|
|
Post by almguy1 on Aug 8, 2011 17:26:10 GMT
CONCORDE and THE TSR2 Still looking good. Now only in the air museums The last 2 TSR2 saved from the breakers. XR219,XR220 DUXFORD anD Cosford UK Concordes in Various Museums around the world. BAC/AeroSPTL CONCORDE FS France Yannick, Loïc, Herve Maxime (Mr 3D Model) Sebby, Aurel, Thomas, Gillou Rayak. Pedro Oliveira, Andrew Wilson, Paul Varn and M.Swanson . BAC TSR2 by Kazunori Ito Scenery RAF Cranwell UK they have a nice long runway.          |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Aug 8, 2011 21:28:25 GMT
Looks like Dave has just transitioned from "BIGGER" .... to "FASTER" !  Is that CONCORDE the FSFRANCE TEAM model .... or .... the version by Libardo GUZMAN in Colombia ? You might want to try the Russian TU144 "KONKORDSKI" too Dave .... there's supposed to be quite a good simulation for it over at FLIGHTSIM.COM or AVSIM.COM. It it's FS performance is true to that of its realworld counterpar .... then it shouls be a "wee bit faster" than the CONCORDE". Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by almguy1 on Aug 8, 2011 22:29:42 GMT
Looks like Dave has just transitioned from "BIGGER" .... to "FASTER" ! Is that CONCORDE the FSFRANCE TEAM model .... or .... the version by Libardo GUZMAN in Colombia ? You might want to try the Russian TU144 "KONKORDSKI" too Dave .... there's supposed to be quite a good simulation for it over at FLIGHTSIM.COM or AVSIM.COM. It it's FS performance is true to that of its realworld counterpar .... then it shouls be a "wee bit faster" than the CONCORDE". Mark C AKL/NZ Thanks Mark I always thought the two would look good together at least once. so gave it a try the TSR2 is a bit of a challenge to fly with the blown flaps but think Ive got it down now. and I could not find the windscreen wiper switch on the concorde to turn them off. I think the old Koncordski TU144 never really realised itself due to breakup at Paris Airshow . Maybe I will give it a test drive I heard it may make a comeback but not 100% sure on that. a/c info at top of page. Just put it in. I beleive I have the Libardo Guzman Concorde but not installed to FS 2004 yet, Rgds Dave |
|
|
|
Post by jimhalinda on Aug 9, 2011 3:02:42 GMT
Mark and Dave,
The Ruth/Mussner TU-144 models have the Airframe Type set to 5943 in the .air file, which apparently is the 'Concorde' airframe type.
As I found somewhere on a forum long ago,
"setting the Concorde Type number also sets the Concorde overspeed tables, so you may get an overspeed warning at 350 kts IAS at lower altitudes. The Mmo parameter in the AIR file does set the Mach number the overspeed warning comes on, but at lower altitudes that warning is based on maximum IAS, not Mach. And, the Vmo parameter in the AIR file no longer controls this when the Concorde Type is set."
So, in FS2004 anyway, the TU-144 is not allowed to fly any faster than Concorde.
And even though it reached M2.35 in flight testing, the excellent book "Tupolev TU-144 - Russia's Concorde", by Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant, states that during its short service life, it was typically limited to Mach 2.0, just like Concorde.
Regards,
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Aug 9, 2011 3:47:15 GMT
That's "A BUMMER"  I'd heard (from my old aviation phoography colleague .... and Russian aircraft speacialist/commentator Colin BALLANTINE) .... during the early 1980's .... that the TU144 actually became unstable at extremly high cruising MACH speeds. Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Aug 9, 2011 15:44:14 GMT
They never mastered the c/G shift problem like as well as the Concorde which pumped the fuel around....maybe the Russians did as well, but it was also unstable at lower speeds hence the retractable fore planes.
It's interesting as a supersonic transport are going to basically look the same but with these two it difficult to imagine if they could be any more different.....nothing is the same or in many ways even similar.
Garry
|
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Aug 9, 2011 16:49:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by almguy1 on Aug 9, 2011 22:52:38 GMT
Looks Good Herman good to give some inspiration. I didnt fare well on the TU144 I just loaded it keeps bursting into flames at idle and just burns on the Cranwell runway, Hope its not a sign of whats happening in UK right now. I have a brother in South London. regards dave |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Aug 12, 2011 7:52:01 GMT
Other than knowing of it's existence for FS2004 .... I don't know too much else about the operation of that TU144 simulation Dave. If it's made by that Russian group, of FS fame, then it will be complex  .... in the sense that there may be a lot more to it, and it's panel, than just push'em forward (the thrust levers) and it goes. I think I recall some good comentary feedback regarding it, but again, I'm not personally familiar with it myself .... yet. The TU144 .... like the FS FRANCE TEAM CONCORDE (Project MACH 2) too .... is something, like many other FS things, I'd like to try too, but, have had to constantly put on the back-burner due to HJG stuff which I need to attend to  Once day .... soon .... I hope !  Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by almguy1 on Aug 19, 2011 4:55:46 GMT
Other than knowing of it's existence for FS2004 .... I don't know too much else about the operation of that TU144 simulation Dave. If it's made by that Russian group, of FS fame, then it will be complex .... in the sense that there may be a lot more to it, and it's panel, than just push'em forward (the thrust levers) and it goes. I think I recall some good comentary feedback regarding it, but again, I'm not personally familiar with it myself .... yet. The TU144 .... like the FS FRANCE TEAM CONCORDE (Project MACH 2) too .... is something, like many other FS things, I'd like to try too, but, have had to constantly put on the back-burner due to HJG stuff which I need to attend to Once day .... soon .... I hope ! Mark C AKL/NZ Thanks Mark No worries I will revisit it one day, Cant do it all . On to the next thing in the meantime. Puttin TU 144 back in the Hangar again Back in the Hangar again As much as Id like to fly er I cant start her fire Back in the Hangar again. Regards Dave   |
|
|
|
Post by anderscn on Sept 15, 2011 14:19:41 GMT
Hi, Ruth/Mussners ”Kondordski” is beautiful and rewarding to fly. It is not as complicated as for instance Project Tupolevs ILjushin 62M, let alone the Tupolev 154. Somewhere between the PT Iljushin 62M and Samdims Tupolev 114, I would say. However, there are a few errors in the manual regarding engine start-up; look here how it should be done: forum.avsim.net/topic/295397-tu-144-for-fs2004-tutorialI managed to get this aircraft in the air, but not down again in a particular elegant way! I neither managed (yet) to get fully hold the Sovjet navigation techniques. This aircraft has a steep learning curve, all together. And yes, in this simulation you have to pump the fuel around during flight, in order to keep the CG right. There is however an “Auto-CG button”, that relieves the work load of the FS pilot! SO, instead of asking the busy developers all the time ”why not this or that aircraft, repaint etc.”, why not in the meantime delve into some Russian aircraft? Definitely a different, but interesting world. Have fun, Anders |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 15, 2011 21:20:57 GMT
YOU KNOW .... there's a saying ....
"Any landing one can walk away from is a good one"
There's some beautiful Russian stuff out there alright .... which are a credit to the designers whom have produced those products.
I already have some of these .... and only wish I had more time to be able to use/enjoy them even more !
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan K. Hansen on Sept 19, 2011 7:41:43 GMT
... SO, instead of asking the busy developers all the time ”why not this or that aircraft, repaint etc.”, why not in the meantime delve into some Russian aircraft? Definitely a different, but interesting world. ... Hear, hear! |
|
|
|
Post by almguy1 on Sept 19, 2011 21:40:10 GMT
Hi, Ruth/Mussners ”Kondordski” is beautiful and rewarding to fly. It is not as complicated as for instance Project Tupolevs ILjushin 62M, let alone the Tupolev 154. Somewhere between the PT Iljushin 62M and Samdims Tupolev 114, I would say. However, there are a few errors in the manual regarding engine start-up; look here how it should be done: forum.avsim.net/topic/295397-tu-144-for-fs2004-tutorialI managed to get this aircraft in the air, but not down again in a particular elegant way! I neither managed (yet) to get fully hold the Sovjet navigation techniques. This aircraft has a steep learning curve, all together. And yes, in this simulation you have to pump the fuel around during flight, in order to keep the CG right. There is however an “Auto-CG button”, that relieves the work load of the FS pilot! SO, instead of asking the busy developers all the time ”why not this or that aircraft, repaint etc.”, why not in the meantime delve into some Russian aircraft? Definitely a different, but interesting world. Have fun, Anders Hi Anders I never asked the developers anything, Only prob I had was the engines catching on fire after they were started. Tried all different ways still did the same thing, Could be an installation problem as it had some files I was not familiar with. I do have other Russian a/c's that operate just fine. Regards Thanks for the info. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by Dan K. Hansen on Sept 19, 2011 21:45:52 GMT
I think that Anders was perhaps talking in general terms here, not aimed at you, even though I can see how it can or might be (mis-)understood |
|
.... in the sense that there may be a lot more to it, and it's panel, than just push'em forward (the thrust levers) and it goes.
