|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 14, 2011 19:54:31 GMT
I haven't .... yet .... got that far into things Chris As I mentioned .... there is some more recent "2007 dated" AIR data around .... which Walter kindly sent me. These (which are an FFX versions, but, which I suspect might also have been updated with data from the last official SGA enhancements), and the "December 2003/April 2004" dated SGA versions, both appear to be performing quite nicely, for me, in the low altitude/low speed and low altitude high speed regime (I haven't yet started recording "N" numbers) and consequent to my CFG editing. I've yet to test both lots of AIR data above FL250 .... that magical FS virtual altitude where things start "turning to crap" or continue performing "nicely". That's all a little way off yet .... since my current priorities are focused on just getting weights and the approach to landing attitude right. I'll try and report properly on these details much later on. In FS, and using the recommended DC10 panel, I manually restrict T/O thrust to N1 97% .... but .... if the thrust levers are firewalled, at SL, then I know the N1's will wind all the way up to around 110% .... and possibly a bit more too .... as I recall. I don't, normally, engage the AT, until well established and stable in a climb along any virtual airway .... but again .... not, yet, having got around to recording engine "N" numbers .... I'm buggered if I can tell you what sort of readings I'm getting there either. Some time back I did note, with concern, that the indicated N1 values all started to exceed N2 values above FL250 .... and got progressively worse with altitude, but, I can't recall if this occurred with the standard or updated SGA DC10 panel versions. It'll be interesting to see what, if any, variation might exist in these gauge readings, subject to influences by both lots of AIR data .... and .... what, if any, variation in these values might also exist between both GE powered 10/15/30 and P&W powered 40 series DC10 variants .... all using the stated FDE and panel/gauges. "INTERESTING" ! I wasn't actually aware of that .... and hadn't seen any previous such technical references made to this. I flew more on UTA FRENCH AIRLINES DC10-30's than AIR NEW ZEALAND aircraft .... although I did do quite a lot of trips on ours too. Most of my many jumpseat experiences on DC10's were with UTA between Auckland/NZ and Papeete/Tahiti. I do remember UTA had a reputation, within the industry, for going flat out/"balls to the wall" ;D .... flying their DC10's about as fast as they'd go or as conditions would permit their safe operation .... and which might have "some bearing" on the GE engine technical reference you've just made. There's a lot of nice work that's been done for the FFX/SGA/CANTU DC10's (and I've even got some on the back burner too .... as time permits) .... many of which have been long forgotten, or, are difficult to find if folk don't search correctly. I recommend searching both FLIGHTSIM.COM and AVSIM.COM libraries as follows .... dc10 sga
dc10 ffx
dc10 cantuThat should turn up "a whole lot of stuff". Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by christrott on Sept 15, 2011 11:13:58 GMT
Mark, if you go download the Zagoren DC-10 performance chart set from AVSIM or Flightsim (Simviation might have it too), you'll find good charts showing the N1 and N2 power settings for takeoff and cruise. The charts are out of the Continental manual (found that out when I got a copy of the Continental manual sent to me and they matched up), so they're not "made up". I've also verified them against the FedEx book. It's really odd to have N1 speeds above 100% be "normal" for some conditions, but they are, and the plane flies just fine, both in sim and real world.
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 15, 2011 11:28:11 GMT
Not very often someone els gives me a bit of my own good advice ;D I completly forgot about ZAGORAN ! ;D I will look at this .... when I'm ready to start those more thorough tests/observations Those charts sound like just what I'm needing .... for later on ! I presume the ZAGORAN data is GE related (only) .... OR .... are P&W charts included there too ? Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by bluestar on Sept 15, 2011 12:22:23 GMT
Mark,
I think we've had this conversation before concerning N1 and N2. They are just numbers, nothing more.
bs
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 16, 2011 5:12:35 GMT
Different aircraft engines do have different capabilities and limitations .... as most of us know. Most serious FS gauge/FDE developers (I'm not one of them but do work with some of them who's opinions I trust) carefully study this information in order to "TRY" to improve the fidelity of details like panel gauge indications. Such parameters aren't really just numbers only. In fact it's actually very useful guidance/target information .... particularly when trying to calibrate the maximum achievable performance indications for engine various engine types gauges in conjunction with FDE's. FS does have limitations and compromises do often need to be made .... of course .... but .... it "is" possible to get "close to" actual performance numbers (like N1/N2 values) for some of the various aircraft engine parameters. Being mindful of the fact that a bit of editing has been going on here recently in regard to these DC10 FDE's .... I suppose Chris is inquiring, of me, simply because he's curious to know what sort of engine indications I might now be getting as opposed to those he was previously familiar with This sort of stuff is all quite relevant in terms of FS development I don't want to get too entrenched in discussion regarding specific engine gauge indications for these DC1o panels .... beyond vague references so far made .... simply because I'm nowhere near ready to even start looking at these particular details.I'll hopefully have a bit more news in regard to this DC10 FDE editing in coming days .... for those whom might be interested ! Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 17, 2011 2:34:11 GMT
Moving along after my "BIG BOO BOO" of yesterday .... ;D Here's a photo which I shot during 1 of my many jumpseat rides across the Pacific .... on this occasion with UTA FRENCH AIRLINES .... a truly magnificent airline to fly with from all of my own personal "up front" and "down the back" experiences with them .... I shot the above scene aboard UTA DC10-30 F-BTDB, en route between Auckland/New Zealand and Papeete/Tahiti on July 10th 1989. This particular flight was under the command of captain Philppe BARLOY, with F/O Josie CONROY, and F/E Serge SPICHER (out of the picture). UTA DC10's were among a number (including all of the AIR NEW ZEALAND operated aircraft) equipped with vertical/tape engine gauges. Most DC10 flightdecks, by airline preference, were equipped with the more common round analogue type engine gauges .... as represented within the FS panel views featured earlier throughout this thread. Just going through my logbook .... and other UTA crews I flew with, and got to know quite well too, were .... - Captain Georges REVENAU (July 24th 1989/ PPE/AKL/DC10-30 N54629 .... sadly, just several weeks later, Georges REVENAU, his entire crew, and all 156 PAX, were blown out of the sky over the Niger Desert as the result of a terrorist bomb whilst operating UTA 772, (DC10-30 N54629) en-route between Brazzaville and Paris on September 19th 1989. - Captain BEIGE (October 12th 1989 AKL/PPE/DC10-30 F-BTDD) - Captain NALLIER (October 26th 1989 DC10-30 N54649 PPE/AKL .... and again on July 26th 1990 F-BTDD PPE/AKL) - Captain Jean TROCHON (July 12th 1990 AKL/PPE/DC10-30 F-GHOI .... ex OY-KDA leased from SAS to replace N54629) It was a real sad event, for many, including myself, when UTA was absorbed into AIR FRANCE durinmg the esrlyn 1990's. Most of their DC10 crews opted to stay on the DC10's (such was there satisfaction/enjoyment of these aircraft .... which wasn't uncommon among other DC10 operators around the world too) rather than accepting upgrades to more advanced AIRBUS and BOEING type jetliners. In fact some of these UTA DC10 crews eventually transferred to AOM when the DC10's left the AIR FRANCE fleet during the mid 1990's. Time to start the last part of my FDE adjustments .... for the remaining DC10-30, CF/F, ER and DC10-40, D, I, and F conversion .... Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 17, 2011 13:00:22 GMT
The DC10-30 became the 2nd, but, most popular of the heavier, more powerful, and longer ranging intercontinental DC10 jetliner developments (the DC10-20 was first but was later rdesignated DC10-40). It was built in 3 basic versions .... the standard PAX configured DC10-30, the convertible PAX/freight configured DC10-30CF, and the later even higher weight and longer ranging PAX configured DC10-30ER. Unlike both the DC10-10 and -15, the DC10-30 and -40 were fitted with CLG units due to their higher operating weights, but, these could also be stowed in cases of lower weight operations. A significant number of ex PAX configured DC10-30's were later converted to pure freighters (-30F), and the basic aircraft design also became the foundation for the military KC10 tanker. In comparison with my recent DC10-10 and -15 FDE edits, the DC10-30 has been "THE MOST DIFFICULT" of all the SGA DC10's to work on so far. Remember .... the "main purpose" of my recent FDE editing has simply been to try and improve the approach to landing AOA/pitch attitude for those DC10 versions which need it .... with any other FDE enhancements applied during this process then becoming an additional bonus. Each of the 3 basic DC10-30 versions are represented by SGA and have been configured with different weights and engine thrust (by SGA and not by me) .... in accordance with the profiles of their realworld counterparts. Using the last "officially SGA released" DC10-30 FDE (both the AIRCRAFT.CFG and AIR.FILE) this simulation seems to fly OK .... in so far as I've been able to assess its low altitude/low speed and low altitude/high speed performance (I haven't got around high altitude testing with any of these DC10's yet) .... HOWEVER .... it does demonstrate an irritating tendency to fly approaches to landing with a slightly higher AOA than each the other DC10 versions I've so far tweaked. So far as I can determine the DC10-30 is currently flying approaches to landing with a pitch attitude appoximately 2* (degrees) too high .... for the speed being flown .... as evidenced per the AI gauge indication in the following panel image .... This 2* (degree) higher-than-normal pitch attitude may not sound much ;D .... but .... it's "just sufficient" to start affecting RWY visibility during approaches to landing .... even when full flaps are selected and speed is increased to around 155 KIAS. It's also an issue when flying the downwind and base legues of any approach pattern too .... with the pitch attitude then rising to as much as 6-7* (degrees) with 3-4 notches of flap selected and at speeds of around 180-200 + KIAS. Walter .... I've tried your more recently dated FDE for the DC10-30, but, it didn't really result in any major difference at all Without risking potentially buggering anything else up in the process .... I'm confident I might be able to get this nose pitch attitude down "a wee bit more" .... all going well Once again .... most of the following images tend to confirm what the panel AI gauge is indicating .... Just the DC10 40's to go now .... and then .... "THAT'S IT" Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2011 14:49:20 GMT
Did anybody know that Icelandair used to operate DC-10?? Look at this cool pic:) Due to copyright, I cannot put pic on the post but here is link: www.lucienklein.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ICELANDAIR-DC10-ELLX.jpgThis fantastic thread about DC-10 is almost reaching whopping 3,000th viewership!! Wondering if it sets all time record of most viewed in history of HJG? Aharon
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 17, 2011 23:41:58 GMT
Forum threads should not ever be considered popular/successful .... solely by virtue of the number of recorded viewings (those numbers are really insignificant within the grander scheme of things ), but rather, popularity/success is perhaps best determined on the basis of what/how .... if anything at all .... such threads/information best benefits the reader .... and which is something nobody (other than readers themselves) can ever truly know for certain There has been longer and more frequently viewed threads in the history of the HJG website forums ! Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 18, 2011 6:12:18 GMT
I think I've just nailed the DC10-30 approach to landing pitch attitude issue mentioned above The AI in the following panel image now tells a much better story .... It seems 1 of the FLAP LIFT scalar values might have been "out slightly" .... and causing all my fuss ;D "ALL FIXED" now though .... I think ! Everything seems to look good in external view too .... Having identified .... and fixed .... the cause of the pitch attitude issue with this particular simulation I'm now getting equally good results using Walters "2007" dated version of the SGA DC10-30 AIR.FILE. Both AIR data versions have now been tested. There are differences between them.... but .... these differences appear to be so "fractionally minor" that it doesn't seem to matter which is used This little triumph also means the DC10-30CF/F and ER versions (higher wights and slightly greater power) should be a breeze to perfect too .... BUT .... I won't be present anything at all regarding these other versions of the DC10-30. Instead I'll just move on to the DC10-40's .... which will also be my "final report" on these DC10 simulations prior to deciding what to do with all of this new data .... apart from enjoying it privately Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by tokolosh on Sept 18, 2011 8:08:30 GMT
... I'll just move on to the DC10-40's .... which will also be my "final report" on these DC10 simulations prior to deciding what to do with all of this new data .... apart from enjoying it privately Hi Mark, I was wondering about that. Are we going to see this new data? I for one would certainly appreciate such a FDE modification.
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 18, 2011 9:59:41 GMT
The intention of myself, and the other person working on this project with me, is to eventually make the fruits of our labours available publicly .... so "EVERYONE", whom wants to, may enjoy these That's about as much as I can say at the moment There's still a fair bit of work to do yet though Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by tokolosh on Sept 18, 2011 20:00:34 GMT
The intention of myself, and the other person working on this project with me, is to eventually make the fruits of our labours available publicly .... so "EVERYONE", whom wants to, may enjoy these Great! Looking forward to it, whenever it's ready.
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 26, 2011 23:23:46 GMT
I've been meaning to update this thread in regard to my continued DC10 FDE editing project, but, the impositions of both business and family commitments over the past week, or so, have prevented my doing so These same impositions have also recently prevented my being able to get into the DC10-40's too ANYWAY .... I wasn't .... originally .... going to comment in regard to either the DC10-30CF, -F, or -ER versions, believing my existing commentary regarding the standard DC10-30 would probably be quite sufficient, but, in the light of recent findings, I thought I possibly should now comment accordingly .... simply because some of what I've learned since my earlier reports has caused me to review a little of what I've previously presented now that I've gotten a better understanding/appraisal of certain details which have influenced some of my earlier conclusions. Very early within this thread .... around "PAGE 3" I think it was .... I presented a list of what was, then, believed to be the most recent/latest model and FDE version dates and file names. That information was based largely on content of the last known data "officially release" by SGA .... HOWEVER .... considering some of this data was touted as,apparently, being endorsed by DC10 crews, I've actually begun to suspect that some of those recommended files might possibly have been "fiddled with and then re-released by parties other than SGA" .... more so given some of the discrepancies and errors that I, and my colleague assisting me, have discovered, so far, among the DC10-10, -15, and -30 SERIES data. These errors range from AIRCRAFT GEOMETRY, WEIGHT & BALANCE, TURBINE ENGINE, and to FLAP discrepencies within the CFG data .... all of which can, and does, affect FS performance. Nearly all of the errors, so far identified, have now been "fixed" whilst others are still being successfully attended to. Some of these discrepancies are of such a magnitude .... and implicate FS performances of these aircraft so severely .... that I simply can't imagine SGA being responsible for releasing them .... hence my suspicions in regard to what we've all ended up with (FDE-wize), to date, possibly "NOT" being what SGA actually intended for everyone to enjoy. Almost every DC10 version I've tested, so far, loads into FS with overloads of as much as 60-90,000 LBS above what's actually realistic for these aircraft types .... requiring massive reductions of either payload, or fuel, or both, in order to set these simulations at/near their various certified weights. This is particularly true of the following DC10-30 CF version .... .... and also in regard to the following DC10-30ER version too .... By default .... the DC10-30ER not only loads into FS with a massive overload, but, also seems to suffer a "stability problem" (rolling gently from port to starboard) during AP controlled ILS coupled auto-approaches to landing. At first I suspected some the AP data might be the cause of this, but, it wasn't .... so far I'm concerned (and nor was the simulation overweight or improperly balanced for landing either as the fuel loading for this test had purposely been adjusted to 20% (remaining) and which had been evenly distributed across each of the 4 tanks within this particular aircraft version) .... because the same AP data has been performing b-e-a-u-t-i-f-u-l-l-y with each of the other DC10 versions so far tested/edited. I'm satisfied this particular issue was caused by a minor discrepancy within the W&B data .... and which has since been successfully resolved to now result in superb AP controlled ILS coupled auto-approaches to landing as well as during fully manual approaches to landing also. Just to recap .... The corrected AIRCRAFT GEOMETRY, WEIGHT & BALANCE, TURBINE ENGINE, and FLAP data issues .... identified so far .... and which have adversely affected, to varying degrees, the FS performance of all of these DC10 simulations to date .... have been, and in some cases are still being, further fine tuned, since my earlier reports .... and are resulting in greatly improved flight performances, so far, particularly during downwind, base legue, and the final approach to landing phase of any FS flight. So long as ones simulation isn't overweight for landing .... and slats/flaps, and gear are each extended at the right speeds .... with power/speed also being sensibly managed too .... then one should be assured of a nice nose-up pitch attitude of roughly 3-4* (degrees on the AI) during all approaches to landing with speeds varying from 145-150 KIAS .... without loosing visual sight of the RWY during the last 10 DME prior to landing .... and then flaring to around 5* (degrees on the AI) nose-up pitch attitude with speed reducing to around 135-140 KIAS just prior to "hitting the ground"/RWY for the landing. In the FS world which often abounds with limitations/restrictions and occasionally imposes all manner of other compromises necessary to achieve "relatively authetic" aircraft performances .... I think the "landing performances" I'm now seeing in each of these DC10 simulations is now about as "fine/close as" we'll ever be able to get to the performance of their realworld counterparts. The high altitude performances of each of these DC10 simulations has still, yet, to be assessed .... alogn with panel/gauge assessment too. More on all of this later .... in the near future ! Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2011 23:32:47 GMT
|
|