PDF file name IS the pub number, by the way. I hope that helps a little, The -200 has the weight/DI numbers for every possible armament, fuel tank, and mounting pylon (MER/TER). They even have "Sample" problems for calculating total weight/DI numbers for several possible combinations. It is a wealth of data, not just for the pilots, but I believe for helping with the W&B section of the aircraft.cfg. There's way too much data for me to put up on the forum here as quoted areas, unless you want me to zip up the whole PDF and post it here...
You mentioned that the software averages the longitudinal weight offsets for the MOI computations. Does it also average the latitudinal weight offsets? I am thinking of Lateral Assymetry calculations. For example, you have a 2000 lb bomb on the left inboard, and a pair of Maverics on the right inboard, just to use a rediculous example. Will it realize the Lateral Asymetery, or will it just average the two out for the Roll MOI calculations? If so, you will need to make sure all the loadouts (weight and DI's anyway) are symmetrical, whatever the visual model may show, or the plane will have a constant roll, which I have seen due to a misplaced decimal point in Pilot weight in a C-182 (AHEM!).
As to the rest, I am just glad I could help out in at least one or two small areas of this amazing project you all have created. It's kinda of an ego boost, to be honest. I know you have much broader range of knowledge on this subject (the FA-18C) than I do, but still, to be able to help out a little is a great feeling!
Anyway, looking forward to the next update, and working the flaps/landing gear systems at the same time on the new one (v1.9.0) :) Again, I will post them up when I am happy with them. Thanks for all the information and support.
Pat☺
-
Hornet F/A-18 A/B/C/D NATOPS dated 2007 is available here (along with other (Super) Hornet related NATOPS material):
F-18C NATOPS: http://info.publicintelligence.net/F18-ABCD-000.pdf (17Mb)
PAGE of stuff: http://publicintelligence.net/u-s-navy-f-18-natops-flight-manuals/
NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL PERFORMANCE DATA NAVY MODEL F/A-18E/F 165533 AND UP AIRCRAFT:
https://info.publicintelligence.net/F18-EF-200.pdf (29Mb)
-
Thanks for the links SpazSinbad, much appreciated.
Here are the weight specifications for the various loadouts, to the best of my knowledge. I had to do some approximations. Let me know what you think.
Update:
- Found that SUU-62 are centerline weapons pylon and SUU-63 are wing weapons pylon for legacy hornet. Could not find any weight data so I took those of the FA-18E pylons (SUU-78/79) instead.
- Countermeasure system seems to be AN/ALE-47. I found some weight data on wikipedia, but was unable to verify how many dispensers are available. This website (http://iron-eagles.tripod.com/wb_ac_files/f18.htm) speaks of six additional dispensers for upgraded spanish versions of FA-18As.
-
All I could find was the data for the BRU-32, which I believe is equivalent, or at least very similar to the SUU-62A, I think. It weighs 76 lbs. according to the information on this site: http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail-rack-bomb.htm (http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail-rack-bomb.htm).
I will review the spreadsheet (picture) you provided. At a quick glance, it looked pretty accurate. I will dig up what I can on any questions, and let you know, but it looks very good and quite comprehensive! Nice job indeed. I realize that what we have is for the E model FA-18's, but I think a lot of the weights and DI's should be pretty close, knowing the Navy's conservatism as far as weapons systems goes. And the racks are mostly improved versions of the older SUU versions, which mostly change the electronics and release mechanizems,, but the over all weights and dimensions tend to remain fairly constant.
Hope that helps a little
Pat☺
-
Well, here's what I have so far. I included a text file to indicate the changes I've made and a short explanation of why. I hope this is of some use to you :D
Pat☺
-
Thanks for your effort, Pat. Much appreciated! I will incorporate your suggestions into the next release.
-
Upgrade v2.0.0 changelog:
- minor texture improvements throughout the pack
- specific station.laod.n values for each loadout adjusted
- adapted MOI values for each loadout, coupled MOI calculation corrected
- flaps lift and drag values improved, thanks to Pat's feedback
- empty weight cg moved to balance airplane for working pitch auto trim
- opted for working pirouette gauge instead of eye candy (ladder, covers, blocks)
Update v2.0.2 changelog:
- sideslip adjusted in accordance with changed empty weight CG
- flaps pitch scalar neutralized (FCS will compensate in real life)
- rudder control efficiency adjusted in conjunction with sideslip
Have fun,
Peter
-
Update v2.0.3
Changelog:
- Sideslip slightly increased
- Pitch efficiency slightly decreased
- Texture USMC_VMFAT-101_200 added for NH C/D versions
Peter
-
Well, so far I've only looked (meaning flown, looks aren't all that big to me, although having the VMFAT-101 paints just rocks, IMO, but i am biased, oddly :D )at the V2.0.0. It really does very very well, IMO.
Now, here we go with my annoying questions:)
I am only looking, at the moment, at the Training version, for testing consistency. no other reason.
- specific station.laod.n values for each loadout adjusted: Yes, but; why only 1 wing station each side, and why is the positioning for them -29, 0,0? Are the horizontal and vertical placements not critical? Are the other 2 averaged in? If so, why aren't the weights added to the existing wing station? IE: There are 2 wing stations on each side. They are placed approximately 1/3 and 2/3 of the wing's total span from the fuselage, and obviously slightly below the reference point. Are the outboards and inboards just averaged out to the ones shown, as far as positioning? Are their lateral and vertical positions so small as to be insignifigant, and only their longitudinal imortant? And what about weight? Shouldn't that 412, not the 206 for 1 MER/TER? I know, small piont, but I thought the placement of the weights might be important for the MOI calculations. Maybe not much, is why?
- flaps lift and drag values improved, thanks to Pat's feedback: WOW!! Thanks for adding my changes in. Gives me a warm feeling to know I contributed, even in so small a way :D
- flaps pitch scalar neutralized (FCS will compensate in real life): Yes, but. It wasn't in the game. I was having to hold constant backpressure on the stick when the flaps came down to full. Is this proper? It's why I put in the pitch scalars I did. May well be just my system/joystick pair. On my system, the scalars I put in made my stick neutral in all flight regimes, with the pitch autotrim on.
- Texture USMC_VMFAT-101_200 added for NH C/D versions: Thank you! I appreciate it, even if no one else says anything about it :D
Until I can gather enough test time, that's all I have. So far. I'm sure there will be more as I go, as usual. Thanks for working so hard on this airplane. I sure appreciate the effort you are putting into this, as well as everyone else that is contributing!
Jimi, good to hear you're coming home. A cruise might be exciting, but they can wear a little thin after a time, I know. Enjoy the return!
Fair skies and 15 knots down the angle to alll!
Pat☺
-
Thanks for the feedback, Pat. Much appreciated.
- Concerning the station.load.n values, in the calculations table all four pylons are accounted for but it seems I did not transfer it properly to the aircraft.cfg and forgot to enter lat. and vert. values, too. I will try to fix it ASAP.
As for the pylon weight, I took 200 lbs as an approximation because otherwise calculations would exceed the external stores max. limit of 15,000 lbs for the GBU version. I somehow assumed pylons need to be accounted for too, but now I am not so sure. Do you think I should change it to 412 lbs (pylon with ejecor rack)?
I found no value for the legacy hornet here so I took the (FA-18E) SUU-78 and SUU-80, each slightly below 200 lbs, as a reference here, with ejector racks included.
- Concerning the calculated MOIs for each loadout, all weights are accounted for, so if I understand it correctly no additional station loads need to be added at all. But the plane's weight (not MOIs) felt too light, so I decided to add the station loads again. Concerning this being an issue or no issue, I posted a thread on LM P3D forum, but I go no answer so far. I will try bugging them again to sort out how weight and MOIs should be done correctly.
- In the prior version, I had not been able to properly balanced the pitch auto trim, so your flaps pitch scalar were needed to compensate. I took a different approach this time and have moved the CG more to the front again, currently -29.6, in conjunction with wing aerodynamic center set to zero. I than tweaked the CG so long until I found the sweet spot for pitch auto trim.
- From time to time I need a change of scenery and than it is texture time. Glad to hear you like the USMC VMFAT-101_200, too. Currently I just started working on the NASA_X53_AAW texture and hope to release it next week.
I hope this explains a bit the hows and whys.
Peter
-
Glad to hear you like the USMC VMFAT-101_200, too.
Well, considering I was stationed with 101 in Yuma for almost 8 years, yeah, it's kinda neat to see the liveries live again on a new bird. When I was there, it was the F-4N, now the FA-18C/D's. Also, in my day, they were the F-4 training squadron for both Pilots and RIOs. We often got new RIO's in the shop, learning the fine points of the Aero-1A, then the AWG-10A/B/C, as time progressed through the different versions.
What we, and Corrosion Control Shop both really hated was when we got an LRU-11 in from the squadron a new RIO had used for a barf-bag. YECH!! And naturally, we got a few cards in it used as ash-trays, too. I will neither confirm nor deny rumors of finding roaches in it, and I don't mean cock-roaches!
Thank you very much for answering my questions, I appreciate it. It helps me understand where we're going, as we go (notice I now use "we", like I'm a big part of this LOL!)
As for the pylon weights, I was going by the latest MER/TER version weights, and what they used in the days of the C models are probably, in fact, lighter. I couldn't find a lot of data on the older ones, but I can keep looking, should you desire. As to exceeding the max stores load, I know that the ejector racks had to be accounted for someplace. I'll look at the NATOPS to see if they count as Stores, or weight of the wing (part and parcel of the plane) or what. I DID take a shot at the lat/vert positions, I can post them in here if you want. I assumed that they were about 1/3 and 2/3 of the way from the body to the wingtip, using the CG+ 1/2 fuselage width at the wingroot, and the wingtip lights for references. You would be amazed at how handy adding a simple steady light to find positions can be. At least for making the visual model postions match the positions in the aircraft.cfg for the different Station_Load.n points. Good for gear positions, too, tail hooks, engines, etc.
Reminds me, I did use that method to fine tune the engine positions in the [General Engine] section. Again, small detail, but the Devil's in the details, they say.
- In the prior version, I had not been able to properly balanced the pitch auto trim, so your flaps pitch scalar were needed to compensate. I understand now! Wasn't complaining, I was just curious as tot he why and wherefore's :)
Thanks again for the answers. Appreciate them :) I'll keep playing with the bits I know, now I understand what's going on, for a change. Hehe.
Pat☺
-
You would be amazed at how handy adding a simple steady light to find positions can be. At least for making the visual model postions match the positions in the aircraft.cfg for the different Station_Load.n points. Good for gear positions, too, tail hooks, engines, etc.
Reminds me, I did use that method to fine tune the engine positions in the [General Engine] section. Again, small detail, but the Devil's in the details, they say.
One word of advice. I used this method myself a the beginning of my modding until I noticed that different models may have different visual flaws and do not always represent desired technical specifications. Example: FSXBA Hornet is lacking the correct negative wing dihedral (anhedral) in comparison to FSX or CS models, but on the other hand it has correct flaps animations etc. and is much more detailed in many other aspects. Jamal did a very good job with this 3D model. Unfortunately, the uncompiled model files were lost somehow, as I have been told, so improvements in this area will be out of reach, unless someone is willing to basically start from scratch again.
In order to get correct coordinates for the legacy hornet I started with technical drawings I could find and overlayed these with the respective absolute coordinates I knew to be correct (e.g. overall width, lenght, height). I then fitted transparent excel graphs (top, side and front view) with the correct coordinates to overlay with the technical drawings (unchanged aspect ratio) and derived all other needed coordinates from visual representation. I even found that the technical drawings, that I could find would deviate in some small details here and there. This method proved to be surprisingly accurate, when I later found some weapon station coordinates in NATOPS, deviations were well within the 3% range.
Peter
-
Thanks again, Peter, as always, your answers really help a lot.
As I understand it, the version in the JPEGs you posted is the FSXBA (or NH) Hornet? If so, then I worked on getting the station_load.n positions set, all 3 axes, for the triple ejector racks out on the wings, and the AIM-9's out on the wingtips, as well as their weights. According to the metrics you provided in the pics. I also verified my engine positions in the [General_Engine] section. I can post these if you want.
On that subject, according to the ESP SDK I use, the posional settings indicate the actual position of the thrust exiting the aircraft. Like, for a Prop plane, it would be the position of the prop on the nose, or wings, whatever. To me, and this is just my take on this, the thrust actually departs the aircraft at the end of the nozzles, or turkey feathers. Due to their changeability, they actually create some thrust when they close down, accelerating the exhaust gasses to higher speed, thus increasing thrust. So, rather than at the start of the AB section, wouldn't the end of the tailpipes be the correct spot? I'm just wondering. I can put the position anyplace, after all. Although the positional information is not present in the .air file, it's not required, as the aircraft.cfg overrides the .air file settings. I believe.
Again, a very small matter, just my OCD for detail kicking in.
Thanks again for taking the time, and having the patience, to answer all my questions.
Pat☺
-
As I understand it, the version in the JPEGs you posted is the FSXBA (or NH) Hornet?
Neither one. These JPEGs are cuttings from technical drawings I found on the web and I use to derive the needed/unknown coordinates for various station points, with the help of the Excel framework I build. I do not use the visual models (FSX, CS, or FSXBA) to derive any coordinates from it. The only cases I check for consistency is when lights, AB/smoke effects, etc. are concerned, which do not have an impact on flight dynamics.
Last night I already did fix the station_load.n coordinates and finished the NASA_X53_AAW texture. I will post an update shortly.
I can post these if you want.
Yes please, do not hesitate to post your findings and suggested changes with some explanations of why and how you did it, and if possible the reference you are drawing your reasoning upon. Every suggestion and bit of information you are willing to share is useful and welcome and I will definitely have a look at it and take it into consideration.
Example: If I understand you correct, the SDK states that the positional settings of the engines should be where the thrust is actually exiting the aircraft (or turbine?). This is new to me, I always aimed at getting the center of the engine turbines here.
Concerning your reasoning where that point may be, I concur, the end of the tailpipes could be the point with the highest velocity of gas output. I will have to get accustomed to that train of thought.
ESP SDK is quite large, please tell where you did exactly find this useful bit of information.
Yes, you are correct, as far as I know aircraft.cfg entries override .air file entries.
Thanks again for your valuable feedback, Pat, much appreciated.
Peter
-
Update v2.0.4 (cumulative)
Changelog:
- station_load.n values (lat/vert) adjusted, pylons added where missing
- engine position adjusted, thanks to input/suggestion from Pat
- new NH texture added NASA_X53_AAW
- NH texture USMC_VMFAT-101_200 included
Have fun!
Peter
-
Hiyas Peter!
Ok, I found the place where I got the whole engine thing. It wasn't from the SDK, for which I apologise. It was from a PDF file on how to set parameters for FS2004 (I am presuming, perhaps falsely, they are the same for FSX) named "How to Tweak the flight dynamics of FS2004 aircraft.pdf" in "howtweak.zip". I found it on FlightSim. The download page reads Name: howtweak.zip Size: 47,722 Date: 09-12-2005 Downloads: 1,855
FS2004 How To Tweak Flight Dynamics. This pdf file is for people who want to learn, or learn more, about updating the flight dynamics of FS2004 aircraft. It won't tell you everything, but it will tell you some things the majority of flight simmers don't know about updating flight dynamics. By Bob Chicilo.
.
I am not sure about the policy in this forum about links to other sites, like FlightSim. If it's permitted, I will post it.
The portion I got the concept from reads, in part,
Something to know about engine locations: The position of the engine(s)
is the point from which the thrust of the prop(s) or thrust of the jet eminates from. So if
you have some idea where the datum point is you can have some idea whether the
engine(s) seem to be positioned correctly. If you think they are not accurately positioned, you can check their position(s) with the light.
.
That's what I was working from. If the information was erroneous, I sincerely apologize. I just double checked the SDK, and in the section [GeneralEngineData], https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#mozTocId136011 (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526949.aspx#mozTocId136011), it reads:
Offset of the engine from the datum reference point. Each engine location specified increases the engine count (maximum of four engines allowed).
.
Obviously, this leaves a lot of wiggle room for interpretation, so if I was mistaken, please feel free to let me know. It's how I learn!
I will post the positions I developed below. I'll just make a Text file of the positions I got, utilizing your JPEGS and, I am ashamed to say, a ruler, helD up to the screen for a straight-edge to read the coordinates on the edges of the picture. Sadly, I am horribly far behind on learning Excel. I am going to start though, I will tell you that. The last spreadsheet work I did was in '90, so I have a little catching up to do, I fear.
Anyway, below, please find the text file with the pylon positions and weights I came up with. Oh, I changed the weight of the centerline Station_load to take the weight of the tank (381lbs) ON the pylon also. It's not much, but you know me.
Hope all this is of a little help :)
Pat☺
-
Thanks Pat, I was able to find the file quickly.
As far as I understand it, it means that the cp for an engine should be placed at the endpoint/exhaust of the turbine, in our case. I do not think that there will be any differences between fs9 and fsx concerning this general understanding.
Concerning the placement of links, I never ran into any problems on forums for placing external links to sources, references or pictures. In case you want to communicate not in public you can use the "MY MESSAGES" function on top of this forum. It works like an email for this forum.
In case you are interested, I am willing to share the current version of the framework I have developed in Excel 2010. You can contact me through the forum "MY MESSAGES" and I will send you the file or any other resources I have found you might be interested in concerning flight dynamics and the development/improvement of the legacy hornet. This is a general invitation to all parties on this forum who might be interested, and are willing to share their findings with each other, too.
Separating the centerline station pylon from the tank is a necessity because the CS version just adds/removes weight for the tank, so in order to be consistent throughout the versions I opted for a separation in this case. The weight and position of the external tanks are located after the internal fuel section in the aircraft.cfg.
There is really no need to use a ruler on your screen, I can send you all the pictures of the technical drawings I was able to dig up too, so you can make use of any picture editing program, measuring the pixels directly and translating these into feet, since we know the overall length, width and height of the bird. Some of these drawing might need a slight rotational correction in order to be exactly orthogonal so you do not screw up your measurements.
One thing that has been bugging me lately again is the visual derivation of the wing twist, the difference of incidence at wing root and wing tip. I get different readings for each technical drawing here, and I am not really sure which one might be closest to reality. Although I do not think it will have a big impact on flight behaviour I just like to get it right and be done with it.
Peter
-
The weight and position of the external tanks are located after the internal fuel section in the aircraft.cfg.
Ok, I see how you did that. You increased the weight of the included fuel by increasing the gallons to make up the difference in the added tank weight. I understand that. However (yeah, here I go again :D ) : Wouldn't that weight then disappear when the fuel is used? I am pretty sure the externals are used first, so it's as though, when the tank empties, the pilot drops it. A viable possibility, no question, and even used to be policy. Drop external tanks before engaging in ACM. But in today's money-conscious Navy, they only jettison external stores (to include tanks) if they loose an engine on catapult launches, or during approach, or if they have FCS problems. SO: I guess my question would be, is there any way we can make the weight of external tanks stay on the aircraft, like the pylons do? Can we add another station_load.n for just each tank? Does it even matter in the overall scheme of things? Should I just ignore the weight of the tank, as it's so small and centered as to be insignifigant?
I'm not arguing, I'm just trying to learn the most I can :)
so you can make use of any picture editing program, measuring the pixels directly and translating these into feet, since we know the overall length, width and height of the bird.
That would be great! I do that for panel gauges and switches, etc, already, so I am fairly familiar with the method. I'll send you my email, if you like, or send me a PM (My Messages in this forum), your choice. I prefer not to post my email publicly, for obvious reasons.
I get different readings for each technical drawing here, and I am not really sure which one might be closest to reality.
Can you take the various different values and average them to get at least a value that comes someplace close to a correct reading? Or is it possible to grab a still from a video or picture of the real aircraft in operation, say sitting still on the flightline, for example, no external stores, overlay the metrics in Excel, and use that? In flight, obviously, the wings constantly flex, but sitting still on the line or on the end of the runway, full fuel, I presume, they would be pretty still, and close to "correct" (accurate?). Just offering a suggestion :)
I sure do appreciate all your valuable time taken answering all my questions. It's the best way I've found to learn from the pro! I'll be around as much as I am able. I really wish I had more time to devote to this.
Pat☺
-
The weight of the empty external tanks should be added as additional station_load.n entries, this is a good idea, Pat. Do you have any values for the legacy hornet ones. I haven't yet stumbled over them, at least I found that for the FA-18E: the empty weight for an 480 gallon external fuel tank is listed at 381 lbs. It is proabably close in relation to the legacy hornet one but that only has a capacity of 380/385 gallons. A first rough linear approximation would be 306 lbs. After some volume and surface calculations taken into consideration for a cylinder it should be closer to 326 lbs. I will add it as a first approximation with the next update.
In flight, obviously, the wings constantly flex, ...
Sorry Pat, I mean the wing incidence (at root/tip, and the respective wing twist) not the wing dihedral/anhedral that will change with the flex under load or during high g maneuvers. When you look at the technical drawings from the side view, you will notice that each of them will have slightly different angles.
Today I have reworked the engine tables for the legacy hornet from an FA-18E because I have not found anything that comes closer and was able to set the induced drag scalar back to 1.0 which gives the bird a more realistic drag and flight behaviour again. There are more table entries for different altitudes now, which should in general give a more realistic engine performance for the various altitude levels, too. I am still experimenting with it.
The next textures I am currently looking at and I will try to finish are the NASA_HARV and NASA_TestPlane ones. After these I will have to cut back on the amount of time spend with this project because honestly speaking this has become quite addictive and I have started neglecting my other duties.
Peter
-
Do you have any values for the legacy hornet ones.
Well, I am presuming you mean the C models?
According to the NATOPS I have for the A-D models, A1-F18AC-NFM-000, pg. I-4-12, they weigh: there are two possibilities, actually. There is a 315GAL tank, weighing in at 454lbs empty. And a 330 GAL at 429.
These are compared to the E/F model which has a 480 GAL, weighing in at 381lbs empty. Seems the older ones are high, but I believe the older tanks weighed more due to materials used in construction, perhaps.
These are the weights in the NATOPS manual, anyway. They may be adding in the single station, internal ejection machinery, perhaps, or maybe the C model had to use a single ejector pylon for the centerline, with the E/F having the internal ejector built in.
Sorry Pat, I mean the wing incidence (at root/tip, and the respective wing twist) not the wing dihedral/anhedral that will change with the flex under load or during high g maneuvers.
OH! Woops, sorry. I misunderstood. A common failing of mine :D
My idea remains, though, would averaging different sources readings for this be an acceptable solution? Just a thought .
Edit: Thank you very much for the data file. It will take me a bit to work through it, especially the math in the Flight Dynamics PDF file. It's been a LONG time since I did some of that math, although some is fairly easy. All depends on what one uses, I suppose. I worked up through Calculus in my Navy/MC schooling (Avi-C7), but that was in '82. I may take me a bit to get back into it, but I'm nothing if not stubborn, if not to mention relatively good at math (Although my appearance may seem to belie that). I will get it down (please note: I will never use the phrase "Down Pat" :D ). Since PDF files are small when by themselves, I have one similar to the Flight Dynamics one I can will send you as an attachment. It's very much similar, as far as the mathmatics goes, and has to do with the sections 1502 through 1507 in the air file, and how to properly set them. It may be of use to you, as you mentioned you are going to be working that area now. PSB
Pat☺
-
Update v2.0.5
Changelog:
- weight for empty external centerline tank added where appropriate
- engine tables reworked in conjunction with
- reset induced drag scalar to 1.0
- air file entry no. 1523, turbine variable inlet, corrected to 'false', which increases subsonic engine performance offsetting the additional induced drag caused by the reset scalar
- air file entry no. 1524, turbine afterburner thrust factor vs mach, adjusted to work in conjunction with changed engine tables
- new texture for NH version finished: NASA_TestPlane_852
- texture NASA_HARV_ANSER implemented, but still under construction
Note: Reworked engine tables and reset induced drag scalar give the bird a more realistic drag and flight behaviour. Additional engine table entries should also give a more realistic engine performance at various altitude levels.
Peter
-
Wow, it's the NASA N852NA paint scheme! Thanks!
Edit: Here's a screenshot. :)
(http://i.imgur.com/l66DNAV.jpg)
-
Glad to hear you like it, Orion.
I started with this simple but very elegant scheme because the NASA_HARV_ANSER texture will require a bit more work, and I was keen to release the updated flight dynamics.
-
That is a nice texture! I got used to seeing the old Phantom II's (and I do mean old age wise) with the matt-finish paintjobs. Even fresh off the wash rack, they weren't exactly what one could call shiny! By the same token, the way the Phantoms leak, everything and everywhere, it's not real suprizing. Most of the operational squadrons are less concerned with looks though.
May I ask what base that is? It looks like a good one for touch-n-goes. Just wondering :)
Pat☺
-
May I ask what base that is? It looks like a good one for touch-n-goes. Just wondering :)
It is KSFO, San Francisco International Airport. I do most of my flying within the sim around the bay area because the scenery is very versatile. My favorite airport I usually take off from and use as a base is KOAK, Oakland International Airport, runway 15. You get a nice view from the tower during takeoff and a close flyby, too.
Having said that, doesn't the 18 have variable intake doors for transonic/supersonic flight?
You are right with the variable intake doors. I consider these a simple bypass. If I remember correctly they are helping with engine rumbling at transsonic and supersonic flight and squeezing out more performance (up to mach 1.8) helping getting closer to the 2.0 mach number. What R1523 probably is aiming at is a variable intake ramp compressing the airflow at transsonic and supersonic flight, like the F-14s had, and such a thing the hornet engines are lacking. Anyway, right or wrong, I was desperately looking for a way to offset the lack of power at subsonic flight caused by the additional induced drag through the reset scalar value back to 1.0, and was more than happy when I remembered that this parameter change would be at least a step in the right direction.
Peter
-
KSFO! My father's home base (He was a UAL pilot for 35+years, after being a flight instructor in the Navy in the SNJ). I thought it looked familiar, but I wanted to be sure. I like the area to fly too, oddly. Moffet for me though. Saw my first F-4 there, at an airshow. The Blue Angels. I was about 8 or so. Good times. Great place to grow up too!
Ok, ok, enough reminiscing. I tried out your latest changes last night. And for these comments, please bear in mind I am not, nor ever was, anything resembling a fighter pilot, so haven't a clue just how the real FA-18 flies, other than watching the Angels fly at El Centro a lot when I was stationed at Yuma MCAS.
The first thing I noticed was that the %N2 displayed on the ENGINE screen of the MFD was now WAY different than it has been. Much lower for all throttle settings. Won't even make 100% at 25,000' MSL. is this significant? If not, can it be "fixed" so that the display of %N2 is accurate? I'm not certain, not watching it carefully as I do N2, but I believe %N1 is off on hte display too, as well as the EPR (Engine Pressure Ratio). Again, I am NOT a professional, not even an engine shop mech.
Next, the engine response to small throttle inputs seems much slower than it was, or, from reading the NATOPS, as it should be even. The NATOPS specifies engine response is instant (I know, the laws of inertia prohibit true "instant" response, but they wouldn't specify it if it weren't awful fast). I know that R1505 has a lot to do with it, as does R1501 #3, Spool-up Rate, but just HOW I am not certain. I'll read up more on this. I believe the R1505 over-rules R1501 settings for this, but I may well be wrong.
The engine settings may well be much closer to "real world accurate" now, especially at altitude (36K?). Not a clue which way (before or after v2.0.5 changes) is "correct" or more accurate to how the real plane functions, or even just how the real engines do, but personally, I much preferred the old way. They made the plane much more enjoyable to fly, especially around the boat, or doing T&G's for FCLPs. Just my personal opinion, based on my, literally, minutes of flight time :D Although the %N2 display errors I can vouch for, they are probably simply an error in displaying them now. Is there an offset in the MFD XML that can be changed to accomodate the changes in R1502-R1507? Wondering, although that seems more Jimi's baliwick.
On that subject, Jimi, is there any way to make the Speedbrake warning light brighter? It's awfully dim in daylight and non-existant at night. Also, is it possible to make the FCS Reset button actually functional? It'd be easier than wagging the rudders to get rid of hte annoying leftward drift problem. Lastly, why does the Anti-skid always return to "ON" once you have Weight on Wheels? I know it's supposed to be OFF on the boat, but I can't turn it off with WOW, and if I set it to OFF in the air, as soon as i touch down again, it's ON. A very minor detail, I know, but hey, "As real as it gets"!
Thanks to all for all the great work on this bird. It's a wonderfull plane to fly, and the looks are amazing!
Pat☺
-
Thanks for your feedback Pat. I will try to offset the reset induced drag scalar with the original engine entries, again.
Rebuilding the engine from scratch and make it comply to NATOPS is currently out of my league. I will try to learn and experiment with it as I go along and will be hopefully getting closer step by step. What disturbed me most and was the reason I started working on it was the very low induced drag scalar that caused other issues and made the plane behave unrealistic during flight maneuvers requiring high AoAs.
Peter
-
Hi Peter! Thanks for the quick response ;)
I'll revert the R1501-R1507 sections to see what happens, if you want. Easy thing to do. Harder to get a truly objective test of how the bird flies, but I'll know right off about the N1, N2, and EPR displays. I'll be able to get an idea of the slow-speed flight characteristics (around the boat, in the pattern, etc). As to the High AOA maneuvers, it's been since '74 that I tried stuff like that in the real world, and then it was in a glider (around '75 or '76 I got to play in a Citabria some too) chasing hawks around the Napa Valley cliffs. Not being mean, they would come up when they wanted to play. Anyway, I'm slowly working on educating myself on the Hornet, so I'll do my best this evening. It's a learning curve. And without the "feel" of what the aircraft is doing...well...
Jimi: I figured out WHY the Anti-skid works as it does, requiring hte wings to be folded to be OFF. I read the XML (What little bit i understand, anyway). May I ask just why it's that way? I know planes go all over the boat without folding the wings. Just curious more than anything.
And of course, every time I go to fly I go off-line, and as soon as i'm in the cockpit, I remember another question I keep having, but I forget it as soon as I shut everything down, naturally. I'll get it, you wait and see!!
Pat☺
-
On that subject, Jimi, is there any way to make the Speedbrake warning light brighter? It's awfully dim in daylight and non-existant at night. Also, is it possible to make the FCS Reset button actually functional? It'd be easier than wagging the rudders to get rid of hte annoying leftward drift problem. Lastly, why does the Anti-skid always return to "ON" once you have Weight on Wheels? I know it's supposed to be OFF on the boat, but I can't turn it off with WOW, and if I set it to OFF in the air, as soon as i touch down again, it's ON. A very minor detail, I know, but hey, "As real as it gets"!
Thanks to all for all the great work on this bird. It's a wonderfull plane to fly, and the looks are amazing!
Pat☺
Hey Pat,
-Yes, there is a way to make the Speedbrake warning light brighter. I will work on that when I get back home.
-As for the FCS button, probably not. That would involve decompiling the model, animating the button, and assigning function. All of which is out of my league. The Anti Spin Switch is animated, and for now, that is what will eventually take that function in this jet.
-The defect with the Anti Skid can probably be traced back to when we were working on the Acceleration Hornet when the anti-skid switch was not animated and that jet had Anti-Skid set to OFF by default so the wheels would lock up everytime you tapped the brakes. That gauge is probably still sitting in the Panel folder somewhere waiting to be deleted. Easy fix (hopefully)
As for the power settings, I started out doing most of my work in the subsonic area. For the most part, I've been working on a data set that SLUDGE gave me a while back from a guy named "Average Joe". He apparently is a Legacy Hornet pilot and provided some info for us to use.
Within the data set, he provided:
-Speeds achieved at various fuel flow settings at various altitudes
-Thrust outputs based on various RPM settings
-Time elapsed to achieve certain speeds based on Mil Thrust.
-Basic table of thrust degradation as altitude increases.
So with that info, and info that I already have (i.e. aircraft weight & thrust specific fuel consumption), I was able to calculate how much thrust the engines should produce at a given fuel flow and altitude. From there, I adjusted the drag so that the aircraft matched the speed indicated in his data. In order to get it as close as possible, I started at higher speeds where the LEF and TEF were fully retracted so that I didn't have to take into effect drag created by flaps. For flaps, I used the info that i gathered about carrier landing parameters, such as Trap Weight, typical ENG RPM and configuration settings that are usually found to keep the jet "on-speed" during the pattern and the approach. I would adjust lift and drag to help match those parameters.
I'll look for it and post Joe's data when I make it back home.
Hope this helps.
-
-The defect with the Anti Skid can probably be traced back to when we were working on the Acceleration Hornet when the anti-skid switch was not animated and that jet had Anti-Skid set to OFF by default so the wheels would lock up everytime you tapped the brakes. That gauge is probably still sitting in the Panel folder somewhere waiting to be deleted. Easy fix (hopefully)
I may be to blame for reintroducing that issue, when working on the visuals concerning ladder, covers and blocks I tried to fix the visual glitch of the main gear wheels too, when they lock up each time while breaking. As the Antiskid_Brakes gauge (from version 12.3.2) is apparently causing other issues I will disable it with the next update, for the time being. Perhaps it can be fixed later in a way avoiding any further issues, while still having the wheels not visually locking up.
Edit: Concerning the external fuel tanks 330 vs 380/385 gal. capacity, I stumbled over a picture (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/aircraft/fa18/fa18ord.html) showing the 330 version having horizontal contours (like the ones showing with the default fsx textures) whereas the 380/385 tanks do not seem to have these contours anymore. This encourages me to believe that the ones with 380/385 gal. capacity seem to be newer/upgrades.
Update v2.0.6
Changelog:
- reverted .air file engine tables 1502-1507 back to original ones (FSXBA version 15.2)
- induced drag scalar reduced to 0.45 in combination with no. 1523 (false) and adjusted 1524 table
- wing sweep set back to 20 deg. (1/4 chord)
- anti-skid brake gauge disabled
- minor MOI adjustments to incorporate recent changes (added empty weight of external centerline tank, etc.)
Peter
-
Jimi:
Thank you very much. That cleared up all my questions so far! I sure appreciate you taking the time for it.
I did think of my final question (for the moment at least :D ): Is there any readily workable way to change the minimum throttle setting once airborne to 68%? There is a Flight Idle "stop bar" that extends when Weight OFF Wheels, then retracts when the WOW switches trip again. Just wondering. Another of those "realism" things. NOT a major detail at all.
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
Just so you know, R1506 is altitude reduced Corrected Thrust, I believe, and from what I've read, it's R1507 for the RAM Drag, which may be of use in setting Max Thrust for given flight parameters. I think, anyway, although it's a rare phenomenon :D
Peter:
I didn't mean to disparage you efforts so far in anyway, nor imply that your changes were unaccaptable in any form. I was mainly wondering about the indication differences and thrust settings for different conditions, was all. I meant no criticism whatsoever. I apologize if I came across that way. Really!
I was thinking that perhaps changing R1507 would accomplish the desired ends for all, not changing fuel flow or N1/N2 indications or thrust produced, while adjust for the Induced drag changes? I'm not saying it's the be-all and end-all by far, but maybe a starting point for both at the same time?
Just a thought from a total tyro :)
Pat☺
-
No hard feelings, Pat. Thanks to your and Jimi's comments I quickly realized that this was a step in the wrong direction, and I really appreciate the feedback.
If I understand it correctly, the information Jimi will provide actually gives us something to benchmark against. Maybe he is willing to share some of his calculations and additional explanations. I will try to setup some calculations/tables in Excel that will hopefully enable us to create the desired engine characteristics, and offset the low induced drag scalar, too.
Currently I do not know how all of these tables go together and which does what exactly, but I am confident that I will figure it out, sooner or later.
An other issue I currently have is that I can only edit a single (function) line and not the whole table. I probably will need some other tool beside AAM and AirEd to to this.
For the time being I will focus my efforts on the NASA_HARV_ANSER texture.
Again, thank you all for your comments and valuable feedback so far, much appreciated.
Peter
-
Gents,
Should be getting off early today. I will push out the info when I get home. Data is not all inclusive, but definitely a good place to start. I will also post up what I know in regards to tuning engine parameters in the .air file. In short... it's very fun stuff! (not..)
I did think of my final question (for the moment at least :D ): Is there any readily workable way to change the minimum throttle setting once airborne to 68%? There is a Flight Idle "stop bar" that extends when Weight OFF Wheels, then retracts when the WOW switches trip again.
If my knowledge serves me right (which it usually does not lol...), we can tackle this one of two was. We can create a gauge that will advance the throttles forward every time it detects the RPM below 68% while in flight. The other way i think lies in the .air file and would be the min RPM based on airspeed. Have to double check that one.
Pete,
Here are the basics of how the engine tables work in the .air file:
http://www.mudpond.org/jet_flow_chart.pdf
I have also attached an article by Roy Holmes. He is the Guru on anything propulsion related in FSX.
Hope it helps.
-
Jimi:
Thank you for those two bits of info! Sadly, I already use them both :D The second one is the one I just sent to Peter via ZippyShare. I think it's great we are all in the same book anyway. As to the same page, well, I think I'm still in the table of contents. Heh. I am learning, slowly but surely, though. I can't get that friggen NASA program, Engine-Sim-Sim, to work on my comp either. My Java keeps getting upset with it no matter what I do to the config for it. I do thank you for thinking of us at least, especially just returning from a cruise. I know I always had, ahem, Other Things on my mind at that point than a computer game!
Doing the Flight Idle gauge would really rock! I obviously don't have a clue How To on XML gauges or I'd give it a shot myself, to try and save you the effort. About the most complex thing I've ever done is making an Icon to put in a Panel file. Between the math for .air file aerodynamics, jet engine dynamics, how to fly certain maneuvers, and now XML coding, it's all a lot to try and learn in a short period. Especially for, to borrow a quote from an OLD movie; an old, one-eyed, fat man.
But heck, it's proving well worth the time and effort so far, in the satisfaction I'm getting in helping! The data file for the engines will be a huge help, whenever you can get around to posting it, no question!
Thanks again for the answers. I know you're busy with the end-of-cruise stuff, so it is a big deal that you took the time. At least to me!
EDIT: Peter: I use AirEd myself, but as a standalone. My AirEd version is 1.5.0, and I can edit all three columns of 1502-1507. I click the cell I want, and hit enter, highlight the whole number by left-click-hold, move cursor across entire number in cell, release, type in the number I want. AirEd adds in needed trailing zero's, if any required. I don't know if this helps or not but I thought maybe...
Pat☺
-
As promised, this is the data set that I use for engine performance along with a few other things.
Cruise numbers:
at 5,000 ft; aircraft weight = basic plus full fuel load; aircraft is clean.
.5M: 2800 lbs per hour per engine (PPH)
.6M 3300 PPH
.7M 4300 PPH
.8M 5500 PPH
.85M 12800 PPH (.85M is max speed in mil thrust).
More numbers:
at 15,000 ft; aircraft weight = basic plus full fuel load;
aircraft is clean.
.5M: 2250 lbs per hour per engine (PPH)
.6M 2600 PPH
.7M 3150 PPH
.8M 3800 PPH
.85M 4600 PPH
.9M 5300 PPH
at 25,000 ft; aircraft weight = basic plus full fuel load;
aircraft is clean.
.5M: 2200 lbs per hour per engine (PPH)
.6M 2250 PPH
.7M 2400 PPH
.8M 2750 PPH
.85M 3100 PPH
.9M 3700 PPH
Acceleration times: At 6,000 ft MSL, MIL power.
360KIAS to 420 KIAS = 9 sec
360 to 480 = 19 sec
360 to 520 = 26 sec
360 to 550 = 33 sec
Since your tweaking here is some general RPM vs % thrust of a turbojet info that may help:
50% RPM = 15% Mil thrust
60% RPM = 22% Mil thrust
70% RPM = 29% Mil thrust
80% RPM = 46%
90% RPM = 69%
95% RPM = 84%
99% RPM = 97%
100% RPM = 100%
Altitude variation
SL = 1.0 of SL thrust
5K = .95 of SL thrust
10K = .90 of SL thrust
15K = .84
20K = .78
25K = .72
30K = .67
35K = .61
-
Pat,
NASA Engine Sim
Great program if you can get it to work. Have you tried following these directions?
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/javaset.html
XML 101
XMLs aren't that bad once you understand what you are looking at. Hell, if SLUDGE was able to tech me (and I'm pretty dim-witted), then it you should be able to grasp it no problem lol. Biggest recommendations is to take an existing gauge and make small changes to some of the variable to see how things work. Obviously the more you play with them, the easier they get to tinker with. Don't really need math much, unless you are doing some high level coding which is few and far between.
Basically they are if/then situations of "simulation variables" (parameters that the gauge monitors) and "events" (actions to be done once all variable conditions are met).
Example:
(A:CENTER WHEEL RPM,rpm) 40 <
if{ (A:RUDDER PEDAL INDICATOR, position) 0.25 * (>K:STEERING_SET) }
All of things that follow the "A:" are sim variables or "SimVars". Take the first line, (A:CENTER WHEEL RPM,rpm) 40 <. That tells the gauge to look at the Center Wheel RPM. Unit of measure for it will be revolutions per minute or "rpm". The "40 <" tells the gauge that the condition is "true" if the wheel rpm is at 40 rpm and below ("<" translates to "and less than". ">" translates to "and greater than. "==" translates to equal to). After all conditions are stated, you have the "if" statement which tells the gauge what action you want the gauge to take once all conditions are met. Take if{ (A:RUDDER PEDAL INDICATOR, position) 0.25 * (>K:STEERING_SET) } for example. This states that once the center wheel rpm is at 40 rpm and below, the gauge needs to take whatever the rudder pedal position value is and multiply it times (*) 0.25, or a quarter of what it was and feed that value into the nosewheel controller event, which is named "STEERING_SET". The ">K:" tells the gauge that the following is an event. STEERING_SET is an actual event as defined in the SDK manual. You can get the complete list of SimVars and Event IDs from the SDK manual. Once you have finished making the gauge, make sure you add it into the Gauge Config file with the correct sequential number in the "Virtual Cockpit" area. From there you should be good to go.
AirEd vs. AirUpdate
I use AirEd for some things, but for engine stuff I usually stick to AirUpdate. No GUI involved really, but presents all the data in a tabular fashion. An example 1506 table below if you haven't worked with it.
Record: 1506 Turbine Thrust Scalars vs CN1 and Mach No.
columns: 3 rows: 23
0.000000 0.000000 1.000000
0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
20.000000 0.025000 0.034317
25.097298 0.032365 0.047894
30.194595 0.038389 0.055154
35.000000 0.046789 0.066401
40.097298 0.056153 0.080213
44.902702 0.060766 0.095589
49.902702 0.069130 0.116049
55.000000 0.077283 0.140532
59.708107 0.086778 0.178202
64.805405 0.111790 0.229732
69.513512 0.160155 0.289779
75.271004 0.249719 0.398308
80.173706 0.361495 0.529790
85.000000 0.497553 0.688178
90.000000 0.673341 0.926532
94.491165 0.894423 1.273138
97.000000 1.010000 1.503138
98.000000 1.000000 1.700000
99.000000 0.950000 1.900000
99.500000 0.500000 2.150000
100.000000 0.430000 2.400000
Hope this helps.
-
Jimi,
thanks for your quick and valuable feedback, I know you must be very busy, much appreciated.
Pat,
thanks for the hint that "Enter" will do the trick. I am sure I have tried this several times before, but it NEVER worked, as I now found out, when you have MORE than one AirEd session open, which I usually do. Editing tables will not work in this case, nor will file copying/pasting on the desktop or with Windows Explorer while multiple AirEd sessions are open. Must have propably something to do how .air file entries can be copied/pasted between two AirEd sessions, locking up the clipboard or something else. With just one AirEd session active everything works as it should be, again.
Just finished the NASA_HARV_ANSER texture, in the process I have discovered a few small texture fixes and improvements I like to appy to the rest of the texture pack too, so I will prepare an other upgrade this weekend.
Peter
Edit: Just finished some flying with the bird, switching between D version Trainer and the C version GBU, and noticed for the first time that adjusting all that MOIs and weights really seems to make a difference. You can actually feel how the plane is heavier or lighter, slower or faster to accelerate, how it rolls easier or is more resiliant to stick input, that the g limiter has a tighter regime during turns with more weight, etc. I really like it and start to believe that all that aliasing and adding folders was finally worth it.
-
Pat,
NASA Engine Sim
Great program if you can get it to work. Have you tried following these directions?
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/javaset.html
Yup! Followed it to the letter. I work with trying to get it going when I have time, between flight testing, researching engine parameters, , going to the Dr., etc etc. I think I'm busier now that I'm retired than I was when I was working!
As to the XML 101: THANK YOU!! That is an immense help in getting going! I really appreciate it. I can understand what I'm reading a lot better now, when I go through an existing XML gauge. I may even begin to work on writing a few simple things to start out, just to see how things go. It's how I got started with Aircraft.CFG and Panel.CFG files. I'm still learning on the .air files, but hey, "The more I learn, the less I realize what I know", if that makes any sense.
I also found a tutorial on FS2X website, by Nick Pike. It's got everything, including the various LVars, Key Events, you name it. Great resource for me to work off of.
Thank you again, and for taking time out of what I know can be a hectic time.
I also thank you for all the data you provided. It will help a lot!
Peter: I'm glad you got the AirEd thing figured out. I haven't tried both editing a table entry, AND having more than one open at the same time, which may be why I never had the problem. I've had one or the other, never both. No idea why, just wound up that way out of blind luck, I suppose.
Since I've only been experimenting with the NH C model Training setup, I've never noticed a difference, oddly enough :D I wanted a consistent plane to work with. I am glad the "separate folders" system works so well! It was a lucky day for us all when you had that brainstorm! A hearty GOOD JOB! to you :D
-
Thanks, it would not have been possible without the help of you all!
Pat, I remembered having run the EngineSim applet approximately 3 years ago without any issues in IE. With the current Java Runtime Environment it does not seen to be compatible, no matter what I tried it would not start. I than quickly setup a virtual machine (Win7 x64) with JRE 1.6.0 build 45 (32-bit) and the browser applet ran in IE (v11) out of the box, I did not even have to tinker with the security settings.
In case you need the old JRE, I found it on the web: http://filehippo.com/download_jre_32/tech/14872/
I hope this helps.
Peter
-
Upgrade: 2.1.0
Changelog:
- minor texture improvements throughout the pack
- NH texture NASA_HARV_ANSER finished
- incorporated latest updates into new upgrade
Have fun,
Peter
-
Thanks for the link. I'll give it a shot soon. My wife is getting ready for a trip back east soon, so of course, it's come down to panic time :) Once I get some breathing room, I'll get set up like that again. I'm glad it wasn't jut my ignorance causing my failure on getting EngineSim going.
Thank you also for the latest update. I got it now, going to install and fly later this evening.
Pat☺
-
Work in progress - just when I thought I would be done with the textures for a while. Fired the bird up this morning for a quick spin during a coffee break, when I noticed that I have slightly misplaced some tail numbers (VMFAT-101_200), and some other inconsistencies with the canopy warning labels that did not look good (NASA and prototype textures). Got it fixed right away, and will wait a few more days to see if some other visual issues might bob up I have not noticed before, I will release a fix later this week. Just wanted to let you know.
...so of course, it's come down to panic time. Once I get some breathing room, I'll get set up like that again.
Yeah, I know this feeling. When my mother comes visiting from time to time, it feels like one is 8 years again and you haven't cleaned up your room. Probably, childhood traumata ;) My girlfiend complains that I usually do not make such a fuss about it when she is getting back from a business trip or a short vacation with her girlfriends - probably one of the reasons why we are still are together :)
-
Whats up all?? Hope all is well I just been kind of busy but I am back now to continue to fly this amazing aircraft. Any other updates that I should know about?? Let me know, thanks.
I'll be around!! ;D
-
The latest update to the three Hornet versions, FSXBA (NH: Jimi's version, modified), the Captain Sim version (CS), and the original FSX Hornet (FS), all with the all the paints for each, in the C and D models. Peter put a lot of work into this whole project, and still is, I believe. There are also the Sludge version, and Jimi's 15.2, but you have to go find those. I can't tell you where they are any more. Mind like a steel sieve, I tell ya! :D
Oh! And welcome back, btw, Switch.
Pat☺
-
Awesome thanks Pat!!
-
Update v2.1.1
Changelog:
- Small texture corrections (VMFAT-101, Blue Angels)
- G-limiter adjustment
- Afterburner color and saturation slightly adjusted
Peter
Edit: Update v2.1.2 (cumulative)
Forgot to add some texture corrections for:
- Hornet_Prototype1
- Hornet_Prototype2
- Hornet_Test
- NASA_HARV_ANSER
- NASA_TestPlane_852
- NASA_X53_AAW
-
Hi all!
Sorry I've been quiet, been flying, reading, tweaking, you name it. And loving the new horizons opening up as the inner workings of these planes, and the Sim too, are comming slowly clearer. Got a LONG way to go, but I'm working on it.
As usual, I have a small question. I was reading through the FCS gauges xml's, and in the Inverted_Fuel_Tank.xml I noticed reference to both an inverted flight switch, and it's guard. I can find absolutely nothing like this in the cockpit, and in fact the SRM system is the only guarded switch I saw (I'm reading that soon, believe me!). Especially since I am frequently departing while trying to figure out the Pirouette maneuver. IS there such a switch? If so, where? Am I just missing it or is it not included for whatever reason? I didn't see an XML for it, nor an entry in the Panel.cfg, but I am far from infallable. Which reminds me, does the Hook Bypass Switch actually DO anything, or is it just eye candy? I know, it'll kill me some day but hey, I'm a nosey SOB :D
By the way, best explanation I ever saw on that was in one of the HTMLs Peter was very kind enough to send me as part of the Refrence.zip file. VRS forum entry, matter of fact, written by a real world test pilot. He said, and I quote, "The Hornet will stand on it's tail at 100 KIAS and 35° AOA and reverse it's nose's heading. It's like a combination of hammerhead with quater-roll thrown in". THAT sentence I got. I did it with my hand as an airplane till I figured it out, then a few (dozen) times "chair flying" or "desk flying" it, ie doing it all in my head, as though I were sitting in the cockpit (both of which are Navy/MC normal practice for pilots from Ensigns on up, BTW), and I think I may be getting a clue! I actually DID manage a decent barrell roll recently too. Lotta new stuff to learn, and whatta platform to learn it all on! I've done it all in prop planes, and gliders too (for real!), but this is a new world. And I'm loving it, too! Thank you to all for the wonderful opportunity!
Now, I'm going flying :) Great day (night?) to all!
Pat☺
-
I was reading through the FCS gauges xml's, and in the Inverted_Fuel_Tank.xml I noticed reference to both an inverted flight switch, and it's guard. I can find absolutely nothing like this in the cockpit, and in fact the SRM system is the only guarded switch I saw (I'm reading that soon, believe me!). Especially since I am frequently departing while trying to figure out the Pirouette maneuver. IS there such a switch? If so, where? Am I just missing it or is it not included for whatever reason? I didn't see an XML for it, nor an entry in the Panel.cfg, but I am far from infallable. Which reminds me, does the Hook Bypass Switch actually DO anything, or is it just eye candy? I know, it'll kill me some day but hey, I'm a nosey SOB :D
Pat,
Inverted gauge is there for a couple of reasons. First is to simulate the tendency for the engines to starve at negative G. Talking to the Blues, this usually happens around 30 seconds or so. The jet isn't designed to be flown for extended times in negative or zero G. Because some of the maneuvers flown by the Blues are flown inverted for extended times, they've installed inverted fuel pumps to extend the amount of time that they can fly inverted. If you have ever seen the dash of a Blues F/A-18, you will notice a few extra buttons, switches and lights mounted on it. Most of them are for operating and indicating the status of the inverted fuel pumps. If you jump in one of the FSXBA Blue Angels jets, you will see these switches and indicators as well. The guarded switch should be on the left side of the dash. This enables the inverted fuel pumps in the sim and allows for extended inverted flight.
As for the Bypass switch did work the last time I checked, but I might have disabled it for some reason or other. It's primary purpose deals with the AOA bracket lights. When enabled, the lights are stead on regardless of hook position. Off, the lights blink until the hook is lowered.
Hope this helps.
-
Thank you very much, Jimi! You answered my questions perfectly. I always thought that switch atop the glare shield bow was for smoke, or something like that (knowing the Angels propensity for the stuff :D ). NOW I get it! And the lights are therefore time left inverted. I understand completely, now. My appreciation. I guess this means I'll have to put a BA panel in for those birds to use. That I know how to do :) I will say the inverted flight tank XML works great as-is though. About the third time I lost the engines trying to do the "4G, INVERTED dive with a MiG???" thing. I'm a huge Top Gun fan. I realize, I should have +4G all the way through, if done correctly. I need more practice, really. I know, that was a F-14B (I think. I'm not great at the B vs D comparison), but what the heck. It's fun to try nonetheless.
Thank you also for the Hook Bypass explanation. I was wondering about the flashing AOA. It's a Gibbs-Slap over the skull to drop the hook. Wonderfull. The more I learn, the more I love these birds!
I also appreciate the quick response, and Welcome Home! I know the first several days are hectic, so I really appreciate your time. Have fun!
Pat☺
-
No problem Pat. Still out to sea actually. Just had a little time to check out and post. Thanks again.
-
Hi all!
I've been doing some digging, and I believe I have found the definitive data on how FSX (well, MSFS in general, FS9 and FSX in particular) utilizes and how to properly set the tables R1501 through R1507 in .air files, as well as the [Turbine_Engine] section of aircraft.cfg files. There is a TON of info and some pretty advanced, but not too esoteric, mathematics provided as part and parcel.
It is the FSDeveloper forums, and two threads in particular. The links to the two threads are http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/air-table-1507.250358/ (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/air-table-1507.250358/) and http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/jet-engine-performance.240073/ (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/jet-engine-performance.240073/). I've been slogging through them both slowly, but I'm trying. Maybe they will help others as well. Hope so, anyway!
Pat☺
-
Thanks Pat, that's a ton of useful information concerning the engines, much appreciated.
I won't have much time in the near future, so I will focus on reading and getting a general understanding of how the engines work in the sim.
Lately I have been thinking about some other questions that came to my mind, too:
1) Currently when additional weight is added to the plane (fuel, loadout, etc.) it becomes easier to pull high AoAs, at slow speed with a given amount of stick input involved. This means, at the end of a flight when most of the fuel is gone, the maximum AoAs one is being able to pull during tight turns at slow speed is reduced. I do not know weather a real Hornet would behave in a similar way, my general understanding would say no, respectively the other way around, but I might be wrong.
2) One other thing that always kept me guessing is the elevator efficiency. Is it too strong or too weak? Against what can we actually benchmark it? My personal routine for testing/setting up the elevator efficiency is right after takeoff at sea level, at slow speed, with max dry thrust, during a tight turn/circle I try to reach 30-35deg. AoAs. with max stick input. Currently we use a V-shaped (linear) function for the elevator control (table 341). I have always wondered weather it would be more U-shaped (progressive) in real life or rather linear, as is?
Maybe someone is able to shed some light onto these questions or knows someone who might know such things, and might be willing to provide some additional information we could use.
Best regards, Peter
P.S. Glad to hear Sludge is back on the forum. A few years back it was his mod that got me interested in the legacy hornet first, and was the reason I always came back to simming and finally to modding. Sincere thanks!
-
Hello all!
Peter:
In addition to the two threads I posted from the FSDev forums, I was reading through Yves Guillaume's PDF Flight Dynamics in MSFS V1.0 After several hours of study of that, I got, besides a headache, totally and completely twisted sidewise trying to keep the interrelations involved straight in my poor old addled brain (well, addled NOW! :) ). What I essentially came away with was that your two questions are interrelated in a very complex fashion. I believe the short answer to #2 is basically that it changes with CG (like fuel weight, payload etc). This leads us back to question #1 in that the AOA is easier to change at higher weights has to do with how MSFS (including FSX) treats elevator effectivity overall vs "hand forces". It seems MSFS is designed for Joystick control, where the force is zeroed be returning the joystick to center. This is much like a stabaug system. Thus, the more weight on the bird, the same motion of the joystick causes a greater change in the pitch (or roll, or yaw) moment, since there is more mass available to "help" or increase the pitch moment. Thus, to my thinking, more weight, more moment per "hand force" or joystick movement per unit deflection of the joystick.
All this has complex math involved, but Yves does a pretty good job of explaining it all, to my mind. The PDF is readily available on the net, and in the FSDev forums, although I had to use Google to find the thread it was posted in. I just put Flight Dynamics in MSFS V1.0 in the search box and it was the second down. The first DL location Google gave required registration (Free) and I just didn't want to spend the time.
I thought you already had this PDF, but if you don't, I can put the zipfile up on ZippyShare for all, should you wish.
NOW, I am going flying to relax :)
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, thanks for your explanations, this really helped a lot. I already have the document "Flight Dynamics in Microsoft Flight Simulator" by Yves Guillaume, but I have only read a few passages so far, in particular pages 14-15 concerning the moments of inertia.
When I understand you correctly, the only thing I could do so far is to tweak elevator efficiency specifically for each model version/loadout so they will each have roughly the same behaviour according to their specific weight. All other aspects seem to be inherent to the system of the sim and cannot be changed. Thus, I will consider specific elevator efficiency tweaks for each model version/loadout for the next upgrade.
This leaves only the following questions open for debate:
a) How strong/weak should the general elevator efficiency be, e.g. max. AoAs at slow speed during a tight turn at sea level, with max. dry thrust and full stick input, the airplane should be able to reach? How would a real legacy Hornet behave in this situation, would the elevator deflection be strong enough to put the plane into a stall situation and would this be tolerated, or would this be countered by the FCS as a deviation from controlled flight path and the elevator deflection thus be limited?
b) Should the elevator function be linear (V-shaped) as it already is or rather be progressive (U-shaped) in order to empathize the correct flight behaviour of a real legacy Hornet?
c) Is the elevator efficiency function symmetrical or asymmetrical for up and down pitch in a real Hornet? Currently, the down pitch is slightly decreased (flatter angle) in comparison to the upward pitch - is this realistic?
Peter
-
Peter,
Seems like you are starting to arrive at the same point that I am at and where Orion and I have been working in regards to the PIDs.
Your questions assume that stick movement directly correlates to stab/elevator positions when in reality it does not. Stick positions correlates to either AOA or G. If commanding G, then the stabs will move more at slower speeds to give the pilot the G that is requested based on the stick position. If at lower speeds (below corner) then the stabs will adjust to give the pilot the correct amount of AOA as requested by stick position.
Last I checked cornering speed of the legacy is around 310 KIAS. In theory, that should be the lowest speed in which the Hornet can reach 7.5 Gs.
In regards to a linear or exponential, I think it is more a matter of preference. In our 2012 release, we used curved which provided nice fine adjustment flight characteristics near stick center, but still provided the "umph" needed to pull hard Gs. The linear approach provided predictable pitch characteristics through the entire pull.
Being that the max pos and max neg are different, I would imagine that the logic would be different to match max G pos/neg with max pull or push. A pull all of the way back would command max G of 7.5, while a push all of he way forward would give you neg. 3 Gs. In order to accomplish this, the elevators need a little less "bang for the buck" while pushing.
But all of that is null and void if you are implementing PIDs for G and AOA commanded inputs.
Another option is to get SLUDGE's inputs since he has direct access to the Growlers/Grizzlies sims. It's not Legacy, but far better than nothing.
Hope this helps.
Hope this helps.
-
That was going to be my next answer, too. Ask Sludge, since he works with the Navy's training sims, which are gaining more and more popularity (or at least use) in the tighter budget environments of late. Costs a lot less in maintenance and fuel to fly a sim, not to mention a lot less cost in ejection seats :D
As to how a real-world Hornet flies, other than what I can read in Approach magazine or other sources on the net, or ask in various forums, I haven't a clue. I was foolish enough to drop plans for college (Stanford or Davis) and go active USMC because I was mad at my parents. Boy I really showed them, huh? By the time I managed to get through all the hoops for MECEP (Marine Enlisted Commissioning Educational Program or they pay for my college, I stay in X years as an Officer), I was too old for flight school selection. Pretty dumb of me, I realize, but anyway...
I would suggest getting ahold of some of the real Hornet drivers in the General FSDT forum. Seems to be more than a few on there, off and on. They may or may not have the mathematical details, but the anecdotal evidence can be invaluable.
For the linear vs exponential curves of R341, which is actually only a part of how "effective" the elevators are, first, you can trying making one of each, NO other changes to the .air file, same exact conditions, like fuel, payload, temp, pressure etc etc, and try your test (the high AOA low level edge of stall turn), as close to the same way. Same speed, same thrust, same G, same AOA, etc., and see which seems more "realistic". To you. Again the trick, I believe, is to isolate a single variable at a time, as much as possible. Being humans, we are far from perfect, but you should be able to get pretty close, I think. Second, I believe, although I may well be wrong, that to get a decent exponential curve to R341, you would need more X,Y pairs. Most of those tables are limited as to how many pairs or data points are permitted per table, so you may well actually have a less linear curve than you think from a glance, there's just so few data points it's not obvious visually, again, at a glance.
I have tried making some (very) small changes to R341, and studied the effect, but again, a real Pilot I aint, and a test pilot I am far from. I've also made some other minor .air file changes. Once I am "statisfied" (statistically satisfied :D I love English!) it's flying like I believe it should from all I've gathered, I'll send you a copy of the .air file.
Last I checked cornering speed of the legacy is around 310 KIAS.
Jimi, again I owe you a huge debt of thanks!! I've been looking for that tidbit of info for the longest time!!! And you just casually pop it out. Wow, all I can say. :D
Keep the clean side up, and for Heaven's sake, do NOT depart down that low :)
Pat☺
-
Jimi, hi! I forgot to ask last night: May I ask under what circumstances one would input extra/manual (pedal??) rudder during maneuvering? You mentioned that the FCS handles the rudder for coordinated turns, but you also mentioned that the Angels in particular tend to utilize rudder a LOT. Ok, do they/you (whatever) turn the FCS off (Master Arm ON) during specific maneuvers, all maneuvers, no maneuvers? Do you add rudder on top of the FCS inputs? I thought that reset the rudder inputs from the FCS. Did you mean the FCS makes large rudder inputs, as seen on the data page (shft-8) that is available? Speaking of the Data Page, on the NH Hornet version Peter put out, it shows the flaps system "OFF" under all conditions. no UA, no landing configuration, nothing, even when IN landing config (under 33K Gross weight, Gear down, Hook down, Flaps FULL selected) . Is it just not sensing the Flaps system operation for some reason? I am thinking of starting to burrow into it's XML file (please don't let it be a .GAU file!!) to see what I can see, just thought I'd go the easy route first :) Please see the attached JPEG for an example. The lower left part of the page. Note that several other things, whose gauges I know are in the Panel.cfg also are inactive according to the Data Page, like the G-LIM and ROLL-LIM features. The T/O trim /Landing Trim and ATC off is understandable, since they were, in fact, off. I haven't looked to see if they show ON at the appropriate times or not, but i will right now...
I'm just trying to fly right, as the saying goes.
Thanks again for all the help you are kind enough to give. I sure appreciate it!
Pat☺
-
Pat,
Rudder is part of the Blues technique for keeping close formation. Instead of banking left and right to keep proper lateral separation, the use rudder. That way, all of the wings in the formation are not rocking back and forth and they appear to be solid and "welded together"
If you watch the diamond takeoff and as the #4 pilot transition into the slot position, you will see him using rudder as well.
On our team, we do not turn off the FCS. The systems continues to add rudder (via use of rudder trim event) to coordinate turns and adds any additional manual rudder provided by the pilot.
As far as the data page, that FCS system needs to be updated. Many of the gauges and parameters that was read by that gauge has been changed such as converting them from XML to C++. Just need to updated/reconnect some of them.
Hope this helps.
-
On our team, we do not turn off the FCS. The systems continues to add rudder (via use of rudder trim event) to coordinate turns and adds any additional manual rudder provided by the pilot.
I thought the current setup uses the AXIS_RUDDER_SET key event (actual rudder position) to coordinate turns (only when user input is rudder neutral) and uses rudder trim for RSRI?
-
I'm think that's the setup for the PID version that you and I are working on. The team hasn't transitioned to that one yet. And I dont think that Peter and Pat are flying that one either. If I remember correctly, the one they have has an algorithm that sums up rudder output needed for coordinating turns and for RSRI and sends as a numerical value to rudder trim. Leaving normal rudder to be used as normal, thus adding or subtracting to what is already there.....i think....
Gonna have to take a look once I get back home.
-
Thanks Jimi! I wasn't expecting such a quick response. I knew about how the rudder was used in formation flying. Believe it or not. When I was 14 and learning to fly gliders, that's exactly how we "boxed the wake", a precision exercise when on the tow plane. Normal position is slightly above and centered, hence above the wake and in view of the tow pilot who has a "window" in the upper fuselage over the cabin (on a high wing) with a large rear view mirror, but for the exercise, I was expected to make a rectangle or square around the tow plane's wake. If I dipped a wing during the horizontal slide to the side top and bottom, I got smacked in the head. My IP had amazing accuracy with that yardstick. It was used to indicate to the tow pilot a desire to deviate from the briefed target for drop-off, indicating for him to go away from the position of the glider relative to his wake. Above left, please turn right level, that sort of thing. We didn't have radios in the gliders.
I had thought you meant that during certain maneuvers you used more rudder than just the FCS provided. I am utilizing what Peter terms the NH model he has on page one of this thread. I am pretty sure it utilizes the same FCS system as the FSX BA 15.2 version, if that helps any.
So with this system, it sums the output from the RSRI xml, if any, with what it generates internally, so to speak, and applies that summation answer to the rudder trim of the aircraft, if I understand correctly, yes? This being enough to coordinate a "normal" turn at "normal" AOAs, but things like formation flying, or abrupt maneuvers at very high AOA's, or whatever, the rudders are fully available for pilot input, correct? That's the way I'm reading it, anyway. But with the new PID system, all this will change? I'm just being nosy, is all :) I think that's what Mr. Orion was indicating, anyway. I look forward to any new changes, since they always seem to be improvements.
Thanks again, I appreciate the responses. Helps me wend my way through all this :D
Pat☺
-
Pat,
The way it your rudder should work right now is indicated below:
Turn Coordination (Angle of Bank + Airspeed) + RSRI (Lateral Stick Input + Airspeed) = Rudder Trim Output
Airspeed is used to increase rudder trim output as speed is decreased.
-
Thanks for explaining it in such simple terms this poor drug-addled (not by choice. No drugs, no walking or sleeping. All prescription and legal, I swear) brain can grasp quickly and easily. I'm not EVEN going to ask about the "new" method. Best of luck to you and Mr. Orion on it!
Peter: I had a thought, for when you choose to take a break from the Math and control surfaces to do more textures. VMFA-333, Trip Trey as we called it. I can dig up some pictures if they would help. That's the last squadron I was in just before I got out. On their last trip to Iwakuni, Japan, in F-4's, a C-141 ran off the runway and ended up sideways right about where our maintenance van complex had been placed until the night before. Very near the barracks we had just vacated. I have some pictures of it. NOT taken by me :) They trashed the model airplane field though. Some very upset folks about that. ANYWAY...
Just a thought. They transitioned to F/A 18C's just (3 months) before I got out. I didn't want to be afloat 8 months a year. Besides, the Radar shop went from component level trouble-shooting and repair to "plug it in, verify bad board, return board to depot, LRU to squadron" maintenance. Just not my style. But I am sure that if they are still active, they have paint jobs like the Phantoms had. Might be a nice bird to fly in, for old times sake.
Just a thought, anyway :D Great day and fair skies to all!
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, I will put in an USMC_VMFA-333 texture with the next release. Currently I am busy, so it will probably take a little while.
Best regards,
Peter
-
Very cool, Peter! Thanks much, I appreciate the thoughtfulness. No worries about rushing to get it. I am way too slow to ever hurry any more ;D
Pat☺
-
Hey all!
Peter: I found how MSFS calculates CDi, or the total Induced drag index. Mostly, it's R404 involved, but only a very narrow range of it, interpolated out linearly. 0°-10° to be specific, interpolated out to +/-30°. With R401 and the Oswald Efficiency factor for high Mach numbers, if necessary. It includes also CDo, R1101_17, I think. As usual, very convoluted. Point being, perhaps adjusting the two points in R404, the 0 and 10° points will accomplish what you desire. And adding in a R401, if necessary. I am giving it a try even as we speak. Remember that the scalars in the [flight_tuning] section are just mutlipliers. Also, Yves specifies that the flaps raises the entire CDi curve , not sections, or affects the curve of the curve, so to speak.
I gleaned all this from page 25 down, and Appendix 2 of Yves' PDF. I don't know if this will help at all or not, but I thought it might.
Pat☺
-
Pat, thanks for the valuable hint. I remember having already screwed around with R401, but did not really notice what it actually achieved. Your explanations concerning R404 in plain english helped a lot. One thing that remains a mystery to me is how they derive the R404 table's x-values representing specific AoAs.
For R401 I found a general function from an F-16, I use for experimentation. If you want to tweak it I have attached it below.
Concerning the USMC_VMFA-333 textures, I have already finished two of them and I am working on a third. It will become a small study transitioning from clean to dirty.
I also did finish the adjustments that assign each model version a specific .air file, so we can tweak R341 (elevator efficiency) for each model version according to its weight, to achieve a more conguent pitch behaviour throughout the entire pack of configurations. However, the degradation with the loss of weight due to consumed fuel will remain.
Before the weekend I hope being able to release an other upgrade.
Peter
-
I haven't the foggiest idea about the X values in R404. YET. But I'll finger it out. I believe it has to do with R404 not only being used for total drag, but also for Pitch Moment calculations, as explained in Section 6.3.2, ppgs 28-31 of Yves' PDF. Mainly, the equation at the top of ppg. 30. From what I can see, you would do better to change R517 vice R341 for that, but i may well be wrong about that. There is gets a bit complex for me, but if you like I can try studying it and getting what I can figure out posted for you. May take me a bit, as it's a little complex in the math, but I did learn all this good stuff in AVI-C7 school, the Navy's version of a BSEE degree. Of course, that was in '82, and for Electronics, and i've slept since then ;D But hey, math is math.
This also feeds into your questions regarding the elevators vs. weight questions, especially the equation at the top of ppg. 30. You can clearly see how CG is involved in this equation. I'll do what I can, but it'll take me a few days, given my limited time for this fun stuff.
By the by thank you for that R401. I was looking at Dino's F-14 and T45, since an F-14 is an unreasonable facsimile of an F/A 18, I think. Aside from being one of my favorite aircraft of all time. First one I ever saw was taking off at MCAS Yuma at dusk as I was walking a post out on the flight line (Yeah, great thing for a Sgt to do, believe me. NOT!). After I saw it lift to about 20'AGL and accelerate all the way down the runway in full burner, then go vertical till it was out of sight, still with the blowers lit, really awestruck me, I can tell you that! It was an incredible display, with the sunset colors in the sky, but dark enough to see the blower cones clearly. Loud as heck too!
Of course, I also saw a F/A-18C or E, I'm not sure, but I know it has better than 1:1 thrust to weight, as it slowed down along the runway at about 200' AGL, AOA increasing, until it was sitting on the tail on pure thrust. Everyone on the flightline was awestruck. We thought we were going to see a bad crash, but itstead, it just went up! Fast. No one had ever seen that before. Apparently he was tying to see how it would look at the Airshow in El Centro that year, but they decided it was too dangerous and deleted it from the program. Still neat to watch!!
But I digress. I apologize. I'll post on all this as soon as i can!
Pat☺
-
Upgrade: 2.2.0
Changelog:
- minor texture improvements throughout the pack
- NH textures USMC_VMFA-333 added
- adjustments to assign each model version a specific .air file
- R401 changed
- R341 adjusted for each model version/loadout
Have fun,
Peter
-
Thanks Peter! Those VMFA-333 textures look great! I recall them on Phantoms, there at what we called Beautiful Beufort (pronounced bull-fart. When the wind was right, the smell off the tidal wetlands was pretty horrific. I really felt for the PI recruits!) by the Sea, but this is what they looked like just prior to my departure. I left pretty much during transition.
Thanks again! Great flights and fair winds to all...
I'll try out the new FDE's and see what I can break :)
Pat☺
-
Every time I see an update is getting close , I feel like a kid waiting for a new toy ! :)
Keep up the great work guys !
-
Hi Jimi,
I just tried playing around with the gun mode of the HUD and noticed that it does not seem to work anymore. I had a quick look and noticed that you have changed some things. I assume it has something to to with the gun and flares animations xml. Is there any way to trigger guns and flares separately? - key 'i' always triggers them both simultaneously. I got the combat HUD working again when I reinserted the original combat HUD .xml and .cab files. Before I try to mess with it I like to know your reasoning behind the changes, so I do not counteract your efforts.
Best regards, Peter
Edit: Another anomaly I have noticed is that I cannot disable the wing flex for the model C version Trainer. I have commented out the gauge from panel.cfg and even renamed/removed wingflex.xml, but the wings still flex under load. Have I missed something, is there any other thing I could try?
-
Happy 4th of July to all!!
Peter, are you using hte Master Arm and Guns mode switches on the main panel, or the HUD's Switch Panel? It's the HUD's switch panel that does the real controlling of it all. I am pretty sure all the MA switch on the main panel is only used for disabling/enabling the FCS now.
At least it worked for me...?
Pat☺
-
Must have been blind. Didn't see the most obvious thing, already integrated into main panel. Thanks, Pat!
-
Glad I could help :D
Must have been blind.
And don't feel bad, I AM 1/2 blind. Lost my left one when I ran into a horse on my motorcycle at 60 MPH, back in '92. For the life of me, I STILL can't figure out how a horse got on my motorcycle! Sorry, standing joke. I don't recall the actual impact, but we figure it reared at the last second, and rode the fairing up (Old CHIPS type police bike, I loved that bike!!!) and scraped me off the back. I still have the the helmet I was wearing around here someplace, with a nice bright yellow stripe down one side where my head ricocheted off the pavement as I bounced down the highway for a bit. Knocked the retina loose, and it collapsed down into the bottom of hte eye. The doctors over at Scrip's in LA tried to put it back with an experimental procedure, but it failed, so now...nothing. Hurt like a mother though, I'll tell you that! I've been told I was dead on the table for about 5 or 6 minutes too...
Absurd headline in the Yuma paper the next day (really and for true!): Horse dies in motorcycle accident. Totally asinine, but that Yuma!
I hated that place with a blind passion for nearly 30 years, from the day I first saw it till I managed to escape it. /shudder/
Pat☺
-
Hey Peter,
Got some paint requests for the NH when you get the time. Test Pilot School & Might Shrikes please. Thanks.
-
Hello Jimi,
I will put these textures on the top of my list, because they should be fairly simple to realize compared to the other ones I like to do later:
- Test Pilot School
- Mighty Shrikes, VFA-94
- VX-31, China Lake
- VFC-12_14 (white/grey)
- VFC-13_06 (blue/grey)
- VFC-13_12 (brown/grey)
(all three schemes with the diagonal grey triangle along the wings)
Recently, when I disabled my Accu-Feel addon I noticed that the VC sounds could need some improvement. I put that on my to do list, too and will try to add some dynamic turbine and wind sounds, but it will probably take some time to figure out how to manipulate these in the right directions. I also noticed what when you put the engines into idle during a flyby from a tower perspective the sound completely dies, I will try to fix that also.
Concerning the AoA limits/limiters, after having talked with Sludge, I came to the conclusion that I will try to reintroduce some code in the Pitch_Auto_Trim.xml I did earlier this year trying to mimic some basic boundaries for the jet.
So, these are the current plans for the near future. Everything else I've put back and will save for the rainy winter days.
Peter
-
Hello all! Hope y'all (no, I'm not Southern, I just think it's a good way to express the plural of "you") are having a great holiday weekend!
Peter, I'm looking forward to the updates, eagerly as always :)
Jimi, a question, if I may on Pitch Auto-Trim: I have found that with the aurotrim active (no autopilot etc etc), when I am hand-flying the plane at altitude, say above 30K' MSL, the nose oscillated up and down at a steady rate with 0 stick input. I watched the display on the Data Page (Shft+8) and saw that the pitch auto trim system was doing it, with about a +/- 0.1 constant trim variation, and a +/- 0.01 Trim Rate reading. I took a look at the Pitch_auto_trim.XML file, and saw it specified the 0.01 trim center setting, thus
(L:FCS_PITCH_CENTER, enum) 1 ==
(A:AIRSPEED TRUE,knots) 50 > and
(A:ELEVATOR TRIM POSITION, percent) -0.01 < and
if{ 0 (>K:AXIS_ELEV_TRIM_SET) } els{ } .
If I were to change that to, say, 0.001 would it reduce the obviousness of the oscillations? Or would this affect it adversely in other ways?
It does the same thing at low altitude also (500'MSL), but the nose oscillation in pitch isn't noticable at low altitudes.
I took screen caps of the Data Display up at low and High altitudes, 0° AOA, and will post them if you want (my description may be leaving something important out you want to see).
No rush, I plan on playing with this a little bit to see what happens, I just thought I might get input from the guy that wrote the gauge in the first place :)
One more, if I may here: why is it the Lights.xml file has
<Gauge Name="F/A-18A LEX Vapor">
<Comment>
"F/A-18 Medium G LEXVapor - Triggers/Stops - +4.5 G, +210 KIAS, -20K' baro."
</Comment>
At the top, yet it has nothing to with LEX vapor? It's IS called in the Panel.cfg file, thus:
gauge41=FX!Lights,
I am confused, which is a normal state for me :D
Thanks in advance for an answer you may give :)
Pat☺
-
Pat,
The oscillations are due to the "Bang-Bang" technique that I used on the system. I've tried my best to minimize the oscillations, but they are always there. Due to the increased maneuverability at altitude, they are probably more noticeable there and at higher speeds, there the control surfaces are more effective. My recommendation would be to play around with the trim effectiveness. This can be done in either the Aircraft CFG or in the .Air File.
The code that you referenced refers to the "trim centering" that occurs once you pull or push on the stick. That function zeros out the trim, so you get a consistent, unbiased pull, without residual trim every time you place G on the jet. With the new techniques that ORION and I are working with, this should be fixed on the new version.
Speaking of New Version, ORION and I have been making some outstanding progress on it this week. We were able to accomplish the following:
-Pitch Rate & G Command "Blending" for the FCS. This means that at higher speeds, the FCS resorts to a G commanded system where pilot input results in a consistent G regardless of speed at 390 KTAS and above. Between 390 and 230 KTAS, the system combines G and Pitch Rate inputs to give a blended solution. Below 230 KTAS and below, pilot input results in a consistent Pitch Rate.
-Roll Axis PI Controller. We now have a PI controller that controls roll rate as well and works to assure max rate is below 240 deg/sec, regardless of speed
-Pitch Rate & AOA Command Blending. Pitch Rate and AOA inputs are not blended based on percentage of max flaps deployed while in Powered Approach (PA) mode. At 45 degrees Trailing Edge Flaps, pilot input are 100% AOA commanded.
-Reduced AOA Command Region. Before we had max rate for AOA mode set to a max of 55 deg/sec while in PA mode. Thanks to the help of SLUDGE, we've reduced this to a max of 12 deg/sec in PA mode. Results are much better and less sensitive.
-Manual Trim On Command for G and AOA Modes. Manual trim is now implemented in the FCS. In Up and Away (UA) mode, the pilot trim input adjusts the baseline G that the system trims for one the stick is released. Normally this is set to 1 G. Pitch authority across whole axis is adjusted based on new trim inputs. In PA mode, manual trim input changes the baseline AOA that the system will trim to upon neutral stick (pilot can now dial in the AOA that he wished the FCS to maintain). Again the authority across the whole axis is adjusted based on new trim input.
-Autopilot Re-Integration. Default autopilot functionality has been re-integrated into the system.
-Input Disconnection. All manual stick control inputs are nulled once hydraulic pressure falls below 1200 PSI and if the APU is off.
Still working on the tweaking of the PI Controllers and a few other things. All-in-all, definitely a push in the right direction!
-
Jimi, you never cease to amaze. That was the solution. I made a few minor trim system setting in the air file and the aircraft.cfg, and the problem went away. I am still working on returning the settings to as close as they were to where I started to balance what has to be done to loose the oscillations and how the system worked originally, as you had the xml's set for what it WAS.
Thank you so much for you input!
Speaking of XML's, have you had a chance (I know you're busy as heck, no hurry at all!) at the lights.xml I mentioned in my last post? It just makes me wonder. I can't find a version without the mislabeling (at least I think it is) up at the top of the file, as I posted. Even the two Sludge and Hanimod versions have it.
Just wondering, is all, no real impact either way.
Last, but certainly not least, I am eagerly looking forward to you next update. I am beginning to think you guys are working tword a system as close to how the real plane's FCS actually functions as is possible! Never give up! You all rock...
Not that Peter is any slouch, by the way. He still leaves me in the dust!
By the by, you all have a new fan. Check the General forum for a post by a username of Snowman.
Pat☺
-
One last question for you, if I may, Jimi (or anyone else, for that matter):
I was looking for a way to turn on a smoke of some sort for low level aerobatics training (of me). Do I need to put a Blue Angels panel on a plane to do this? Also, what is the difference between smoke.xml in the current version (Peter's NH v2.2.0 that is) and F18_Show_Smoke.xml in the Sludge Hornet? Are they just different ways to do the same thing?
Also, How does one trigger the smoke? I read throught the XML, but I can't figure it out for the life of me. It seems to me one needs a cockpit switch or key combination to do it. The "I" key triggers the cannon and Flares, so that's not it...
Any help will be greatly appreciated as always :)
Pat☺
-
Upgrade: 2.3.0
Changelog:
- oswald efficiency factor adjusted to 0.95 and induced drag scalar to 0.35
- external night lights position slightly corrected
- wing_pos_apex slightly adjusted for wingtip vapor effects
- minor texture improvements for weapons, fuel tank and ejector racks
- canopy textures slightly changed
- overbright cockpit night light buttons corrected
- new textures added: VFA-136_300 and two VFA-27's based on Hanimichal's textures
- glass hud texture improved, should better mimic the look of a real glass hud.
- cable_force_adjust = 0.68 changed //3.4s from main gear touch down to full stop ? - info/feedback needed!
- minor adjustment of in/out g-limiter transition
- texture improvements, e.g. VMFA-251_200 was missing mock-up canopy underside the fuselage
- AOA LIMITS/ERS: 35 / 25 due to loadout (tweaked multiplier for altitude)
- AOA LIMITS/ERS DUE TO MACH: 0.7 to 0.8: -6 to +20, 0.8 to 0.9: -6 to +15, above 0.9: -6 to +12
Notes:
- Haven't had the time yet to do Navy Test Pilot School and Mighty Shrikes schemes, these will be part of the next update/upgrade.
- I know the AOA Limits/Limiters may not be stricktly NATOPS in every sense but they should impose some general restrictions on the flight envelope of the jet mimicking limits enforced by the FCC/FCS. There may be some side effects like slight bounce off and flutter of the control surfaces, these are to be expected. The code is added in Pitch_Auto_Trim.xml, in case you like to have a look.
- Concerning the oswald efficiency factor, I've come to realize that adding values that might be close to physical reality will not necessarily result in a realistic/desired flight behaviour within the sim. So, this is a step back to the original values Jimi used to tweak the jet before I started nagging.
Hope you like it,
Peter
-
Thanks, Peter!
It will never cease to amaze me how fast you can do this stuff. It seems like just yesterday v2.2.0 came out!
- overbright cockpit night light buttons corrected
Yaaaay!! Thank you!!
Any chance you brightened the Spoiler (Airbrake, whatever you want to call it) panel warning light, just under the glareshield on the left side? It's pretty dim in the daylight, and invisible at night. Just wondering :)
- glass hud texture improved, should better mimic the look of a real glass hud.
That was pretty low on my list, but I am very glad you changed it!
- cable_force_adjust = 0.68 changed //3.4s from main gear touch down to full stop ? - info/feedback needed!
I've got mine set to 0.85, and it seems to do ok, but will check it at your setting to see what happens, and post on here.
- AOA LIMITS/ERS: 35 / 25 due to loadout (tweaked multiplier for altitude)
- AOA LIMITS/ERS DUE TO MACH: 0.7 to 0.8: -6 to +20, 0.8 to 0.9: -6 to +15, above 0.9: -6 to +12
Cool! I will test out at different altitudes and weights and let you know how it does.
As to the rest, THANK You! all this texture work is beyond my comfort (and time) envelope by a long ways. I appreciate you doing all the work on it you do, as well as all the tweaking we managed to do together (sort of).
Thanks again!
Pat☺
-
Here you go, Pat.
Update v2.3.1
- Panel warning lights left/right under glareshield brightened a bit up.
Peter
Edit:
- cable_force_adjust = 0.68 changed //3.4s from main gear touch down to full stop ? - info/feedback needed!
Concerning the cable_force_adjust, I dug that up from the FSX_FA-18_Combat.zip from the aircraft.cfg. I have no idea weather it is a step in the right direction or not, so I thought it might be best to test it and put it up for discussion.
-
Update: 2.3.2
Changelog:
- Afterburner texture improved
- R1523, reset to 'True'
- R1524, adjusted due to reset R1523
Peter
-
Thank you Peter! I will DL and install the latest :)
I am going to presume that the v2.3.2 includes both updates, or should I install 2.3.1, and then 2.3.2? Oh well, give the changelogs, I'll figger it out!
Thanks for the hard work!
Pat☺
EDIT: Got it! DL'd both and installed. Thanks! Need more recoveries to mmake a dtetermination on the Cable Tension, but ran out of time. More tests tonigh/1
Pat
-
Will these updates be available to the public anytime soon ? Or did I miss where to get them ? Sorry for my ignorance ! :)
-
Go to page 1 of this thread, and read the instructions. The latest updates for all three versions are there, with the FSX and CS (CaptainSim) are first, the NH or New Hornet ie Jimi's version, modified a teeny (!!) bit, further down.
When Peter publishes an upgrade or update (v1.9.0 to v2.2.0=upgrade, v2.2.1 to v2.2.2 = update), that's where he places them. Click on the links, one for airplane, one for textures, to keep the zip files from being too unwieldy, and you will go to the Zippy share site. In the upper right area is a largish orange box with DOWNLOAD NOW in it. Click.
In the upper left area of the same area as the big orange box, is which file you will receive, as a verification that THIS is the file you really want.
As I said, this applies to every upgrade or update Peter puts out, so if you see a changelog posted, it's on page 1 of the thread. I, personally, make a copy of the changelogs as they are posted and save them off to a text file so I can be sure I can look at and/or test out new changes. That's just me though :)
Hope this helps a little bit :)
Pat☺
-
Update: 2.3.3
Changelog:
- high_g sound amplitude slightly reduced
- ambient fans sound amplitude slightly increased
- some fly-by sound cones slightly adjusted where appropriate
- afterburner sound effects modified
- VC sounds added: ambient fans and dynamic wind effects
- a few broken sound filepaths fixed
- overkill bitrates of a few sounds reduced to 705kbps
Note:
This updade will improve the out of the box sounds of the jet especially if you are not using additional sound effect addons, like Accu-Feel, with the sim. I've added some distinct sounds that I found were missing and will keep digging to add further sound effects.
Best regards, Peter
-
I will DL the latest and install in a minute. Thanks!
I hate to be a pest about this subject, but it just bugs me. The textures I asked you to change, ie the Spoiler light, and apparently the flaps/gear lights, look great now. IN THE DAYTIME. Night is an entirely different story. I still can't see the spoiler or gear/flaps lights when the cockpit lights are on, in the night time. With or without a VCLight in the [lights] section or not.
Please see the attached examples.
Am I doing something wrong? Is there a setting someplace I'm missing, not setting correctly, whatever? I feel foolish, not being able to figure this out, but textures have never been a strong point of mine...
EDIT: Quick, easy question, here: Shouldn't the FSX-BA plane have Jimi's BA panel? It has the stopwatch, inverted flight tank switch, and so on, not included in the Fleet panel. Or is it just more trouble than it's worth? Just wondering, if it bothers me enough, I'll put a BA panel, appropriately upgraded naturally, in myself :)
Thanks for any help or advice you can provide!
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat,
my screens look a bit different, especially the mirror reflections since my sim is P3D v1.4. When VC lights are disabled you can see the spoiler light go on/off, with VC lights enabled you will not see a difference - see the screenshots. I haven't that one figured out, but I will put it on my to do list.
I had a quick look at the textures, but nothing came to mind. Currently I am still busy with the sounds. In case you like to have a look yourself the textures are in the main folder Texture, f18_CVSurface3_T.dds and f18_CVSurface3_Night.dds, in the lower right quadrant are the warning lights for under the glareshield, left and right side. What you want does not seem to be possible, because there do not seem to be additional textures present for day/night that specify the buttons glow or color in addition to the default textures, like the f18_CVButtons_T.dds and f18_CVButtons_Night.dds.
This seems to be also the issue for the elongated outside position lights. Once you have activated them at night (they go from black to light green) and than disable them again they will not go dark, but remain the light brown color of the day texture.
Best regards, Peter
-
Go to page 1 of this thread, and read the instructions. The latest updates for all three versions are there, with the FSX and CS (CaptainSim) are first, the NH or New Hornet ie Jimi's version, modified a teeny (!!) bit, further down.
When Peter publishes an upgrade or update (v1.9.0 to v2.2.0=upgrade, v2.2.1 to v2.2.2 = update), that's where he places them. Click on the links, one for airplane, one for textures, to keep the zip files from being too unwieldy, and you will go to the Zippy share site. In the upper right area is a largish orange box with DOWNLOAD NOW in it. Click.
In the upper left area of the same area as the big orange box, is which file you will receive, as a verification that THIS is the file you really want.
As I said, this applies to every upgrade or update Peter puts out, so if you see a changelog posted, it's on page 1 of the thread. I, personally, make a copy of the changelogs as they are posted and save them off to a text file so I can be sure I can look at and/or test out new changes. That's just me though :)
Hope this helps a little bit :)
Pat☺
Thanks Pat !
Scott
-
Glad to help :)
Please disregard my EDIT question about the BA panels. I never realized they are integral to the model. Sorry bout that!
I would still like to know about the lights questions, but I may be zeroing in on that, so don't sweat it.
One question, though: On the BA panel, I see the big stopwatch, but I can't see how to start/stop it. I will someday, you wait an see! I'm persistent. Same with the Smoke. I don't have the faintest on how to start/stop it, but I'm still searching :D
Pat☺
-
Another question for anyone, if i may: Is there a way to set the Bingo to something other than 2400 from the cockpit, or will I have to edit the EFIS gauge? Or another one?
Just curious...
Pat☺
-
Hey Pat. Answer to a few of your questions:
-If I remember correctly the clock is connected to the "Spoiler Armed" function. Try assigning a button or key to it and give it a go.
-For the smoke, try clicking on the white "Smoke Armed" button located on the left side of the dash next to the HUD. After that press whatever button/key you have assigned to smoke button.
I'll look into the bingo deal.
Hope this helps.
-
Thank you Jimi! As always, you are right on the ball. I was just wondering about the smoke, because I hit the "I" key, and it drops flares, but no smoke. That's why I asked. I will look at key assignments, but...Maybe actuating the arming key makes the flares not drop...
By the by, is there a limited amount of smoke aboard? Say 10 min total cumulative time or something? I didn't see anything in the XML about it, but ya never know!
The stopwatch is great. I never thought about arming spoilers to make the stopwatch start/stop! Not much used on the Hornet, I realize now, so it works great for the new use. Thank you for the help!
Thanks for looking at the Bingo setting for e. I treid, but that one is still beyond my abilities in XML. I'm learning, and still intend to write a 68% flight idle gauge, if I ever get the time/knowledge together at the same time :)
Of late, I have been trying to learn make a PROPER pattern/landing on the boat. I can land on the boat, but I always make waaay too long a DW leg to give myself time to line up properly. But hey! I'm shotening it up! FCLP is my new friend. And a great thanks to Paddles and SpazSinbad for all their invaluable help. I really needed the break from working on the FDEs.
Thanks again for your answers. I hope I'm not too much of a pest. I'm just a very curious person.
Pat☺
-
No worries Pat. For the smoke issue, you will need to download and install the Blue Angels Jet as a whole. Sounds like you might have mated the 3D model of the BA version with the guts of the FLT version. There are a few different gauges and entries in the aircraft.cfg that the Blue Angels variant uses for smoke. Suggest you download that version and make changes from there. You shouldn't see flares at all from the Blue jets. Also as a note, the Blues version is more streamlined for multiplayer formation stuff, so many of the effects that you would normally see in the Fleet jets such as heat shimmer, wing flex and exhaust smoke have been removed.
Carrier Pattern: There are a few different flavors for this depending on weather and time of day. The most basic and my favorite would be Case I Recovery... especially with multiple aircraft.
Entry: 800ft AGL ship's heading and offset to the right of the ship. I usually do about 400 indicated for speed. Make sure your hook is down!
Break Turn: Once ahead of the ship, perform a level, breaking left turn at 800 ft AGL to the reciprocal heading. I'd recommend 10 seconds after passing over the ship before starting the turn until you get more comfortable with the pattern. As a rule of thumb, you will use 1% of your airspeed to calculate the amount of G used during the break. For example, if break is entered at 400 knots, 4Gs would be used. While in the turn, bring throttles to idle and deploy the boards (speedbrake). As speed drops below 250 indicated, drop the gear and set flaps to FULL. Retract the speedbrake.
Downwind: Once on downwind heading, drop down to 600ft AGL, trim the jet to ON SPEED (amber doughnut), and go through your before landing checklist. You will maintain ON SPEED for the remainder of the pattern. If done right, you will be about 1.2 miles away from the ship once it is on your beam (at your 9 o'clock).
The 180: Since this pattern looks more like a race track pattern instead of a rectangle, there are no crosswind and/or base legs. Instead you have the 180. It is the part of the pattern where the 180 degree turn is commenced to bring the jet back to the Base Recovery Course (BRC) for landing. For Carrier Ops, this turn is usually started once you are abeam the cables on the carrier. If you are doing FCLPs or using a stationary carrier, you will delay the start of the turn until your touchdown point is about 45 degrees behind you. The turn will be another left turn with a slight descent (velocity vector about 1 deg. below the horizon) for the 1st 90 degrees of turn. If I remember correctly, you should be at about 550ft AGL at the 90 (the halfway point of your 180 degree turn). From there, take a quick glance at the ship and make adjustments as needed. This will usually require additional angle of bank and an increase in your rate of descent. This is also where you should start picking up the ball.
The "Groove": Upon finishing your 180 turn and rolling out, you will enter "the groove" or the final leg of the pattern. As a personal technique, I try to put the ship's wake directly under my left knee right as a roll out into the groove. Altitude would be at around 450ft at this point, and you should be about 3/4 of a mile behind the ramp of the ship. From here, technique should shift to a constant scan of Ball, AOA, Lineup. Once established, I usually place the velocity vector on the CROTCH, or the angle on the flight deck that is created between the bow and the angled landing deck (see attached pic). This helps compensate for the constant right adjustments that need to be made due the landing surface constantly sliding to the right caused by the 10 deg offset of the angled deck. I also superimpose the velocity vector and angle about 3 degrees down below the horizon line on the HUD. This should give you a descent rate of 700-800 fpm. I constantly cross-check this with the ball on the ship and make quick small adjustments. USE POWER FOR CORRECTIONS TO GLIDE SCOPE & PITCH FOR AIRSPEED as you make your adjustments. Once you find your "sweet spot" on your throttles, stick with it. I usually will "bump" the throttles up or down for a second or two when making my corrections, but always returning to the sweet spot. Don't leave corrections in for too long or you will sink through or slice through the glide slope. Maintain your scan, follow the ball, and hold attitude until touchdown. DO NOT FLARE OR TRY TO "FISH" FOR A WIRE.
Touchdown: Upon slamming into the deck, go to full power (MIL or MAX) until rapid deceleration is detected at which point bring the throttles to IDLE. Retract the hook and fold the wings. Congratulations, you made it on deck!
The attached picture should help. Well, that's my technique. I'm pretty sure others have different approaches...
Also, MICRO did an excellent job of explaining the details of the Carrier Pattern in his video, OK,3. Highly recommend giving it a look. It can be found at the following link: https://vimeo.com/2950519.
Hope this helps.
-Jimi
-
Wow!
Thank you for all the help, Jimi. NOW I understand why Peter's NH version of the BA birds is as it is. There is no WAY I want to BE a BA, I just love the bird, and some of hte special effects it has, is all. I really need much more work at just flying this amazingly realistic plane before I come anywhere close to what they (You!) can do. I'm happy to hold straight and level at somewhere around 350KIAS :D I will install the v15.2 BA plane you made a while back for the BA stuff come the day, or the newer ones you are coming out with soon (I hope :D ).
TY very much also for all the info on carrier patterns. I saved it for further memorization :)
I've read, re-read and re-re-re-reread the NATOPS and every other scrap of information I can find on "How-to" for the basic, Case I, down the groove and into the break carrier pattern. I mainly just need to practice it until I get the muscle-memory built up properly. I only have limited time each day to do so, so my progress is a tad slow, but I'm getting there. That info you provided on the 1% G/Airspeed ratio really helps, though. THAT little tid bit isn't in anything I've read so far, so it's a huge help. I always wondered how to determine the proper turn radius, and that was just what I needed, much like the cornering speed info you provided by accident. It's the little things that can make such a huge difference, and why I'm such a pest about this stuff.
Which, of course, brings me to my next question: If I put the flaps to full with the F8 key on the regular keyboard, is it necessary to also switch the switch on the lefthand angled panel also to "Full" (position 2 on shift+8, the data gauge)? IE, will the FCS/Autoflaps/etc operate properly without the switch position being changed? It doesn't SEEM to me to make any difference, and it isn't in any of the XML files I can see, but I can't read the autoflaps.dll file so I don't know...
Just wondering. I DO flip it to FULL when I am in the break, but it requires looking down, so if I can NOT have to actuate it would be handy. I also make sure it's in AUTO before I launch, whether land or carrier.
Thanks again for all the help, you all are wonderfully nice about all this, especially when I know you are busy, and I sincerely do appreciate you taking the time to help me out so much.
Pat☺
-
Hehe.... As far as I can tell the Flap switch in the virtual cockpit doesn't work. The switch is animated, but it doesn't actuate the flaps at all. I would stick to using the F5-F8 key commands to control flaps, or assign them to a button on your stick/throttle.
By the way, flaps are usually set to HALF for takeoffs (both land-based and carrier) and FULL for landings.
-
By the way, flaps are usually set to HALF for takeoffs (both land-based and carrier) and FULL for landings.
That's the way I've been doing it, yes. HALF for take off, boat or shore, FULL for landing, boat or shore. Thanks for the verification, though! If I gave misleading or mistaken information, I apologize.
And my thanks for the info on the Flaps switch in the VCockpit. Appreciate the verification on that too. I just wanted to be certain I wasn't missing a trick. :D
Pat☺
-
No worries :)
-
Peter,
Got another paint request for ya. Can you make a USNTPS texture as well? Thanks.
-
Hi Jimi,
due to the good weather and other activities the project has almost come to a standstill, but USNTPS and MightyShrikes textures are at the top of my list to do. I hope you do not expect anything soon, it will probably be end of August before I will be able to finish something. I will try to add the first four schemes on the list for the next release, the other ones will require much more work expecially due to the complex textures on the fuselage and on the wings upper and lower side, so I will save these for the coming fall/winter days.
- USN Test Pilot School
- USN VFA-94, 400 and 403
- USN, Centennial of Naval Aviation, VFA-122, 25
- USN, Centennial of Naval Aviation, VFA-106, 45
- USN VX-31, China Lake
- USN VFC-12_14 (white/grey)
- USN VFC-13_06 (blue/grey)
- USN VFC-13_12 (brown/grey)
My recent efforts to improve the VC sounds have been somewhat successful, but I am not quite satisfied how it all goes together, I am also trying to add the distinctive howl during a fly by. I have converted some good sound samples from this years Pensacola Beach air show I found on the web, will try to add and test these later.
Peter
-
Just a quick (for me, anyway) Update:
Over the last few days, thanks to all your help and advice, I got about 40 bounces in in the NH Hornet (VMFAT-101, naturally ;D ) At KNRA, from the FCLP Pack 2. Coupeville, near Whidbey Island NAS, because I like the scenery a lot better than El Centro. Tooooooo much like Yuma, where I spent almost 30 years (30 years too long! I hate the place...). Anyway, out of the 40 or so bounces, the last 3 or 4 I did today, finally, were what I would call decent. Not great, but decent. I figger, in about another week, I'll be good enough, in MY opinion, to turn vLSO on, and see what those heartless, mean, cruel LSO's have to say. :o
Once THEY are happy, it's off to the boat, altho I try to get a few each time on the boat too, just to practice what I've been doing at the FCLP.
Thanks again for all the help and advice y'all are kind enough to give!
And of course, a question: In the break, you said about 1% G/IAS. Ok, it works great, but: You don't HOLD that, do you? You have to keep the ratio through the entire turn, right? As IAS drops, so does the G, yes? So that by the time you roll out on the downwind the turn is no more than about 1.3 or 1.4 G, then of course 1 G on downwind as you descend to the proper altitude for the turn to The Groove. And again, about 1.3 or 1.4 G in the turn to line-up on the boat, depending on the amount of pull needed to make the turn the correct radius, at about 25° to 35° bank angle.
All those assumptions I make are somewhere close, yes? I think so,anyway. Been almost working for me, anyway. Now I just need to make sure I'm looking at the right place at the right times to make the turns correctly. THAT is practice...And more practice, and...etc :D
Thanks again, that post you made earlier really helped with the little details!
Pat☺
-
Peter,
Thanks for the update. Looking forward to your products.
---Break---
Pat,
Glad to hear you are progressing and yes you are correct, I usually keep the ration throughout the break turn.. For the turn that commences at the 180, I am more focused on AOB and speed for that turn. I am not necessarily looking at G. Looking at about 30 deg AOB, and a slight decent rate for the first 90 deg of turn and I usually increase it to about 35-40 deg AOB, and a slight increase in decent rate for the remaining 90 degs as I roll into the groove. All the while maintaining ON SPEED.
-
Hi all!
Thanks again, Jimi for your answer, it just verified what I thought, and I appreciate it!
And now, my usual question: I saw this thread, http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,6570.0.html (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,6570.0.html)
So I DL'd Dante's new Halo file (dflights.zip) and installed, along with the effect and their texture file, included in the package. The OP is 100% right, the runway lights, as well as the IFOLS on-board the carriers (Javier's Nimitz) are much better. Crisp, clear, better all around. Even the position lights, strobes, and so on on the aircraft look much better, at least on my system.
BUT! Now the NH Hornet's have no Formation Lights, the green, electrolumniscent light stripes at various locations about the aircraft. Gone, Kaput, vanished. Formation Lights switch in the cockpit doesn't even animate. Please see the attached pictures. Even the cockpit lights look better, at least I think so, and the three rectangular lights on the canopy bow slightly to the right of the main field of view (the LOCK and SHOOT lights) are no longer lit up as green blanks at night, which is better.
Again, though, no Formation Lights. Is there any fix for this? I would hate to go back to the old HALO.BMP and EFFECTS files, but will if I have to. Even during the daytime, the IFOLS is much crisper, clearer and more visible at a distance.
I know y'all are busy with other things going on, and this is a VERY minor problem, but it's something to consider when you have the time. If you all say so, I'll just go back to the previous versions of all the files :D
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, could these issues have something to do with that the effects were designed to work with FS/CS version models in mind, not the NH version? The thread stops with the last post from sludge looking for some feedback concerning Jimi's FSXBA version.
Just some things that came to mind:
- You have mentioned a 'dflights.zip' file, I could only download a 'dlights2.zip' from the link (thread) you have posted.
- a) What about only using the modified halo.bmp and leave everything else as is?
- b) Have you had a look inside the effect files, compared them to the original ones? You could try using the effect coordinates from the NH ones and try merging them with the new effects?
I hope these might be of some help.
Peter
-
Hi Peter!
Thanks for the quick response. Appreciate it!
I will now proceed to take a look at the possibilities you gave me. Thankfully, I am a fanatical back-up-er :D
I'll go back first to the original (before the latest effects changes) but leave the Halo.bmp alone to see what's up. If that's it, I'll change one at a time till I find it. I just thought y'all had seen this before, as it was relatively old thread. I'll let you know what I find, so anyone else can fix this if they run into it to. I'll also get the updated dflights2.zip version and look for differences, maybe that will pin-point the one effect file fairly quickly. I didn't use their DL link, I plugged in the author's name to the search feature of FlightSim, and that was the only one that showed up. I'll see what Avsim has, too.
Thanks again for the answers and possibilities for solutions. I'll get on it right now :D
Pat☺
-
Ok, it seems to be the new (to me) Halo.bmp file in the dflights2.zip. I can't find any difference in the 2 zip files, but I DL'd dflights2.zip and installed according to the instructions. Then uninstalled all but the Halo.bmp and the situation persists (no Formation Lights at night). Uninstalled the Halo.bmp and back to normal.
SO: It's the Halo.bmp. I much prefer the way airport lighting, carrier deck lighting, and the IFLOLS systems look, so I'll live with the one teeny tiny little problem. It's irrelevant to me, just happened to have noticed it.
I don't know how or what to edit, nor have I ever touched texture files, so I'll leave well enough alone for now. As I've said before, how she looks isn't anywhere as important to me as how she flies. Overall, the newer lights, to my eye, are a pretty good improvement over even the latest and greatest other lights files I've installed, especially the IFLOLS systems, land or sea, so I'll stick to what works best for my setup.
If one of you texture guru's wants to work on this situation, please feel free. I would love to have the planes back to what they should be, but heck, I sit in the cockpit and can't see a formation light anyway, so it's VERY low on my priority list :D
Thanks again for the help, though. At least I know for sure what's going on, for once :D
Pat☺
EDIT: One thing I nearly forgot! No matter what I do, I can NOT get the AOA lights to show up without being in the VC cockpit.They don't show in the 2D cockpit no matter what, and if I turn the VC Panel off, and just call up the HUD image (Shift+1), nothing. Yes I DID put the AOA from the VC cockpit into [Window00]. I also looked, and if I hit the carrier landing gauge (Shift+6) the AOA is supposed to be there, but nothing. Just to be certain, I cut-n-pasted the line from the [Vcockpit01] section to [window00] and [window07], the 2D and carrier landing panels. Nada.
Sludge has the AOA Lights in his landing videos, off to one side like they show up WITH the cockpit showing, with the HUD and carrier landing gauge, so I thought it should work, but nothing. I am obviously doing something wrong, but can't seem to see what! I can even read the Blackbox folder, F18_AoA_Indexer.XML file called out by the gauge line to make sure it's typed in and copied down correctly, and it is.
As always, any help would be greatly appreciated!
Pat☺
-
Hi Pat, just did a quick check with the current version mod, and AoA lights seem to be working ok, both internally and externally as you can see from the screenshots.
Do you remember for sure that they have been working ok before? Try to revert the last changes as far as you can remember which you have done and see if you can get it working again, if you haven't done already so.
What I usually do trying to narrow an issue down is to first check if Jimi's current FSXBA version - unchanged, out of the box - works fine or not. This could point you to whether something within the sim has been screwed up along the way, e.g. some addons, changes etc. that might interfere which have been recently done, or in case everything works fine, that some changes specific to the modified airplane - gauges, etc. which have been recently tweaked are to blame for. I hope this will point you in the right direction.
When I usually do such changes that will effect the entire sim (scenery textures, landclass changes, terrain mesh changes, light effect, water effect, sky effect changes, etc.), I backup (zip) my entire FSX resp. P3D folder to an additional physical drive (speed!) and name the file with the current date and addon state, because in the past I tried several addons that I later realized did screw up other things beside what they were supposed to do and I realized these issues just a few weeks later when I flew somewhere else or at a different time, etc. I got very frustrated having to reinstall / revert everything to the setting that I know worked and looked fine before. Now, all I do is delete a folder, extract a backed up zip file for about an hour or more, in the evening, and no more frustration. But be warned my 'default' basis P3D folder is about 32GB and my orbx version is almost 50GB in size (zipped!), these backups will take time to create/restore (use additional physical internal drives if possible, they will be much faster than external ones). I also do this on a small scale for the airplane folder or other things/folders (e.g. sounds) I am currently messing with, so in a worst case, I will be loosing just a few hours or days of work, but I will be able to revert to the last known good version for sure. I learned this the hard way a few times - I hope you will be able sort it all out, without having to reinstall or big frustration.
Best regards,
Peter
-
Oh, I must have not been clear, sorry bout that. I meant the individual GAUGE, the AOA indicator alone, doesn't show up in the 2D cockpit, not that they don't work at all :)
They work perfectly normally in the VC cockpit, no problem, but I saw a Sludge video in which he went to the 2D cockpit, called up the Carrlier Landing gauge, and the AOA indicator was showing where it usually does in the VC cockpit, without the cockpit being there. IE: blank screen (2D view, as normal) until you hit SHFT+1 for the HUD and SHFT+6 for the Carrier Landing gauge, which should include the AOA indicator, but doesn't.
Lets one clear up the screen when landing, if your view of the deck is obscured by the instrument panels, etc.
Please see attached JPG's. One is the 2D alone, when first called, the next is HUD only, and finally witht he Carrier Landing gauge, which SHOULD include an AOA Indicator off to the left of the HUD display in it's usual position, but doesn't.
Again NOT a big deal at all, more annoying than anything, but always nice to have the AOA available for crosschecking.
Pat☺
ps: I got the order of the JPG's backwards, but I think you get the idea :D
PSB
-
Hi, Peter!
I just now tried to DL the 2.3.3 update and the link seems broken, either that or I am...I tried the D model 2.3.3 and it worked fine, as did the C model 2.3.2.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Pat☺
PS: I still can't get the AOA gauge to show up in the 2D cockpit either :D
PSB
-
Is it possible to add reflections/glare to the canopy?
-
Pat:
I get the same error, server response seems to time out. Give it a few hours or a day and check the link again.
Update 2.3.3 is only a sound fix, so you might neglect that or simply copy the sound folder from a different version, since they are all the same.
Currently I am busy with textures for the next release - haven't yet touched the sounds again which I was not really satisfied with, and which I will do last.
Montie:
I'd like to intensify the reflections/glare of the NH version canopy from the inside (VC) too, but I haven't found a way yet. You can find in the main folder 'Texture' a few files named CP_F18_Glass... which will change the canopy color and brightness, etc. both from the outside and inside.
From the outside the canopy glass looks ok to me, but from the inside VC I'd like to have more reflections, like in the fsx VC, when one flies and turns and these reflection give you a really good visual impression of actually being in a cockpit covered by a glass canopy when in fact you are not.
In case you'd like to do some experiments and post your results, help would be very welcome, because I am currently busy with other stuff going into the next release. You will notice the glass files for the C and D version are slightly different, trying to achieve the same look, because the two-seater VC cockpit was not properly finished and will look slightly different.
Best regards, Peter
-
Thanks Peter. Appreciate the answer. If it's just a sond adjustment, I'll use the D models version. Should be identical, I think you're saying. I already had the other two updates in.
Just a heads-up, and it's a minor detail and probably makes no difference, but to my knowledge, which is admittedly dated badly, canopies are plexiglass (perspex for our friends over the pond, which I prefer as it doesn't indicate "glass"), not actual "glass". It may make for different reflective qualities, I don't know, but I would think it does...
Pat☺
-
A small teaser for the coming update, to shorten the wait a bit. Having just finished USNTPS scheme and CONA VFA-106.
Peter
-
Looking great, Peter! My goodness, I am never sure just WHAT paint I want to fly sometimes, there are so many...
Pat☺
-
Some where along the 3rd page I did not keep up with this thread for a while and it has exploded. Now I see Peter has a D model, that has my interest peaked now so I downloaded all for it and it looks as if I have to put it all together and each version will have it own folder, or am I missing something. I looked for the actual model config and I don't see them anywhere. I was hoping I could see that and be able to see how he did it. I wanted to see if the extra stuff was gone from the D cockpit in his model config and I am not sure how to put all this together.
I am lost now. If there is a page where it is explained point me to it.
Rick
-
Hi Azframer,
inside each airplane mod's 7z folder there should be a readme that will tell you what goes where.
The folder structure for the NH mods has been changed to incorporate features like unique MOIs, weights, loadout for each model version. This required referencing/aliasing each texture for each model version, thus the additional folders and texture subfolders for each model version.
For each model version there will be a separate cfg (and .air file) with the unique settings and texture references in the respective model version folder.
For the D version model only Clean/BA and Trainer versions are available.
I hope this helps you understand what was done and why,
Peter
P.S. I will consider putting some extra explanations in the next readme, so it might be easier to understand why there are additional folders present, in order to avoid confusions.
-
I just tried to install it as per my understanding of the instructions and clearly I am missing something, no plane showed up. I will just continue working with Jimi's Hornet, I was just looking for a clean non Blue Angel to fly without the extra things in cockpit I could never figure out how to get rid of when using Jimi's Hornet. I've asked a couple of times how to get a Clean D and no one would answer if it were even possible.
thanks for your time anyhow
Rick
-
Clean as in no BA "stuff" in the cockpit? Stop watch, inverted time indicators, etc? All that stuff is integral to the VC of the BA models. Pick any other plane, and they aren't there.
I have been sticking to the Clean and Training versions of Peter's NH, and have no problem with it. Look on page 1 of this post. There are 2 main Zip files per aircraft, one for the "Plane", one for the textures (Paint jobs and aircraft.cfg files). Just DL both zip files (the D model is the same as the C model and right below it), and then unzip them into the Simobjects/airplane folder. If you need them, unzip the effects files to the, oddly enough, Effects folder. For the D model they are airplane_v2.3.0_FA-18D_NH.7z and textures_v2.3.0_FA-18D_NH.7z. Also, there are the small updates to the main plane, update_v2.3.1_FA-18D_NH.zip, and so on. If you only DL the Plane zip file or the textures zip file and install, nothing will show in the Change Airplanes display. Gotta have them BOTH installed. You also need to have the little Show All Variations box checked.
When I go to use free-flight, I select Boeing, NH Models, then choose the paint I want to use (Usually VMFAT-101, I used to work there) in the Clean configuration (no external stores or tanks, no pylons) or the Training version (no stores, centerline tank, pylons) for more time aloft practicing BFM before I start FCLP bounces or carrier traps.
I apologize, I didn't see your earlier requests. I hope this helps some...
Pat☺
-
I have all the files, just not sure how they should be structured folders and files. I tried unzipping them into FSX main folder but that did not work out deleted that then I unzipped into a new folder on desktop to see how it unpacked, and that did not look to good but tried it anyhow nothing showed up but the C model I already had.
Jimi makes it easier to install unzip and plug into airplane folder copy effects to main effect folder, If it was supposed to look like what Jimi's files and folders I might be able to piece it together. I am just not getting it. Iff it was supposed to look like the NH C model I might be able to get it., Maybe I will try to do that I guess.
Sorry man I was lucky to pull off those 2 textures I did.
Rick
-
Let me look. I never DL'd the D model. I'll double check it's file structure and report back tomorrow about 1200 PST.
Peter broke the aircraft into different folders, one for the main textures common to every paint, the Panel, and the .air files, and then a folder for every version, Clean, Training, A-A loadout, etc etc. Each individual version folder has the thumbnail to that particular version, like the thumbnail for the A-A missiles, and the aircraft.cfg file for that version (Clean, Training, etc etc). This reduces the overall HD space required for all the different versions, and lets each one have it's own aircraft.cfg so WE don't to get into the aircraft.cfg and // out or un-// lines to make the plane that version.
The Airplane zip file will have the main folder (FA-18_NH), and one for each of the rest: FA-18_NH_Clean, is one folder, FA-18_NH_Training is another, and so on. Just unzip the zip file into the main FSX folder (C:\game\FSX, for example) and all the proper files shouldwind up in the right places.
In the Textures Zip file, there are numerous textures folders, a main one Texture and then one for each paint job. Unzip the Textures into the main FA-18_NH folder, and voila! All is as it should be.
I will double check the D model, and make sure the folder structure is the same. Tomorrow :D
Pat☺
-
Hi Azframer,
hope this screenshot helps a bit.
Peter
-
Okay I think I figured it out now, I went with what I could figure out from your capture and tried again. When I opened change airplane display and they were all there, all grey with textures not showing. I got ticked off and deleted them and started all over from scratch, instead of unzipping into FSX main folder I unzipped to a folder and put each into its own folder. That is when it dawned on me when I deleted I was close, no textures were in the proper folders so the models just showed gray.
Oh well I got a handle on it now I believe. I am going to go ahead and get all planes installed as is. I like the fact that we will have BA in D model for all the planes numbers because when pilots are rotating in they fly say #1 as a D model when taking new leader up to fly a show with proper number displayed. I have seen a D model fly in 1 and 4 position at the same time as well as a 5 and 6 at the same time. Any other time they just do #4 D model during a show as a single D model in formation. They will fly a D model as #7 if one of the other planes have a mechanical issue. I am sure they fly 2 and 3 as D model I have never seen that one myself.
Thanks for your time Peter.
Rick
Edit= I got it and all is golden.I did have a blue cockpit, not as bad as with Jimi's Hornet more like strips on seats and under HUD. I created a folder in main Texture folder in FA-18D_NH_BA and FA-18D_NH then moved texture CP_F18_4_N.dds to new folder and Blue is gone.
-
Hello all,
concerning the current project update I have something rather unpleaseant to report. A 'screw up' or you might call it 'one backup too far'.
Here is what happened:
Last night I tried out a new demo version of a game and it seems, as far as I can tell, that the install must have gone into the wrong folder, my main game folder instead of the desired subfolder, which I didn't notice at the time. When I decided that I didn't like to keep the demo and uninstalled it later that evening again, the installer seems to have removed EVERYTHING from the folder it was installed to, not just its own files/folders, including all current flight sim installations and mods along with all other games having been installed in the main game folder. That wouldn't have been a problem since I keep daily backups that run after midnight. But as I didn't notice my mistake and didn't check the main game folder again before the backups ran, the nightly backup than synced the empty folder and effectively deleted the most current backups too, as I realized this morning and what I habe been able to tell from the logs so far.
Long story short, around one month of small changes/improvements, additional textures etc. just went down the drain in one night, including the most current backups. Nice! :D Will have to make sure I do not stumble over my own feet again! - Yeah, I can hear you all thinking 'use incremental backups, as I do....'. Sorry, I have seen these go belly up in the past too often ending up with 'frankenbuilds' due to some mix-up and having have to revert to the last full backup anyway. Probably, just this time they would have been the lifesaver. Excuse me ranting, I will stop it now!
My current degree of frustration just shows me how much I have become to like this project. Having already begun restauration from around one month old backups I keep on external drives, it will take me some time to get up to speed again due to the amount of data loss, so please do not expect new stuff anytime soon. Will keep working on it and keep you updated on the progress, as usual.
Besides, I already call it the summer of data loss, since just a month ago one of my large backup drives went belly up due to a hardware fault, barely four years old. On the other hand my trusty/rusty array of about ten-year old IDE drives that most of the time have been running 24/7, and I now use just for backup, seems to be unbreakable, haven't yet lost a single drive so far.
Wish you all a nice and trouble-free weekend!
Peter
-
Oh no! I am sorry, Peter! :'( >:(
I hope you get things squared away soon, for your own peace of mind. Me, I am way too old and fat to worry about the word "Hurry"! Take all the time you want. I am sure we are all rooting for you, and I know I'll be around for a long time to come, so if you need anything I can do or provide...
Anyway, good luck, and I hope things go smoothly hence-forth! Just a thought: You might consider using SSD's vice the "old", moving type HD's if/when you buy new ones. I understand they are very reliable now-a-days, and much faster...
So, all the best, and take lots of breaks, they really help keep the frustration levels down. Go outside, enjoy the summertime weather, sit on the grass and read your favorite book, again ;D Just get AWAY from the computer.
Or drink heavily! LOL! :D
Pat☺
-
Thanks for your kind words, Pat.
I am already over it, mostly - as they say, there is no use crying about split milk. It just felt quite surreal when you slowly realize that what was there just a day ago is now gone for good. Just as if a magic fairy appeared and let a part of your furniture disappear you have had around and got accustomed to, right in front of your eyes. The other thing is that one does not really think that it will happen to oneself, unless it does - you just believe having figured it all out, and you learn something new!
For some short moment there I even had faint hope when I was able to recover several thousand files with the help of forensic software and it boldly marked these files being in good condition (i.e. not being 0KB ), because I hadn't touched the disk since. But the fully automated disk defragmentation already did a good job, and I could not even recover a single uncorrupted texture. And in the best case just being able to recover only around 15-25% of the top of some texture, with the rest of the files just being mash or gone, really doesn't cut it.
Yes, I do use SSDs which make the system react much snappier but only for my system drives and only in a Raid1 setup with conventional HDDs, in case it shows data corruption and becomes unreliable, which in my case it usually does after 3-4 years, I just have to swap in a new one a few days later, and I am back to full speed without having to deal with downtime and the need to manually recover my system.
Concerning the weather which was really good and quite hot, so I was out with my bicycle a lot of days enjoying the summertime and the beautiful countryside. Thank God for that, had it been raining, probably a lot more work would have been lost? ;D
Best regards, Peter
-
In the newest version has anyone else noticed when you pull full back or near full back on stick going into vertical it continues to pull after releasing the stick? I have not notice it happen in a level high G turn, just when pulling near vertical or near vertical the pull continues. Is this something with G limiter or auto trim or what?
Thanks
Rick
-
I would think that any maneuver that is pitch only, say do the roll, neutralize the stick, THEN start to pull hard, would do the same thing. I'll look tonight and report back!
Are there specific speeds involved in each maneuver? Like say 350 to go vertical, but only 250 for hte High G turn? I have no idea if it's a important clue or not, but sometimes...Like is the G in the turn sustained? How about the vertical pull? Short burst of G then back to 1.0 as you relax pull? If so, how much G?
Like I say, NO idea if any of it matters, I am just trying to think of possibilities. And I'm getting a headache...:D
I'm going flying...
Pat☺
-
Hi Azframer, these hickups can sometimes happen in rare circumstances, as I hoped, and are to be expected due to how currently G-Limiters and AoA-Limiters are implemented. You can find them in the Pitch_Auto_Trim.xml at the lower end.
With update v2.3.0 (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=5igml7o8t6atmkmepmte2oadm4&topic=10839.180) I decided to implement these to mimic the limits of an FCS/FCC, so the bird cannot be pushed into too unrealistick flight envelops. Trying to mimic the limiters with the help of xml gauges, trigger thresholds (yoke position, elevator position) need to be set. The side effect of these are bounce off (reaching limits) and in some rare cases delayed yoke position feedback (during stick release). If you set these % trigger values too high, the plane can be pushed beyond the limits at certain speeds before trigger thresholds are effectively met. If you set these lower the transition in/out of the limits will be smoother, but in rare cases they sometimes appear to be stuck. This usually happens when your system is already stressed to the max. with textures, effects, etc. during fast maneuvers or switching view points, it can not process all data in a timely manner and xml gauge processing gets delayed or even messed up, as I have become to realize.
I tweaked these values to the best of my knowledge to give a smooth as possible transition into limits while avoiding any associated hickups. Will check the theshold values before the next release and try to ease them a little bit.
With Jimi's and Orion's progressing efforts on implementing PIDs I hope that will have to rely on xml gauge workarounds to mimic FSC/FCC characteristics much less in the future.
I hope my explanations could shed some light on these issues.
Best regards, Peter
P.S. My intention has always been to have an as smooth as possible flight experience, meaning to have as many FPS as one can get out of one's system without sacrificing the overall visual experience too much. This is also the reason why I decided to use 1024 size textures instead of 2048 or even 4096 ones - up to a 3.0 zoom you won't see a difference even on HD monitor resolution, but it helps a big deal with FPS over large cities, e.g. L.A. or New York. Not being a texture enthusiast to the extreme, marvelling its accuracy/detail at a 6.0 zoom, I rather have a nice variety of as distinct and good as possible looking schemes, being fun to fly so one does not get bored that easily. This also helps to keep the size of the project in check, as textures slowly seem to grow with an increasing number - especially at night, when it rains, they double up. :D
-
Pat the first time I noticed it I was in Blue Angel 1 taking off from NAS Pensacola and was going to do a loop, when I started pull and I got over G warning and relaxed the stick and G effects kicked in and it continued to blackout so I went to exterior view and noticed elevators were still in up position, even with stick relaxed to neutral position.
The second time I notice was setting up a flight to see how formation flying was using flight recorder, flying from NAS Pensacola to Eglin, sweeping right turn flying down the beach almost to Bama state line and turning sweeping right turn to line up on runway 7R pitch up and then to left was the plan, but it locked again on pitch up, it even continued when I rolled left. I did find this out when in a locked up elevator condition pull back and release quickly will get it to release upward pitch and go neutral.
Rick
-
Az,
Remember that the trim is not functional during Up & Away flight conditions. You wouldn't happen to have trim set to an axis would you? If so, it might be kicking in. Might want to check and make sure it's zeroed out prior to takeoff.
-
I don't have trim on my flight controller it is keyboard controlled, same thing happens with your new version of the hornet just released as well.
Rick
-
Flew the new version last night for a while. 15.6
I noticed the the roll axis was, on my mind, a LOT more sensitive during PA than previously. One little movement of the stick, and I'd be inverted, or close to. During normal, UA flight, perfect, for me, in all 3 axes. Bear in mind I am FAR from a real pilot, btw. I just know how it used to fly vs how now, Brown Cow. During PA, the pitch sensitivity remains "normal", it's just the roll.
Additionally, the engines seem underpowered above about 20 or 25k MSL. Below that, the power response seems perfectly normal, again, to me. I also noticed that N2 RPM reading wouldn't go above about 94% at the higher altitudes also. The Data page (shft+8) indicates N2 of 126%, and the AB's lit normally, it was just the engine page on the left DDI. The power delivered doesn't seem to match up though, even with the AB's lit, very little "Oomph" out of the engines.
I never did see the "stuck elevator" effect occur, but it may just be my system? I tried to get it to happen, but I'll try again during today's flights. I will duplicate the "take-off into a loop" maneuver and see what happens. I am presuming you were at Full AB during the maneuver, and during take-off. I have noticed that on occasion, my stick inputs are ignored by the plane, but I am presuming it's my system's problem, not the plane. The control surfaces just freeze in their last position for a few seconds then respond normally again.
They seem to burn more fuel by a long a shot than previously, at all altitudes. Normally, I can do 10-15 bounces at Coupeville before I run down to 4000lbs (clean configuration) which is my personal bingo, since I can't change it on the IEFI still (Not complaining, just commenting :) As always, no rush at all), in the 15.6 only about 1/2 that. I didn't hawk the fuel consumption or power generated on the engine page or the Data Gauge during my flights, although I will next time I fly it, later today.
One positive note: It doesn't depart as easily or severely during post-stall, high AOA maneuvers. This to me is a huge improvement. The maneuvers seem smoother, and more stable than previously. It also seems to bleed energy during high-g maneuvers more rapidly than previously, but that may have been a result of the engines situation I mentioned coupled to the altitude I started at (35K MSL).
I plan, with your permission naturally, to make some changes to the .air file, and perhaps to the aircraft.cfg. I will try to keep track of what I change and how much for what result, and I can post the results here if you like.
I DO have some rather limited time each day for this, but I will do the best I can as fast as I can. Again, if you permit, and want me to make such changes. I plan on using the Training version.
OH! the panel's callout for the sound gauge's .ini file was for the A-A version's path, for some reason, which I haven't DL'd yet, so I changed the path to be the Training version, which I was using.
I did like the night-time illumination, up to a point. The external lights/textures were great. I prefer the green panel illumination for night, but that's a personal preference, realistic or not. I changed MINE, it's not a mandatory change. Again, personal preference. The Speedbrake light on the panel is still weak and invisable at night, even before I made any changes. The Flaps/Gear indicator lights are so strong, however that there's no way to see any changes. Gear up? Who knows! Again, even before any changes. The AOA indicator tot he left of the HUD frame also flashes regardless of the Hook Bypass switch's position, and regardless of the Hook position, as though the switch were in Carrier and the hook was up.
That's what's going on so far! I do love the plane, and want it to be as perfect as possible :D
Pat☺
-
Thanks again. This is a group project. Of course you have permission to change and edit as needed. I'll take a look at the roll rate. Thanks again for the input.
-
I have a pictures of the Splinter Hornet I did earlier in a newer paint scheme, I am slowly working through it now that I own Corel PaintShop Pro 7. It will be a while before I upload it. Just thought I would put it out there for now.
Rick
-
Thanks, much appreciated Azframer.
In case you get it finished before christmas, I will try to included it with the next update I intend to release between the years, when I will have a few days off, or early next year. Itching to get back to the hornet project.
Best regards,
Peter
-
Mr. Azframer!
I heartily approve of that paint! But then, I'm biased: I worked in 101 when I was stationed in Yuma. They were the main F-4 N/J/S training squadron ;D I worked on the radar systems. I always loved the tail letters: SH.
We used to say it was Sierra Hotel (military for s^&* hot, if you understand what I mean).
I could tell some stories...
Anyway, feel free to make all the SH paints you want! Love em!
Pat☺
-
Just wondering if anyone has painted the NH for VMFA-323 yet ?
-
Do not think so, Corvette99. If you like I can put these schemes (normal + squadron leader) on my to do list of textures. They look quite nice and should not be too difficult to implement, leveraging on what we already have.
Best regards, Peter
-
Do not think so, Corvette99. If you like I can put these schemes (normal + squadron leader) on my to do list of textures. They look quite nice and should not be too difficult to implement, leveraging on what we already have.
Best regards, Peter
That would be great ! Will be looking forward to it !Thank you sir !
-
Just wondering if anyone has painted the NH for VMFA-323 yet ?
http://www.usmilitaryart.com/FA18C_VMFA3232_09-1200.jpg
Rick
-
Just wondering if anyone has painted the NH for VMFA-323 yet ?
http://www.usmilitaryart.com/FA18C_VMFA3232_09-1200.jpg
Rick
This one and a line bird would be great !
-
Please, bear in mind that I am currently very busy.
I have scheduled some time in between the years I like to work on the texture schemes.
Due to the underlying referencing structure, single additional texture releases/updates are a pain in the a.. to implement, so I rather intend to release a bulk of new textures combined with some other fixes in one of the first months of 2016.
Best regards,
Peter
-
Please, bear in mind that I am currently very busy.
I have scheduled some time in between the years I like to work on the texture schemes.
Due to the underlying referencing structure, single additional texture releases/updates are a pain in the a.. to implement, so I rather intend to release a bulk of new textures combined with some other fixes in one of the first months of 2016.
Best regards,
Peter
Wasn't trying to rush you Peter ! Completely understand .
Blue Skies , Scott
-
"Real" Life always comes first and formost! Besides, I bet none of us are going anywhere for a long time :D
Glad to hear you're doing well, Peter.
Pat☺
-
Just wanted to let you all know when to approximately expect some updates, so you do not have to bite your nails so much waiting. Things look promising that most of the urgent work will be finished before christmas so I can gradually get back in the saddle working on the legacy hornet on a regular basis again.
Peter
-
Hi, Peter, and all others!
Hoping y'all have a wondrfull Christmas, and a very happy New Year!
Remember, don't make any New Year's resolutions you can't keep ;D
Pat☺
-
Thanks Pat.
Wish you all a merry Christmas and a happy New Year, too!
Almost finished with work - hurray! Although, I will need a few days to unwind until I am in the mood to get back to the texture schemes. I will keep you posted with screenshots when I got something. Because of the folder structure and referencing, single texture updates are getting painstakingly difficult to implement, so I will be probably aiming for a bulk update of textures and fixes this time - not wanting to end up with frankenbuilds. Maybe it is time to set up incremental backup snapshots... will see if that works.
Best regards,
Peter
Again, I wish you all a happy holiday season!
-
Hello all, is it possible someone can post a link of the VMFAT-101 Textures? I have the latest v15.6, thanks all.
-
Hello Switch,
downloads are located on the first page of the post.
VMVAT-101 schemes are part of a texture pack, you can download it here: http://www12.zippyshare.com/v/2a4vlYO2/file.html
Peter
-
I was with '101 back when they flew F-4 II's in Yuma!
I was very appreciative when y'all were kind enough to paint this plane up in the '101 liveries. Lotta good memories, some great folk.
Although I hated Yuma with a passion for hte almost 30 years I spent there...
Have fun all!
Pat☺
-
I was working on a newer version VMFAT-101 but I got side tracked on a night version of the 747 upper panel. As soon as I get it completed I will get back to work on plane 12.
-
Hello Switch,
downloads are located on the first page of the post.
VMVAT-101 schemes are part of a texture pack, you can download it here: http://www12.zippyshare.com/v/2a4vlYO2/file.html
Peter
Thanks Peter!!
-
I was working on a newer version VMFAT-101 but I got side tracked on a night version of the 747 upper panel. As soon as I get it completed I will get back to work on plane 12.
Ahhh, you do some great work Mr. Azframer!
What you did for the F/A-18C cockpits on this site is amazing.
Which reminds me: I have a couple small problems with the cockpit, epsecially at night. If/when you have the time and/or desire, gimme a PM, if you wish, and I will let you know what I mean ;D
I really DO appreciate what you have done for the cockpit, as well as the rest of the aircrafts. Great work, really it is.
Keep it up!
Pat☺
-
I did not do any work on the cockpits for this bird, I wish I could say I did. Who ever did those did a really nice job. I only did 2 textures for the F/A-18, the Splinter Texture.USMC_VMFAT-101_12 and Aggressor Texture.USN_VFC-12_06.
Rick
-
Drat, the link is down. I could swear the textures you had posted included the cockpit...
After a LOT of searching, I discovered that my weakness for remembering names struck again. It was Mr. Ahmenace that "redid" the cockpit so wonderfully. I sincerely apologize!
Hey, they both start with an A, don't they? ;D :P
Again, my apologies for accusing you of doing great work. hehehe
Seriously, you DO great work with textures. Vastly better than anything I've ever even thought about doing. I appreciate all your hard work. A big thumbs up to ya!
Have fun all!
Pat☺
-
Hi everybody,
after lengthy considerations and an invitation from Jimi to actively participate with the development and further improvement of the FSXBA Hornet I have finally decided not to update the FS, CS and NH mods anymore. This is to avoid unnecessary splintering and double work and to better pool our efforts to improve the jet based on the FSXBA models.
This was not an easy decision for me because I loved to fly the old FS and CS model files for quite some time beside the FSXBA Hornet, but the old files offer no room for further improvement and lack a number of details that cannot be integrated. So it is time to let go at some point.
I hope you will embrace the new FSXBA Hornet versions to come.
Peter
-
Great to see ya Peter!
Also great to see you joining the FSXBA Hornet development team. I understand your decision completely. It will be interesting to see the improvements I know you'll make, although it's a difficult concept. Improving on perfection :D
Hope to hear more from ya soon!
Pat☺
-
Hey Pat,
great to see you are alive and kicking too and thanks for your kind words.
Improving on perfection :D
Yes, you are probably right. When we are finished with the bird, if it will ever be, probably long after the last legacy hornets have been phased out in 2022. The aircraft within the sim will be closer to reality than the actual Boeing simulators. :D
Joking apart, I strongly believe we can successfully mimic a lot of key features of the actural aircraft within the sim and try pushing the sim's current limitations (dynamic MOIs, weight issues, flight dynamics/envelope, transsonic and supersonic engine performance at various altitudes, etc.) with an adaptive FCS up to a point where we would be getting close.
I truely enjoy the tweaking and testing process and providing suggestions for improvement more than flying around. As I did with the old mods, too - the new FCS just offers so much more room for impovement, now.
Just take the transition in/out of the g limiters for instance. Compared to the older solutions they are true bliss and even with a plain joystick you will get now the feeling of an FCS being at work. Driving the aircraft into certain situations and see how 'Bob' handles the jet and to see if the output is what one would expect - also trying to mimic actual flight behaviour/envelopes like sideslip, AoA/G limits, speeds and accelerations, loadouts/weights etc. and experience these results/variations within the sim are the things that still keep and kept me interested.
Peter
-
Hi everybody,
just wanted to let you know that I am currently very busy with a lot of real-life stuff, family and friends, and plans for the summer, and that work on the FSXBA project has come to a temporary hold, probably until the fall/winter season.
Hope you are all right and doing well.
Best regards,
Peter
-
Real Life (wherever that place is...) always comes first! Especially in the summer. Just too nice to sit at a keyboard pecking away when the world awaits you outside :D
I've been flying, and just loving, the v16.1. It's as much better as the last version as the last version was than the default bird. And the last version was just fantastic, may I say! Jimi and Orion, and all the rest, really got it right, this time. And I wager it'll only get better!
I can't wait to see where it goes from here.
Always great to hear from you Peter. Hope you're not getting overwhelmed by that icky W word :'( ::)
Have some fun. Make some time for yourself and your family. It's necessary to all humans :)
Pat☺
-
I'm new to this board and I realize I may be late, but can we please get RCAF textures for the Acceleration F/A-18 of last year and this year's Demo CF-18?
-
I'm new to this board and I realize I may be late, but can we please get RCAF textures for the Acceleration F/A-18 of last year and this year's Demo CF-18?
Hi snowbird13,
I am not sure which texture schemes you are exactly referring to, but I took the time and reuploaded the missing download links if that was what you were referring to.
Sorry, but I do not keep copies of older versions that the current ones available for download.
Please, bear in mind that these are outdated versions so to speak, and the download links will be removed altogether when final (non beta) FSXBA C/D variants are made available. Unfortunately, support of the older Acceleration (FS) and the CaptainSim (CS) models will have to be dropped due to certain incompatibilities/limitations and the amount of work involved.
Currently, I will not be doing any more new texture schemes because we already have a very nice bunch, and they are getting more and more complex to manage, update and improve.
Best regards,
Peter
-
I'm new to this board and I realize I may be late, but can we please get RCAF textures for the Acceleration F/A-18 of last year and this year's Demo CF-18?
Hi snowbird13,
I am not sure which texture schemes you are exactly referring to, but I took the time and reuploaded the missing download links if that was what you were referring to.
Sorry, but I do not keep copies of older versions that the current ones available for download.
Please, bear in mind that these are outdated versions so to speak, and the download links will be removed altogether when final (non beta) FSXBA C/D variants are made available. Unfortunately, support of the older Acceleration (FS) and the CaptainSim (CS) models will have to be dropped due to certain incompatibilities/limitations and the amount of work involved.
Currently, I will not be doing any more new texture schemes because we already have a very nice bunch, and they are getting more and more complex to manage, update and improve.
Best regards,
Peter
I understand. What I meant to say was the camouflage livery that was on the CF-18 last year and from this year (the yellow and black with red one). I saw that the new livery for the CF-18 is in the textures in one of those packs but wish there was a clean variant instead of a training variant.
-
Hello all, can someone on here make me a texture of the VAQ-139 for the Capt.Sim Hornet Mod? Please let me know......
Thanks, guys!!
-
Hello Switch,
sorry to disappoint you mate but I won't be able to do any further texture schemes as I am currently busy with a lot of other stuff, as I posted earlier.
I had a quick look at VAQ-139 and it seems they transitioned directly from Prowler to Growler and in fact never utilized FA-18C/D variants - although not completely sure upon the subject. In case you want some VAQ-139 textures badly you could easily change some of the line textures already present as a template and adjust insignia and call signs yourself accordingly, just with some basic painting skills no magic required.
Best regards,
Peter
P.S. I currently do not have the time to regularly check the forum links if they are still operational. In case you are missing some updates resp. could not download them due to dead links, please feel free to post a message, as I will try to reupload them the next time around. They should stay active for at least three months from the last download.
-
Peter, that is correct about the VAQ squadrons and their transition from Prowler to Growler. I have a few paints on the CS model that are for Super Hornet squadrons flying the "F", as there are no 2 seat Rhinos (yet). If someone really wanted a Growler, the oldie,but goodie FS-KBT model can be ported over to FSX.
-
I have the FS-KBT Super E,F and G model I found.
Rick
-
Anyone up for it?
-
Hi
First of all: peter, great job with these textures ;)
Second: I'm interested in the spanish air force textures for the C model, but Zippishare reports that 'Texture pack, for (NH) FA-18C airplane mod' is not available. Could you upload it again?
It's a pity that this texture is not available in the FSX Blue Angels site.
Kind regards
Antonio
(Sorry for my bad english)
-
Hey folks,
With a new reinstall of P3D to use with FlyInside, I decided to grab the latest update of my favorite Hornet, which I only had older versions of.
Unfortunately, I could only get the base airplanes and the textures for the F/A-18D. The F/A-18C textures and the updates for both planes give an "Unfortunately, this file has expired" error.
Wanted to give you a heads-up. Hoping someone can repost links soon! :)
Thanks for all the continued hard work!
missing files:
- textures_v2.3.0_FA-18C_NH.7z:
- update_v2.3.1_FA-18C_NH.zip:
- update_v2.3.2_FA-18C_NH.zip:
- update_v2.3.3_FA-18C_NH.7z
- Update_v2.3.1_FA-18D_NH.zip
- update_v2.3.2_FA-18D_NH.zip
- update_v2.3.3_FA-18D_NH.7z
-
My F-18C pilot figures seem to appear without skin texture.
Wondered if anyone could assist with this please
thanks
-
Unfortunately, I could only get the base airplanes and the textures for the F/A-18D. The F/A-18C textures and the updates for both planes give an "Unfortunately, this file has expired" error.
Thank you for re-posting the files! Just downloaded them and will install today! Can't wait to try this F/A-18 in the Oculus Rift!
-
Hi Ferg :)
Need to know which version of the F/A-18C you have. 15.2? or what. It matters. Anyway, let us know.
My suggestion is to DL and install the v16.1 before you do anything else. It's the latest and greatest. And I am not be facetious or sarcastic. It IS the greatest F/A-18 ever.
I mean no disrespect to Peter, though. His versions are a very close run thing, no question!
Pat☺
-
Unfortunately, I could only get the base airplanes and the textures for the F/A-18D. The F/A-18C textures and the updates for both planes give an "Unfortunately, this file has expired" error.
Thank you for re-posting the files! Just downloaded them and will install today! Can't wait to try this F/A-18 in the Oculus Rift!
Hello, Denny
I am expecting these files also, and AFAIK they're still not re-posted... :-\
Regards
Antonio
-
Hi everyone,
it is probably a bit late but nontheless I like to wish you all a happy 2017. A lot of private things took a turn for the better for me last year and as a result I don't have time to come back and work on the FSXBA project anymore. I have retired from flightsim and most other gaming altogether due to lack of time. ;)
Concerning unavailability of links, they are down due to the lack of demand. If not downloaded once a month zippyshare will delete the corresponding files. I didn't keep backups of the files since I gave away most of my flightsim stuff I bought over the years to fellow friends.
In case someone still has backups and might consider them worth reuploading on the forum, please feel free to do so.
I wish you all the best,
Peter
-
We all wish you good fortune, Peter. I'm glad you're life is going so well :)
Have fun, and may your good fortune only increase!
Pat☺
-
Will there be a file of the 2017 CF-18 texture made?
-
Peter I think I had if not the last copy made of the NH zipped to where all you had to do is drop in your aircraft folder.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/x54t7ml6k911m6b/FA-18_C_D.zip
Rick
-
Thanks for the new download link Azframer, I've put it on the front page too and removed the older links which were already dead.
All the best,
Peter
-
Hello all,
is there a way to get the DDIs functional in P3D v3.4?
been digging through these 19 pages but may have missed, sorry if I did.
Thanks for the help.
-
hey guys hope all is well. Anyways, Im looking for the VMFA-115 skins for our current v18.4, will these work??
Please help..
Jax