[jhb_airlines] Re: FSX Ronaldsway and Flight Model

  • From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:37:25 +0000

Anothe observation that I forgot to mention is the AI aircraft. They have the dodgy black appearance until either close or Zoomed in upon.

Gerry Winskill


Gerry Winskill wrote:

Out of curiosity I assembled the bits from the GS Ronaldsway, that I'd put into store when staying with yours, into a GS IOM scenery. Although most of his buildings appear, bearing in mind his doesn't have the coverage of your own, some of them seem to have faces missing, transparent, or displaced. I think he said this might happen. Otherwise it was the same as yours, with valleys between runways and taxiways, and the rest of the site.

Gerry Winskill


Bones wrote:

When I said my scenery wouldn't work in FSX I really did mean it. <g> In
truth I expected the lighting gantry and the glidepath aerial to appear but
nothing else on the airfield. If KWC is there I'll bet it isn't mine - MS
previously creating this as they thought it was a hangar rather than a
public school.


I know that our flatten commands no longer work and probably not the
excludes either. Going further round the island my guess is that Jurby and
Andreas won't be visible but the trams, follies and lighthouses may be. I
doubt the lighthouses will be generating a sweeping beam any more.


On a more serious level I doubt my revised IoM coastline now works and any
add-on terrain will again be truncated where it meets the default FSX
coastline. Whether this is as bad and as offset as the FS2004 coastline I
can't say but I doubt it will be very accurate. You can see why scenery
designers are tearing their hair out..


The FSX flight model isn't better than FS2004 but it certainly is a bit
different. I think initial reports that it has been dumbed down again may
not be quite correct but the answer will come when the .air file tables are
looked at more closely. What we do know is that the flight model isn't any
better than FS2004 because there are no new flight tables. Stall and spin
behaviour are still off the menu because FS still treats the whole wing area
as one surface rather than two. That is why it is impossible to have one
wing stalled and the other still flying - the prime requirement for a spin.


bones

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 31 October 2006 10:18
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] FSX Ronaldsway and Flight Model


The Bones' Ronaldsway produces a Curate's Egg reaction in FSX. Although hangars and King Williams are present, none of the terminal buildings are present. Enabling IOM Alpha clearly disables a few of the Deault field's flatten commands. The introduction of 'umps and 'ollows makes the field unuseable. It also shows that the FSTerrain I'm using is a bit wide of the mark, in this area of the Island.

I'll have a look at the GS version, later.

I get the impression that, for light aircraft at least, FSX handles the
flight model better. Flying my much modified APM20, from FS9, I can set
a stable cruise speed and altitude, quite easilly. Better still, it can
be set up on finals in a way that just isn't possible with this
aircraft, in FS9. Once the speed has been set up and trimmed out, the
rate of descent is easilly controlled using just the power settings.
Cahanges of power produce changes in ROD and also slight changes in
attitude. I can even set up the correct short finals speed of  65kias,
which I'd tried to get for FarmStrip use, in FS9. I seldom managed to
achieve it.

One strange reaction, with this FS9 aircraft, is that running Instant
Replay, in Spot View, the 'plane hops about in the way we used to see in
the early days using Rory's server.

Gerry Winskill












Other related posts: