Just noticed the new write up Lockheed has on their Main Page rotating Banner. A2A C172.
Congrats on more spreading of the word!
prepar3d.com
Re: prepar3d.com
"The Prepar3D team is proud to welcome A2A Simulations to it’s solution developer team."
http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2014/10/5926/
This is great, great news! That will bring A2A more customers, which will benefit us who have stopped flying those dreadful travesties that are eye-candy planes with no systems modelling!
A2A: Please, can you try making the P3D-team have a thorough look at the prop-pitch VS manifold pressure-sound problem that is inherent in the simulator? It must be such a generic fix and it will have such immense impact on the immersion. *
* At least for me; after the Accusim-core revolution I have developed almost an audio-fetish for the correct relationship between MP and RPM.
http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2014/10/5926/
This is great, great news! That will bring A2A more customers, which will benefit us who have stopped flying those dreadful travesties that are eye-candy planes with no systems modelling!
A2A: Please, can you try making the P3D-team have a thorough look at the prop-pitch VS manifold pressure-sound problem that is inherent in the simulator? It must be such a generic fix and it will have such immense impact on the immersion. *
* At least for me; after the Accusim-core revolution I have developed almost an audio-fetish for the correct relationship between MP and RPM.
Erik Haugan Aasland,
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Re: prepar3d.com
Argh, I feel my inner purist waking up...Medtner wrote: an audio-fetish for the correct relationship between MP and RPM.
and he wishes to strike over the 'MP' and substitute 'engine power'..Re: prepar3d.com
Haha, true, indeed! I'm just so attached to the gauges, but of course...AKar wrote:Argh, I feel my inner purist waking up...Medtner wrote: an audio-fetish for the correct relationship between MP and RPM.
Maybe even throttle VS prop pitch is better?
Erik Haugan Aasland,
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Re: prepar3d.com
I think some kind of torque and rpm based modeling is quite accurate. I recall that Mustang sounds very fine however it is actually done.
The thing with MP is that while it rather well approximates engine power in many cases, in some other situations it just doesn't - especially true for naturally aspirated engines. A classic example is that you increase your rpm using 'prop lever' with throttle partly closed, without touching the throttle nor the mixture. Now the engine runs at higher rpm, and develops more power (you'll see increased airspeed), but the manifold pressure actually drops a little. Ad absurdum would be of course to open the throttle fully, and kill the engine by cutting off the mixture. The MP remains essentially almost at the local atmospheric pressure, but of course, engine power is actually negative, so to speak - and it sounds rather different than it did when running at high power.
I think it takes a few variables if one wants to account for all the situations.
-Esa
The thing with MP is that while it rather well approximates engine power in many cases, in some other situations it just doesn't - especially true for naturally aspirated engines. A classic example is that you increase your rpm using 'prop lever' with throttle partly closed, without touching the throttle nor the mixture. Now the engine runs at higher rpm, and develops more power (you'll see increased airspeed), but the manifold pressure actually drops a little. Ad absurdum would be of course to open the throttle fully, and kill the engine by cutting off the mixture. The MP remains essentially almost at the local atmospheric pressure, but of course, engine power is actually negative, so to speak - and it sounds rather different than it did when running at high power.
I think it takes a few variables if one wants to account for all the situations.
-Esa
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests