|
Post by walterleo on Jun 11, 2011 14:53:18 GMT
My problems with the landing view in CV 990A originated in the small windows of the original panel. With a foreign panel the landing view is fine (70 % zoom).
Kind regards
Walter
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 11, 2011 15:55:38 GMT
I think our CV880 and CV990 Main Panel graphic/BMP is a bit taller (in terms of it´s lower main panel section) than that of the DM VC10 panel you´re using .... and your pasrticular problem with these CV8980 and Cv990 panels vould be as simple as that !
I didn´t seem to have any visual problems when I tested/rechecke everything the other day .... but .... I did keep my speed up .... with full flaps .... and which does help keep the nose down of course .... and I never lost sight of the RWY whilst still also maintaing a slighht nose-up pitch attitude during my approach to landing.
Using SHIFT+ENTER and SHIFT+BACKSPACE keyboard commands (1 tap only should be enough to do it and avoid actually staring at the ground) will raise/lower the visual horizon .... should you find RWY visibilit any problem.
Mark C BOG/COL
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Jun 11, 2011 17:00:16 GMT
I have a problem with that pic
It's a link and after downloading it says it's not the right type of file...tried a few times but can't open it.
Garry
|
|
|
Post by eastern1004 on Jun 11, 2011 17:59:54 GMT
Also you can adjust the view to your liking permanantly
In the panel.cfg file, under [VIEWS], you may, or may not see this line...
[VIEWS] VIEW_FORWARD_DIR=3.500, 0.000, 0.000
3.5 is a starting point, and works for a lot of aircraft
You may need 9.0 as seen here
VIEW_FORWARD_DIR=9.000, 0.000, 0.000
That figure is needed for the PESKY, er, I mean, POSKY 747's
Adjust to taste ;D
You have to close FS, make the change, then restart FS again for the change to take place, just use 'prior flight' and you will see the adjustment.
And use the number after the point (.) for minor changes, a little goes a long way, as you will see
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 11, 2011 21:03:53 GMT
Walter .... try´n avoid posting attachments here .... if you can help it please We do prefer image linking to PHOTOBUCKET .... or other such imafge hosting services (only) if you don´t mind ANYWAY .... I´ve undertaken some more testing of our CV990 panel today .... the results of which, in my case at least, only seem to confirm what I´ve been stating all along .... that there´s no major problem with visibility .... so long as the speed is kept "UP" .... between 155-160 KTS throughout the approach to landing. I´ve taken some pictures during these tests .... and I´ve left the MSFS data (in relation to speed at least) intact so folk can see for themselves. Also .... no PANEL.CFG VIEWS or FDE adjustments have been made for any of these tests which were all performed using our currently downloadable files/data .... ON APPROACH, 10 DME TO RUN, 161 KTS ON APPROACH, 2 DME TO RUN, 156 KTS The aircrafts external profile (pitch attitude) during approaches to landing also seems fine too .... As I´ve mentioned before .... approaches to landing were flown faster with these birds than was the case with their B707/720 & DC8 counterparts. In fact there´s a story about a DELTA CV880 crew whom shocked the hell out of an FAA inspector during an approach to .... somewhere .... I forget where .... somtime during the early 1960´s ;D This particular aircraft made an approach, with the ASI needle sitting on the Barber Pole by the Middle Marker, and yet, the aircraft still prformed a perfectly normal landing One of the CV880´s attributes (and this must also apply to the CV990 too) is that, for all it´s speed, it could also be slowed down very quickly The conclusuon of my story about the DELTA CV880 crew and the pale faced FAA inspector is that he (the inspector) never wrote-up the incident up .... simply because he believed nobody else would ever believe what he´d just witnessed ;D Apparently a true story. Featured in a DELTA DIGEST issue around the time DAL closed-out it´s CV880 operations. Mark C BOG/COL
|
|
|
Post by bluestar on Jun 11, 2011 22:28:48 GMT
Mark,
I posted some numbers for the CV-880M in the Convair support section. Basicly Vref for the CV-880 is weight/1000. If the weight is 155,000 lbs. (MGLW), then Vref is 155 KIAS. I don't know why, it just always worked out that way. . On landing the CV-880M needs 10 degrees of spoiler. This helps keep the engines spooled up. Remember Vref is Vso +30. Be very aware of the MGLW.
I didn't fly to CV990, but I would think it would be similar???
Bill
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 12, 2011 2:05:23 GMT
I´d agree with that .... and it´s also consistent with the FAA data which I´ve seen too ! The CV880-22M was modified with LE slats which resulted in it´s approach speeds being some 10 KTS slower than the earlier CV880-22 version. I´d assume so too .... and according to my previous CV990 tests, and backed up by todays testing also, something in the vicinity of 155-158 KTS seems to be how our CV990-A simulation seems to "want to fly" approaches to landing anyway. If anyone´s keen to look at "BLUSTARS" modification .... which I believe is for the "CV880-22M version only" .... not the standard CV880-22, or the standard CV990, or the modified CV990-A .... then here´s the link .... tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=convair&action=display&thread=3165PLEASE NOTE: As this´s a non-HJG edit we don´t actually provide any support for it .... BUT .... that doesn´t mean it´s not´any good. In any case I´m sure "BLUESTAR" might be will willing to answer queries anyone might have regarding it Mark C BOG/COL
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Jun 12, 2011 12:52:48 GMT
Hi Mark! Also tried with the original panel after reinstalling it. 1) The RMI is better understood by me using better eyeglasses. 2) Speed, power more or less the same 3) Zoom 70 % view one tick up works fine. Better not changing FS settings, cause I normally use other planes, which work differently. 4) The engine instruments report fuel burned now correctly and according to a foreign fuel stat gauge. 5) The left center post of the windshield blocks the view of the runway on short final (300ft altitude). Something other 3-pane windshield flight decks also do. 6) The pilots best friend (the AP) in this plane is really a good friend, it makes you belief, that you can hand-fly the plane on ILS very well (in comparison). Kind regards Walter
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Jun 12, 2011 12:57:39 GMT
I have a problem with that pic It's a link and after downloading it says it's not the right type of file...tried a few times but can't open it. Garry Hi Garry: Sorry for that, but with firefox browser it works well. Walter
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Jun 12, 2011 18:45:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Jun 14, 2011 2:59:10 GMT
Hmm....Mark, I think the Delta CV 880 story has, as many other tales, lost a lot of factuality over the years ;D ;D ;D
The "barber pole" speed at low altitude would have been around 350knts plus. With that speed at the middle maker, which would be about 2miles from the runway threshhold, with no flap extention, I really can not visualize the CV880 making a successfull landing, unless the runway was extremely long, or reverse thrust was used.
Any respectable FAA inspector would have suspended the crew for operating a commercial airliner in that manner reguardless of any adverse reactions.
Herman
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 14, 2011 3:24:22 GMT
WELL .... that´s the story related by this particular DELTA pilot and I´m only quoting what he wrote It was printed in DELTA DIGEST issue (by a Captain Paul BENNETT as I recall).... around the time the airline ceased CV880 operations which would be around the early 1970´s. The incident was also undertaken prior to the time speed restrictions were implimented around US airports .... so .... we´re talking very ealy 1960´s here. Paul also went on to comment (within his lengthy article) that prior to speed restrictions being implimented DELTA crews were breaking speed records almost daily .... flying the CV880´s. That particular story isn´t unknown throughout serious aviation circles .... and irt was apparently done more than once .... only on the particular occasion related (above) there was, apparently, and FAA inspector in te jumpseat. We actually had quite a lengthy discussion about this particular even back around December 2004 when HJG first released the CV880 and CV990. In his article Paul further comments .... "with all sorts of arresting devices the CV880 could be slowed down very quickly"Incidentally .... that article to whivh I refer was reprinted, in full, withing Jon PROCTOR´s book "CONVAIR 880 & 990". Mark C BOG/COL
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Jun 14, 2011 15:08:02 GMT
Well Mark.....you've got my curiousity up and running....so I will do a simulation of that today and report on the results.
No doubt, the CV880 and 990 were fast airliners, at least in the cruise.
I realize that you are only quoting from other sources and you would think that Jon Proctor's book would be a reliable source.
Herman
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 14, 2011 15:35:20 GMT
YEAH .... I would have thought so too .... in as much as I would think DELTA DIGEST didn´t publish rubbish either.
Jon´s book is very intersting Herman .... and is part of the "GREAT AIRLINERS" series of publications.
I really recommend it to you .... and anyone else interested as well .... if you can still locate and score a copy of it !
Mark C BOG/COL
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Jun 14, 2011 19:53:41 GMT
OK....after doing a couple of test approach flights at KSEA in the Delta AL CV 880 here are my results and a few images to illustrate conditions. Wind speed- calm Aircraft GLW- 140,000lbs. Initial approach speed- 358knts indicated ( Max barberpole speed - 390knts) In the first test flight I attempted to maintain the normal glide slope, and that gave me a VS of about -3000 to -4000 ft.\min. -very scarry, I aborted the approach because I did'nt think any pilot with all his marbels would ever attempt anything like that. In my second approach I descended way below the GS to about 1200ft ASL. Just a bit past the outer marker at 350knts I lowered the landing gear ( not sure if it alowed in this airplane). The airseed dropped very rapidly from 350 to 240knots and I was almost over the RW threshold. Flaps and speed brakes had not been extended yet as I figured my speed was still too high at that point.(ie. 240knts) I also aborted at that point because I was not lined up with the runway center line. AT those high speeds it is very difficult to maintain proper directional control for landing. On the downwind to RW 16 at KSEA....358knts. Just passed the OM,gear down. Almost over the RW threshhold On the overshoot Now if I had maintained the 350knts until reaching the inner maker as related in this story I really cannot see how I would have been able to make a safe landing and not overstress the airplane components such as the flaps, speed brakes and landing gear and tires. So my conclusion to this story is.... that I think the pilot in this case is full of BS and was trying very hard to boost his ego and that of the CV800. Herman
|
|