L1011 Tape Panel RB211-22b Taildragger Effect Problem

[simpilo]

Hi,

I see a problem in this tape panel. When reducing the zoom level by tapping or holding the "-" key the view tilts backwards or looks into the sky just like a tail dragger will. I do not want and do not expect a jetliner to do this. I expect the same behavior as all the default jetliners in FS2004 when pressing or holding "-" or "+" keys.

In the panel.cfg [VIEWS] section directly from the zip archive

[VIEWS]
VIEW_FORWARD_WINDOWS=0,10001,10002,10003,10004

VIEW_FORWARD_EYE=0.000, 0.000, 0.000
VIEW_FORWARD_DIR=11.000, 0.000, 0.000

VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_WINDOWS=36

VIEW_RIGHT_WINDOWS=35

VIEW_REAR_RIGHT_WINDOWS=34

VIEW_REAR_WINDOWS=33

VIEW_REAR_LEFT_WINDOWS=32

VIEW_LEFT_WINDOWS=31

VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_WINDOWS=30

I really want to fix it. This is the only problem with the package. I have it paired with L1011-100 RB211-22B v3

Is something amiss? Did the developer forget to fix it? How do we correct this?

For comparison the problem DOES NOT exist in the 707, and DC 10 panels running on my computer. Same fs2004 installation.

I appreciate any help that is effective in accomplishing my goal of have the correct zoom angle. Very important to me.

Update: Same issue in the standard version of the 22B variant. I didn't try the other two variants as they are for other variants of the L1011

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

The default panel-to-outside environment ZOOM factor is set at a default value of "1.01"

This ZOOM factor can be ajusted using SHIFT + - (minus) kyboard commands, but, should not under any circumstantes, be set to any value less than "0.85" .... or panel-to-outside environment visibility issues will result. There´s really no reason to stretch the scenery horizon more than a ZOOM factor of "O.85" anyway and doing so only results in .... (1) the issue described" .... and (2) a less realistic field of view (IMHO).

We know about this issue, but, there´s "nothing" we can do about it "using the data we have" for these panel" .... sorry


HOWEVER .... the "is" a very acceptable/successful workaround in regard to this "minor issue" ....


This phenomenon, and the workaround, is discussed within the "KNOWN ISSUES" section of our following linked online forum based manual for these L-1011 simulations ....


tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/3888/l1011-tristar-panel-installation-handling


.... see "SECTION 1-07" of this above linked manual


ALSO .... read our/my following internal report in regard to this issue as linked below below .... see the 5th posting with this folowing linked thread ....


tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/8303/landing-wide-bodies-tristar-dc?page=1


Unfortunately my supporting imagery within this particular report was recently obliterated .... compliments of PHOTOBUKETS recently introduced policy in regard to 3rd party image presentation/s (it´s going to be a while before al of this can be repaired) .... but the text is still every bit as valid as it was the day I drafted it.

Each of our 4 L-1011 panels are subject to this issue .... despite being othrwise technically superb. The reason this issue isn´t replicated within other HJG supplied panels is because each was designed by different authors using different design protocols.

Mark C
BOG/CO

[simpilo]

Thanks for that reply. Took me a while to reply. It just saddens me to have such a nice panel with that weird effect. I am happy to fix it if I knew how and had the permission. I have some experience with FS Panel Studio as far as adding or removing gauges and adding or removing panel windows but not the zoom factor. I find a lot of worth in the effort to fix it.

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

It just saddens me to have such a nice panel with that weird effect

I don´t want to get off on the wrong foot with anyone here .... and nor is it my intention to try´n defend our product either (I do need to make this latter point very clear) .... since we "DO" acknowldge the existence of "a minor issue" subject what´s termed as being "self inflicted circumatances", but, as I´ve stated more than once before on this forum .... "there´s some things we can do" (easily or with some applied effort) .... AND .... "there´s also some things we can´t do (and that´s "not" through our not wanting to try or do nothing at all) .... only in the case of the latter any adverse effect we end up with is generally due to the limitations or incompleteness of resources we´ve had to work with from the very start

As explained and as covered within my internal report ....

The said effect becomes evident only if one elects to reduce ones main panel view ZOOM FACTOR below a value of "0.85" .... since any adjustments above this value pose no real inconvenience at all .... HOWEVER .... and as we´ve already stated (and for the reasons stipulated) it´s "not" encouraged, or even necessary, to reduce the the main panel view ZOOM FACTOR at all.

At some inconvenience to myself today I´ve managed to restore all of the original imagery used to support my internal report (I do consider it an "important document") on this subject and which is as follows (see 5th psting within the following linked thread) ....

tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/8303/landing-wide-bodies-tristar-dc

.... the conclusions of which also tend to be supported by other evidenctiary images posted "prior to" my own report within this same linked thread.


I feel we´ve been adequately open as well as brutally honest in regard to this particular issue .... even to the extent of our advising there´s nothing we can do about it (at this time) .... and we may not ever be able to do anything about it in the future either and which is something people are just going to have to accept

In the meantime our advice remains as follows ....


1. Use these L-1011 panels as intended.

2. Don´t stretch the scenery horizon line .... it´s not necessary and these panel were never intended/designed to be subjected to such an adjustments anyway.

3. In the event people choose "not" to take our advice and opt stretch their scenery horizon line/adjust the ZOOM FACTOR of their main panel views anyway .... THEN .... the resulting effect is something that "has to" be contended with .... HOWEVER .... and as evidenced within my inernal report our elevated seat position/adjustment is (we feel) a satisfactory workaround/solution provided the main panel view ZOOM FACTOR isn´t reduced below a value of "0.85".

4. Subject to this minor imposition, but, also applying our recommended workround solution too .... the end user is "not" disadvantaged in any way and all features represented within each of these L-1011 panels contiunue to function perfectly and result in an otherwise more than satisfactorily enjoyable experience.


Sorry folks .... but .... that´s the best we can do .... and advise

Mark C
BOG/CO

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

I´ve since decided to post a copy of my much earlier and above linked internal report on this subject .... iun the intersts of complete openess and ease of reference ....

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 ....

L-1011 PANEL/SCENERY VIEWS ANALYSIS (INTERNAL HJG REPORT)

The main panel represented in each of the HJG supplied L-1011 panels is not only larger/deeper (by virtue of the original authors design concept) to accomodate all required instrumentation with the desirable clarity, but, the scenery horizon line, as is currently represented within each, is also, by necessity, raised somewhat on account of this and in order to ensure adequate ground/RWY visibility .... "during the approach to landing in particular".

We appreciate this default panel/scenery view may not satisfy everyones preference, but, this view can easily be ajusted (if on feels they need to), in accordance with personal preferences, in order to promote more advantageous visability and without any major consequences that cannot be successfully addressed .... "as is duscussed below"

Using any of the HJG/KM supplied L-1011 panels .... "THIS" is the panel scenery horizon line and view presented when using any of these panels in accordance with their default window/zoom value of "1.01" (note this value is displayed within the top right section of each panel image/view) ....




Should one desire to stretch the scenery horizon line (as some do) .... in order to create a more distant horizon effect .... then .... this may easily be accomplished, in increments, using SHIFT + - (minus) keyboard commands, and which will result in the following described view perspectives ....


Resetting the panel/window zoom function from its dfault "1.01" setting to a value "0.50" (using SHIFT + - (minus) keyboard commands) .... the scenery horizon line will be stretched so as to appear more distant, but, the scenery horizon height will also then begin to reduce too .... with the scenery view beginning to receed behind the main panel in accordance with each increment of panel/window zoom adjustmemt. Additionally .... airport related scenery objects, located at peripheral edges of the resized panel view, will also begin to distort .... as is evident within the following image ....




This receeding scenery height can easily be corrected/raised though (according to personal preference) using SHIFT + ENTER and SHIFT + BACKSPACE keyboard commands .... but despite this adjustment .... the airport related scenery distortion, at the peripheral edges of the resized panel view, will still remain evident .... as per the following image (note the panel/window zoom value remains set at "0.50") ....




Further resetting the panel/window function to an even lower value of "0.31" (this is minimum setting available for any of these L-1011 panels .... again using SHIFT + - (minus) keyboard commands) .... the scenery horizon line will become further stretched with the scenery horizon line then appearing even more distant .... BUT .... the panel/scenery view will also have completely receded behind the main panel. Airport scenery related objects, located at the peripheral edges of the resized panel view, will also appear even more distorted too .... as per the following image ....




Once again .... and using SHIFT + ENTER and SHIFT + BACKSPACE keyboard commands .... the consealed panel/scenery view may easily be corrected/raised (according to personal prefrence) using SHIFT + ENTER and SHIFT + BACKSPACE keyboard commands .... but .... the distortion of airport related scenery objects, located at the peripheral edges of the resized panel view, will still remain evident despite this adjustment .... as per the following image (note the panel/window zoom value remains set at "0.31") ....




If the panel/window zoom function is then reset to a higher value of "0.65" (using SHIFT + - (minus) keyboard commands) .... the scenery horizon line will be raised somewhat and the distortion evident in most peripheral airport scenery objects also resolved somewhat. The panel view/scenery height may also then be further adjusted (according to preference) using SHIFT + ENTER and SHIFT + BACKSPACE keyboard commands .... as per the following image ....




If the panel/window zoom function is further reset (again using SHIFT + - (minus) keyboard commands) .... to an even higher value of "0.85" .... and a minor scenery horizon height adjustment applied also (once again using SHIFT+ENTER and SHIFT+BACKSPACE keyboard commands) .... THEN .... not only will the general panel/scenery view be greatly improved, but, all evidence of peripheral airport scenery distortion will also be "COMPLETELY" resolved .... as per the following image ....




The above panel view perspective experimentation tends to confirm that whilst the default panel/scenery view (a panel/window zoom value of "1.01") is perfectly satisfactory/"DOES NOT" present any major problems "AT ALL" in respect of ensuring adequate visibility during ground manouvering and approach to landing in particular .... a panel/window zoom adjustment of not less than "0.85", assisted by minor scenery horizon height adjustments too, is promoting of more than adequate visibility should one ever desire to stretch the panel/scenery view in order to create a more distant horizon effect.

This applies to all HJG/KM supplied L-1011 panels.

Stretching the scenery horizon line to panel/window zoom values of less than "0.85" will progressively impair panel/scenery visibility in accordance with each increment of reduction, but gain, this can be more than satisfactorily corrected per the scenery horizon line view adjustments discussed above. Even so .... setting panel/window zoom values of less than "0.85" is not encouraged/recommended in the interest of ensuring the best possible panel/scenery visibility whilst also avoiding excesive scenery distortion using any of these L-1011 panels.

The above observations are also supported by the following approach to landing view imagery .... each of which is based on a reduced panel/window zoom value of "0.85" along with a minor scenery horizon line correction ....


A. 4.0 miles (DME) from landing .... below 1,500 FT (RA) .... 139 KTS (AT) .... FLAPS 33* (degrees)/full .... gear down .... 3* (degree) AI pitch attitude .... using a panel zoom value of "0.85" ....




B. 3.2 miles (DME) from landing .... 600 FT (RA) .... 139 KTS (AT) .... FLAPS 33* (degrees)/full .... gear down .... 3* (degree) AI pitch attitude .... using a panel zoom value of "0.85" ....






C. Over the RWY threshold and prior to auto-flare for landing .... passing 100 FT (RA) .... 141 KTS (AT) .... FLAPS 33* (degres)/full .... gear down .... 3.5* (degree) AI pitch attitude .... using a panel zoom value of "0.85" ....




D. Auto-flare for landing .... "touchdown" .... 126 KTS (AT) .... FLAPS 33* (degrees)/full and spoilers "UP" .... 5* (degree) AI pitch attitude .... using a panel zoom value of "0.85" ....






It is only in the very last moments (a few seconds only) of any approach to landing .... during the flare to landing/touch down and prior toderotation .... that runway visibility becomes momentarily restricted .... but after which ..... visibility is then "more than adequately" restored.

This is all "QUITE NORMAL" .... for these L-1011 panels/simulations.

The following must also be borne-in mind too ....


1. These are 2D type (not VC type view) panels .... so .... scenery visibility is always going to be "artificial" and subject to enhancement, or even impairment, using the default or other view adjustments .... and that´s just the way "some" 2D type panels work.

2. L-1011 aircraft approach to land with a relatively high AOA .... and which is a natural characteristic of these L-1011 simulations also in keeping with performance of the actual aircraft .... SO .... "it is not" unreasonable to expect less runway visibility to be apparent during any approach to landing, but, as can be seen per the above (and following) imagery .... runwy visibility "is not/should not" ever be a problem .... "provided these simulations are flown properly to start with".

3. Different panel authors design their work in accordance with their own personal (and differing) preferences. Most HJG designed panels conform to particular standard in respect of their default view settings, but, in the case of a number of panels which we have "imported" to HJG .... we are obliged to accept what is provided to us and often "CANNOT" (easily) modify everything in accordance with our own established preferences.

4. Panel views may vary slightly between FS2004 and FSX .... and also in accordance with FS display settings too. We "CANNOT" provide a "one setting satifies all users" for any individual panel. Nor can we guaruntee that everything will display similarly on all PC systems and FS installations either. Therefore if folk are, at all, at variance with the default view settings we determine are best, and wish to adjust these in accordance to their own personal preference, then, this option "IS" available .... only in this particular .... case folk "must" experimement with these views in order to determine what looks best and in accordance with their own personal preference/s.


This folks .... given the absence of any general or known issue (which there "is not") is the best we can currently advise


A wide screen LCD monitor was used for each of the above approach to landing view images .... the results of which are consistant with the following imagery using an old square CRT monitor and with the panel/window zoom function maintained at its default value of "1.01" ....


L-1011 RR RB-211-22B Analogue Engine Gauges Panel


L-1011 RR RB-211-22B Tape Engine Gauges Panel


L-1011 RR RB-211-524 Analogue Engine Gauges Panel


L-1011 RR RB-211-524 Tape Engine Gauges Panel



Mark C
Bogota DC
Republica de Colombia
August 2016

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

Unless a need arises for me to comment definitively in regard to any other specific detail raised .... I won´t be adding anything further to this thread since I feel I´ve communicated all I possibly can on this particular subject (on behalf of the group) and for the time being

Mark C
BOG/CO

[simpilo]

Respecting the scenery stretching thing I can assume that the panel is best at 1.01 zoom factor no less than 0.85 it'll be fine. Thanks, Mark, for the time to post details about this. After looking at the Spot View of the yellow, orange and red plane, I am not familiar with that livery, AoA is above the horizon and you cannot see the runway realistically.

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

After looking at the Spot View of the yellow, orange and red plane
I am not familiar with that livery

That´s the British airline "COURT LINE" of the 1970´s .... who´s fleet was composed of both BAC ONE ELEVEN and L-1011 TRISTAR aircraft that were operated on IT flights on behalf of travel agencies during thar period .... and each of which supported a different coloured variation of the airlines fuselage and tail striping.

Their 2 L-1011´s supported pink/peach/orangey-red and yellow/orange/orangey-rd schemes as follows ....



1973 - G-BAAB - L-1011-1
Textures by Tony Madge
Last Updated: 09 Dec 2010



1973 - G-BAAA - L-1011-1
Textures by Tony Madge
Last Updated: 09 Dec 2010

An EASTERN AIRLINES bound and liveried L-1011 TRISTAR (N305EA) .... with additional "COURT" fuselage titles and tal lofo on the #2 engine intake .... was also briefly demonstrated in the UK during 1972 and prior to the delivery of the 2 COURT LINE L-1011´s ....



1972 - N305EA - L1011-1
Textures by Tony Madge
Last Updated: 14 Dec 2011

All 3 of these are avalable from our "L1011-1/1F/50"

AoA is above the horizon and you cannot see the runway realistically.

This can be an "unavoidable" consequence/restriction omposed by 2D panel views associated with airccraft such as the A300B, DC-10, and L-1011 .... each of which approach to land with a fairly high AoA. All 2D panels feature "artificial" view perespectives .... unlike VC panels which often present more realistic view perspectives to the external FS environmenment.

HOWEVER .... as my above imagery (among that also posted by other users of these simulations .... and as may be seen within the above posted links also), RWY visibility "is not" an issue with these L-1011 simulations .... provided they are flown properly/correctly to start with .... and what thos means is the simulated aircraft weight and approach to landing airspeed are a critical combination which have to be correct "or one will get into trouble" !!!!

"IF" the simulation is heavy/overweight fo landing .... THEN .... its nose pitch attitude/AoA will increase with airspeed reduction and possibly to the point of restricting RWY visibility.

"IF" the landing weight is correct (no more than 20% total fuel remaining is desirable for a full payload loading), but, the airspeed is allowed to bleed off too much during any approach to landing .... THEN ONCE AGAIN .... the nose pitch attitude/AoA will increase with airspeed reduduction and possibly to the point of restricting RWY visibility.

"ALL OF THIS" is actually covered within the flying tutorial/s featured within my/our forum based "L-1011 PANEL INSTALLATION & HANDLING NOTES"/manual as follows ....
tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/3888/l1011-tristar-panel-installation-handling

Again .... weight and airspeed are "ABSUTELY CRITICAL" order to ensure the right AoA during all landing .... and in order to ensure rasonable/acceptable RWY visibility whilst also bearing in mind the explained limitations of 2D panels associated with aircraft that approach to land with a relatively high deck angle.

"IF" ever confronted with any RWY visibilty problem (which shouldn´t ever happen if care is taken in regard to the above recommendations .... and as is evident per all of the displayed imagery), then, the prescribed solutiom (in F2004) is to raise/lower the seat/horizon view perspective using SHIFT * ENTER and SHIFY * BACKSPACE keyboard commands .... and as ealier commuicated within this thread.

Mark C
BOG/CO