CV-900A panel Altimeter setting problem?

[mariopilot - HJG Guest]

Dear HJG,
Recently I took the CV-990A (V1.2, panel V2, they appear to be the current version on the site) for a flight. It is such an exotic and unique aircraft and offers its own set of challenges!
Something baffled me about the altimeter baro setting as it appears to be wrong... or is it just me that at a resolution of 1680x1050 I can't read it? It appears to work in reverse, as by clicking "+" the baro indication goes down in value , but the altimeter needle increases! an IFR flight with real-world weather proved a bit of a challenge as I had to guess it! Am I missing something?

Second to that, it appears that even if I cut throttles to idle spoilers are needed to slow the thing down during descent. This might be realistic however. Also, approaching the runway at 160KIAS (yep, this one needs to go faster right?) and throttling to idle 20 ft above the ground resulted (to me) in such a rapid speed loss that the aircraft smashed to the ground at 500fpm...! or maybe FSPassengers 20ft GPWS call was wrong and I flared too early... it was me with improper flying skills I guess...do I need to keep some throttle and idle (then reverse) after touch down?

Thanks in advance!!

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

I've noted your observations .... an out of curiosity just completed some circuits .... since it's been a while since I've played with any of our CV880 and CV990 simulations.

Something baffled me about the altimeter baro setting as it appears to be wrong... or is it just me that at a resolution of 1680x1050 I can't read it? It appears to work in reverse, as by clicking "+" the baro indication goes down in value , but the altimeter needle increases

The altimeter modeled in each of our CONVAIR panels represents a very old type of instrument .... the same type of altimeter as is used in each of our early model DC8 panel versions too. It "DOES" appear small .... BUT .... that's just a limitation of some 2D panels within FS and in the absence of being able to click upon, and enlarge, the panel altimeter which we've never been able to do with these panels. For this reason .... the barometric pressure scal, on the center right rim of the altimeter, is difficult/almost impossible to read .... I grant you .... despite all its information apparently being there.

So far I can determine .... mousing the right side of the knob, located at the bottom left of the altimeter, raises the altimeter barometric scale values (+) .... whilst mousing the left side of this same knob reduces these values (-). Again .... and so far as as I can determine .... the instrument seems to respond correctly to such inputs albeit difficult/impossible to read.

Rather than using this knob to adjust the altimeter barometric pressure setting I recommend using the keyboard "B" command.

Loading into FS .... and on the ground at the default FS2004 KSEA RWY 34R .... the barometric reading will, by default, read a value of "2992" and which is common in FS. Hitting the keyboard "B" command will immediately change this setting to a value of "2991" .... even though it might not be possible to actually read it as such. Doing the same whilst climbing or descending through 17,500 FT (in FS it's actually 18,000 FT before any altimeter baramentric pressure change can be applied per keyboard command) will, accordingly, adjust the altimeter barometric pressure settingto either of these 2 values.

[quote}it appears that even if I cut throttles to idle spoilers are needed to slow the thing down during descent. This might be realistic however.[/quote]

So far as I'm aware .... that's "as realistic as we can currently simulate" for these aircraft .... though with Spoilers "UP" and a wee bit of power "ON" .... the descent rate should increase more than any speed reduction.

Flying approaches to landing using the CV880 and CV990 isn't quite as straight-forward as it may be using either the B707 and DC8 (contemporary accounts by old/retired CV880/CV990 pilots describe these aircraft as being "VERY MASCULINE" in their handling characteristics). It does require a fair bit of trimming and power adjustment throughout any approasch to landing in order to fly a decent profile. I find using keyboard commands "HOME" and "END" (WINDOWS XP PRO keyboard) result in a far smoother Trim response than that which might be realized per controller device assignments.

approaching the runway at 160KIAS (yep, this one needs to go faster right?) and throttling to idle 20 ft above the ground resulted (to me) in such a rapid speed loss that the aircraft smashed to the ground at 500fpm...! or maybe FSPassengers 20ft GPWS call was wrong and I flared too early... it was me with improper flying skills I guess...do I need to keep some throttle and idle (then reverse) after touch down?

A 160-165 KIAS approach to landing airspeed is normal/typical for the CV880-22 .... BUT .... for the CV880-22M it was actually 10 KTS slower due to the leading and trailing edge wing device improvements applied to this particular aircraft version .... and the latter would probably be fairly true of the CV990-A too. Depending on your weight (etc) ...150-155 KIAS should be your target airspeed with full flaps and gear down during approaches to landing with the CV990-A.

I generally flare the CV880's and CV990's at around 15-10 FT above the RWY .... reducing power almost to idle .... with the nose trimmed "UP" slightly .... aided by a wee bit of "back stick" pressure .... and just let the simulation settle onto the RWY and which generally results in a very "smooth" arrival. The spoilers should be selected "UP" immediately upon maingear contact with the RWY .... then the NG settled onto the RWY aided by a wee bit lof "forward stick" pressure. Only once all 3 landing gear have been firmly settled on the RWY should reverse thrust then be applied.

"IF" your landings are resulting in a firm "KA-PLONK" onto the RWY after reducing power .... then, maybe, you're pulling power off way too soon .... as you say .... OR .... you may just be badly trimmed .... OR .... you may simply be overweight for landing .... OR .... "all of these". Trim is essential and you also shouldn't be landing with more than about 20-25% total fuel remaining.

I hope you can get/realize some decent guidance from all of this .... in order to be able to arrive "more gently/with greater dignity" in the future

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[mariopilot - HJG Guest]

Thank you! I'll use "B" key in such instances then

<<...and you shouldn't be landing with more than about 20-25% total fuel remaining.>> I was probably a "little bit" on the heavy side! Had about 50% left by landing time... I definitely had too much to start with for a 1h30min flight... It might explain the wrestles to slow it down on descent as well!! This one probably needs more training!!

I'll take it for another test soon and hopefully after landing the gear will keep in the same location as the airplane...