|
Post by livetosim on Jun 9, 2018 2:06:42 GMT
I just this week got up enough courage to see if I could successfully download some of your aircraft. In the past few days, I have successfully downloaded 4 of your offerings, Thank you! My last gave me a challenge, but I found the problem and wanted to share with you, so the download can be updated, so another poor soul like myself doesn't get stuck pulling his hair out (not much there to pull out)! As you know the L1011 has 3 engines. When I finished all my downloading and final touches, I could only get 2 of the 3 engines running. #3 engine toggle on the throttle quadrant was locked in the off position. and when looking at the lighting section, engine 3 annunciator light was red. On closer examination of the aircraft.cfg file this is what I found:
[GeneralEngineData] //0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop engine_type = 1 fuel_flow_scalar = 0.77 min_throttle_limit = -0.299927 engine.0 = 0, -35.65, -3.4, engine.1 = -76, 0, 10, en
As you can see, there is no entry for a 3rd engine, but look at the last line, looks like someone started to put an entry and never finished it. Okay, now what do I do? Here is how I revised the cfg, using the cfg from one of your DC-10 downloads:
DC10 entry:
[GeneralEngineData] engine_type= 1 Engine.2= 14.00, 29.25, -2.80 Engine.0= 14.00, -29.25, -2.80 Engine.1= -78.50, 0.00, 22.50 min_throttle_limit=-0.369927 fuel_flow_scalar=0.788
My revision for the L1011:
[GeneralEngineData] //0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop engine_type = 1 fuel_flow_scalar = 0.77 min_throttle_limit = -0.299927 engine.0 = 14.00, -35.65, -3.4 engine.2 = 14.00, 35.65, -3.4 engine.1 = -76.00, 0.00, 10
As you can see, I not only added a third engine, but I had to add the 14's (from the DC10) to the other 2 entries, as they did not exist on the original cfg. once all this was done, the aircraft fired up, 3rd toggle on throttle quadrant works, the #3 gen annunciator light is light green and I now have 3 fully functional engines! I do love the downloads you offer! At first, the instructions seemed somewhat intimidating, but once I got started, I found how easy it can be done! Anyway, thanks, and please update this download so that others won't have problems with it.! I look forward to participating in this part of the flight sim community. I currently participate in 2 others, so one more shouldn't hurt!
Rick
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Jun 9, 2018 4:30:18 GMT
Rick, I have looked through our entire basepack set of L1011's and ALL the engine data is in each one, so I am not sure where you went wrong here? Anyway the correct data is as follows
[GeneralEngineData] //0=Piston, 1=Jet, 2=None, 3=Helo-Turbine, 4=Rocket, 5=Turboprop engine_type = 1 fuel_flow_scalar = 0.77 min_throttle_limit = -0.299927 engine.0 = 0, -35.65, -3.4, engine.1 = -76, 0, 10, engine.2 = 0, 35.65, -3.4,
If you can give me the file name of the basepack you used I will see if I can pin it down. Thanks Tony
|
|
|
Post by livetosim on Jun 9, 2018 5:03:03 GMT
Tony - I downloaded the L1011-50 TriStar, version 3.0. I still had the compressed file and I checked it and sure enough, you are correct, the aircraft cfg is correct as you have it. The only thing I think I might have done, when I am all done with my downloads, I will go back in on the aircraft cfg file and close up the gaps between sections, just to condense it a bit. In the process of deleting one blank line between a section, I could have accidently swiped a portion of that bottom line. I didn't know that could be possible, but I guess anything is with these computers today?
I do apologize for hitting the panic button tonite, HJG does have some quality downloads, and when I saw my problem I was trying to give you a heads up! It turned out that there was no problem on your side only me making a mistake along the way! sorry for the confusion!
Thanks again for the quality of product you provide us, I have 4 now and look forward to more in the future!
Rick
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Jun 9, 2018 5:07:34 GMT
Glad its sorted out, I am not sure why you edit the blanks from cfg's always a sure way of introducing faults
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 9, 2018 23:03:10 GMT
There is "nothing wrong" with any of the L-1011's .... or anything else we offer either as supplied by us) .... or it simply wouldn't be uploaded here. Things can happen on some systems that don't happen on others though .... for a multitude of prospective reasons/influences that are hard/often impossible to pin-point .... and we do acknowledge this even as rare as such cases are. Editing any of the FDE data (either CFG.FILE of AIR.FILE) "is not" recommended .... and should not be necessary anyway in 99.999%of cases. Editing some data "may" (possibly) impose adverse impact on other FDE parameters .... and thus equally adversely impact FS performance/s. In this particular case (with the L-1011's) .... we strongly recommend our forum based online manual and tutorials be reviewed/studied .... tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/3888/l1011-tristar-panel-installation-handlingIn the case of correct/prescribed engine startup and panel configuration for our L-1011's refer to "SECTION 3/L1011 PANELS TUTORIAL - BASIC OPERATION" .... and follow the procedures precisely as outlined. "SECTION 4" and "5" of this manual should be scrutinized also .... for the best HJG L-1011 virtul flight experience and especially if one is new to our L-1011's Almost all other HJG simulations are supported by similar forum based manuals PLEASE NOTE: We will soon be releasing a revised gauges/core files package for our L-1011's. This edit "will not" alter any of the procedures outlines. It simply provides in new/better WX Radar as announced in the following recent thread .... tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/thread/9017/new-1011-tristar-panel-editsThis edit will be released among other new HJG product/s at a yet to me determined time. Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by livetosim on Jun 10, 2018 3:45:35 GMT
Mark - You know, I thought for sure I had apologized to Tony last night. The problem I had was my fault, and I admitted that to Tony! No more lectures needed beyond my conversation with Tony!
You say your L-1011's are without fault? I bet many developers out there wish they could make that statement!"
One thing I never mentioned to Tony, earlier in the evening, I couldn't even get my download to appear and that was no fault of mine. If you look at the [fltsim.0] add-on to the aircraft.cfg file you will see that the sim is listed as SIM=Ll011_100 and compare that to what is listed for the air file which is L1011_1.air. The download was not going to work until the 2-00's at the end of the sim were deleted!
Also, whenever I download an aircraft, I always check to see if the aircraft falls within the limits of the "Weight and Balance" for fuel/payload. My perfect L-1011 download just happened to be 15,665 lbs over gross. And you, Mark, say "Editing of any of the FDE data (either CFG.FILE or AIR.FILE) "is not" recommended.... and should not be necessary anyway in 99.999% of cases! I edited the fuel levels to get them within the "weight and balance" parameters of FSX and the plane still "plays hard to get" lifting off the runway!
Last night when I submitted my post to this forum, it was not to place blame to HJG, it was to merely give HJG a "heads up" as to what I thought was an "over-sight" entry or lack of, to the download configuration. In my conversation with Tony and my subsequent review of my original.zip file, I realized there was no fault in the way the aircraft was configured, and it must have been something I had done! Yes, I have an obsession with cleaning up the aircraft cfg files, which includes doing away with double spacing between sections. Call it what you like, it is what I have a habit doing, and last evening it created a mess for me and a misunderstanding with me and Tony, and most importantly HJG. When I realized that it was me, who created the problem, I confessed to Tony that I must have inadvertently smudged (erased) most of that required line for the 3rd engine. I made the mistake and I apologized to Tony! Mark, you take this any way you like, I thought Tony and I had brought this conversation to a close last night, but apparently NOT! If you care to look at what I have pointed out to you in the above, I downloaded the L1011-50 TriStar, Version 3.0 with the Northeast texture.
Mark - Have a nice evening! - Rick
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Jun 10, 2018 5:59:46 GMT
Tristar file you mentioned has now been fixed and replaced, my error sadly they happen
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jun 10, 2018 8:07:42 GMT
Rick You're seemingly applying a significance that's entirely undue to what I've replied. Firstly .... I never stated, or implied, our L-1011's were "perfect" .... I simply stated there was "nothing wrong with them" .... in regard to the "engine related" issue you initially thought you had at least and which might otherwise have indicated a base pack/FDE or panel/gauge discrepency needing to be reconciled. Secondly .... I acknowledge Tony correctly diagnosed your issue to be "non-existent" .... AND .... as a member of this groups 4-man in-house development team" (represented by George, Mike, Benoit, an myself) I consider it's my prerogative back up Tony's analysis .... should I consider such to be the appropriate action. Thirdly .... I never interpeted your posting to be one of blaming anyone .... and .... whilst we seek to inform/educate (as best we can advise) nobody here's apportioning blame to anyone else either. Fourthly .... the advice I provided in regard to not editing our FDE is valid .... and was communicated "in perfectly good faith" .... as were the referrenced links too .... in order try'n aid "your getting the very best out of these simulations" (something we go to a lot of time and trouble to try'n ensure for everyone's benefit and at the expence of our own liberties) .... BUT .... if you don't want, or choose to ignore, our good advice then that's perfectly fine by me/us .... but be warned .... not following, or at least not familiarizing yourself with, the advice offered may result in performance related issues that need not occur, but which, upon reading your last response, appear to be occurring in your particular case. It's actually 15,716 LBS .... to be precise .... and there's a very good technical reason why that particular simulation .... in fact all HJG simulations .... load into FS with nominal default overloads. Unlike most FS developers .... we opt to compile all W&B's on the basis of maximum/100% payload .... and maximum/100% fuel capacity .... and "NOT" in accordance with a set/specific MGW type loading composed of either and which could be somewhat limiting in regard to respectable aircraft type endurances. Our preferences intentionally result in "default overlaods" .... simply because that's what generally happens in any such R/W scenario based on maximum capacities. The data we use to arrive at our conclusions is generally sourced from the R/W manufacturers, or, based on specific R/W airline configurations (some of which do vary between operators) we have access to. Therefore what we do .... and the way we do it .... provides greater flexibility in regard to flight planning that's promoting of a far more authentic experience .... for those whom want that .... and if exploited properly. As is stated within most of our manuals, and many of our service notes too, the end user is expected to use the FS based "PAYLOAD & FUEL" adjustment window .... to reduce fuel loading, to promote greater payloads, at the expence of range .... OR ALTERNATIVELY .... to increase fuel loading, to promote greater range, at the expense of payload .... all in accordance with the duration and requirements of one's intended virtual flight/s an not entirely unlike R/W operations as well Now then .... if one takes a moment to review the earlier linked data, one will find a single MGW loading for each L-1011 (in this particular case) .... based on a full payload and prescibed fuel adjustment/s to match .... and which is what forms the basis of our own pre-release testing and recommended flying guides .... and which additionally goes so far as to recommend certain flap and trim settings for T/O also. If this data is studied, understood, and applied .... then .... no operational difficulties should ever result Should you require technical support in regard to anything else, then, feel free to start another thread accordingly .... BUT .... this particular matter can now be considered "CLOSED". Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|