|
|
Post by walterleo on Oct 12, 2016 13:06:32 GMT
Hi friends two years ago there was a longer discussion on the question how to make look the Tristar landing view as ist should be. What came out was more or less: "Put your eye-view one notch up!" What had been not discussed was, that a widebody with high deck angle as the Tristar or the DC-10 looks differently and is flown in real also something differntly on shortest final. I have read somewere that DC-10 pilots have to fly the last meters before crossing the runway end HIGHER than in smaller aircraft (and commanded by ILS glideslope), as the high pitch angle together with the distance between the mainwheels and the pilots eyes (and the antenas of the radar altimeter and the ILS) would bring the mainwheels too close to the approach lights. So a correctly landing Tristar or DC-10 looks from pilots view point quite differntly as a B 737 or so. From FS standpoint one can correct the view also scaling lower the zoom factor (say to 0,65) and not using the default factor 1. This also helps for landing a CV 990. So: Ajust the outside view before taking off:  At final so the view is nice:  Stay high over the fence:  At 50 ft starting the flare you will see still the runway:  Before touchdown the nearer part of runway disappears, but in real also you dont see down to the concrete but concentrate on the far end of the runway.  Good luck! Walter P.S.: landing wheight 346.000 pds (14 % in all tanks) VREF 33 flaps 140 according book. |
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Oct 12, 2016 15:11:25 GMT
Nice Walter. Looks like the perfect approach and landing attitude for the L1011 or DC-10.
Herman
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Oct 12, 2016 20:04:35 GMT
I'm "pleased" this has come up  .... BUT HONESTLY .... using any of the HJG supplied L-1011 panels I wouldn't recommend setting a reduced panel ZOOM factor of less that "0.85" (if one feels they need to resize the default panel/scenery view at all) .... otherwise .... the scenery horizon line "will" progressively drop/fall behind the main panel view to become obcured in proportion to each increment of reduction .... and .... outside scenery objects located at the peripheral edges of the resized panel view will also then begin to distort. Set a reduced panel ZOOM factor of "0.85" .... if one feels they must .... BUT .... a value of "no less than this" is recommended. Then .... use keyboard commands SHIFT + ENTER (in FS2004) to raise/readjust the height of the scenery horizon line "in accordance with ones preferences". This "IS" discussed within the "KNOWN ISSUES" section of our forum based manual for our L-1011 TRISTAR simulations .... tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/3888/l1011-tristar-panel-installation-handlingI also feel the need to say there has recently been a complaint expressed ..... posted on another social network .... in regard to these L-1011 panels and what happens when resizing the panel/scenery view in particular. The community should know that we/HJG tried .... a number of times .... to assist this particular complainant, but, he flatly refused (publicly uttered) to follow our council. The advice we posted in attempt to try'n support him was "removed", by him (since it obviously didn't suit his intentions), and was replaced with a somewhat less then complimentary statement by him. We never bothered to try'n assist this complainant further (some people simply can't be helped .... and why bother feeding trolls at the risk of creating public entertainment anyway ?) and assume the negativity of commentary will remain as "his own personal testimonial against himself" in the minds of most fair-minded viewers. I need to say that it "DOES NOT" bother us .... in the very least .... that some people seek public media in order to criticize. That's "their right" of course .... but .... as hard as we try to please we/HJG do have our limitations (in regard to the extent of technical expertise) and "CANNOT" cater for everyones individual tastes .... and which is all that really needs being borne-in-mind. In any case .... we/HJG .... do take "ALL" reports seriously (if anything needs fixing, then, we try to do so .... and often with great success .... if it's something within our capacity to be able to rectify all). Upon investigating the subject of this particular public complaint (some 2 months ago) I compiled an internal report/analysis in regard to it (which I'll post below later on). Despite the fact that the "minor issue", which is the subject of this other individuals public complaint/axe grinding, the issue is known one that we/HJG can't do anything about .... other than to offer our best work-around recommendations which "DO", more than satisfactorily, resolve this matter. I also want to stress that Walter "IS NOT" complaining about anything here .... he never does. His often helpful commentarty is therefore "NOT" interpreted as a complaint and is, as always, "more than welcome".
I'm simply "seizing this opportunity" in order to air/remind folk of "a known minor issue" within these L-1011 panels
THANKS" for your respected input Walter .... and your much appreciated contributions to this forum community  Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by jimhalinda on Oct 12, 2016 20:10:04 GMT
Regarding that other complaining individual, you should have offered him a full refund. Oh, wait a minute ... Some people just don't appreciate the hard work done (and supported) for free and shared by HJG. I hardly have time to sim any more but still come to this forum for a taste of what the skies looked like when I was a kid. Thanks, HJG! |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Oct 12, 2016 20:15:33 GMT
As mentioned above ....
Here's that copy of my "INTERNAL" report (although reference to this subject "IS" made within our forum based HL-1011 manual) in response to the complaint recently aired per another social network ....
I conclude that there are "no major problems" to be reconciled in regard to any of these L-1011 panels, but, if folk desire adjusting their panel ZOOM factor to values of less than "0.85" .... then .... they will create a view issue for themselves .... HOWEVER .... this "extremly minor" issue is "very easily" resolved as described within the above report and the "KNOWN ISSUES" section of our forum based L-1011 manual.
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Oct 13, 2016 7:55:20 GMT
Hi friends:
For not letting go down my main point:
A wide-body airliner with a disgn to be flown at high deck-angle like Tristar or DC-10, is flown in real over the threshold higher than other airplanes (relative to the pilots eye-view) and seen from inside looks differntly AND SHOULD LOOK DIFFERENTLY IN SIMULATION ALSO.
My playing around with zoom factor also relates to the fact that I am using a wide screen on my laptop and a normal screen on my PC both running FS 9. On the wide screen I find a lower zoom factor beneficial for airliners which fly at high pitch angles over the runway threshold.
The other discussion went astray to my impression due to the fact that the person mentioned never did show screenshots and never defined what he wanted to see as "normal".
But nevertheless applying Aerofotos handling notes one can "fly" the HJG Tristar simulation without problems to touchdown.
The height of our "seat" in FS 9 is a problem which is more general than in the HJG Tristars, Staffan Ahlberg (real DC-9, MD-80, AB 340 captain) once adviced to raise our virtual seat in all FS9 simulations for landing. Most real pilots do something similar also before landing their real airplane.
Kind regards
Walter
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Oct 13, 2016 8:41:24 GMT
"PRECISELY" .... and Walter has "ABSOLUTELY NAILED IT" in regard to what happened within a certain past forum discussion relating to L-1011 panel views. Even now .... and as Walter "QUITE CORRECTLY" implies also .... we still, don't know, if panel ZOOM adjustments had anything to do with this 1 particular, of 2 only, previously reported L-1011 panel view related issues that've been posted on this forum since 2010. The author of one of these 2 previous threads has never been "clear" in regard to his description/s .... and nor has he ever posted imagery/evidence for us to be able to more carefully analyse his particular issue. It's a pitty really  .... because that sort sort of information is what often enables us to more easily analyse (see what other people are seeing .... and there's nothing this team likes doing more than resolving issues .... if we can .... in order advance peoples enjoyment of what we/HJG offer), and advise acordingly, rather than our guessing, and/or possibly misinterpreting too. It's information exchange, like this, that ultimately aids someone else in the future .... hence my decision to finally post my own internal HJG report above The recently posted criticism (and we believe we know the individual concerned) on another social media (not here at HJG), and to which I referred above, is an "entirely separate" issue though. As 2 of my HJG colleagues would probably testify .... that's "EXACTLY" what I thought of replying Jim .... BUT .... I just as quickly thought ...."why bother feeding the troll only to create public entertainment". Some things we can fix .... other things we can't. Some people we can help (and most are a pleasure to assist whereas others aren't) .... and others simply can't be helped at all  AND .... that's just the way it "IS" .... and will likely always "BE" Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
.... BUT HONESTLY .... using any of the HJG supplied L-1011 panels I wouldn't recommend setting a reduced panel ZOOM factor of less that "0.85" (if one feels they need to resize the default panel/scenery view at all) .... otherwise .... the scenery horizon line "will" progressively drop/fall behind the main panel view to become obcured in proportion to each increment of reduction .... and .... outside scenery objects located at the peripheral edges of the resized panel view will also then begin to distort.
.... because that sort sort of information is what often enables us to more easily analyse (see what other people are seeing .... and there's nothing this team likes doing more than resolving issues .... if we can .... in order advance peoples enjoyment of what we/HJG offer), and advise acordingly, rather than our guessing, and/or possibly misinterpreting too. It's information exchange, like this, that ultimately aids someone else in the future .... hence my decision to finally post my own internal HJG report above 