The A2A Simulations Community

"Come share your passion for flight"
It is currently Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:30 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 370 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 25  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
Airman Basic

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 9:18 pm
Posts: 1
Hello all,

I for one am very much disappointed. I mean, yet another single engine GA aircraft? A2A already has a 172, 182, Cherokee 180, Comanche 250. If you compare the bonanza to those aircraft, it is not very diverse!

Now take into account a Seneca twin, that is different, or any GA twin for that matter.

I am sorry,

Regards

Bart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:10 pm 
Offline
Senior Airman

Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:29 pm
Posts: 141
Location: Maitland, NSW Australia
Really looking forward to the porting of the warbirds, that can't come soon enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:57 pm 
Offline
Staff Sergeant

Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:23 pm
Posts: 361
Location: Norco, California
Lufthansa 380 wrote:
A-26Invader wrote:
100 bucks says its a T-33


I agree. Or something along the lines. Pretty sure you can hear breathing through an oxygen mask in the video, which suggests it's some sort of jet powered fighter/trainer. Exciting times ahead for accusim, for sure. I remember them teasing a Startfighter and F-4 in the past, guess it'll take much much longer than expected to do those aircarft accusim-justice. I only hope we'll see some sort of piston twin in the near future. A Baron or some twin Piper would be awesome.


I was reading that at 90 knots the T-33 controls start to become ineffective which would fall right in line with what we heard in the beginning of the video. F-4 and F-104 would have already stalled at that speed.

_________________
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:06 pm 
Offline
A2A General
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 12:55 pm
Posts: 15369
Location: USA
Bart,

When I look out there and think about all the airplanes I'd love to be able to fly, but even more, own and operate over time. The list is long. But let's just go back to when we were exclusively making Warbirds. We were doing that because everyone at A2A has a passion for this (considering we started making air combat games). 2x a year we would get people from the commercial side asking us to make a 172 or a twin trainer, because they had our Warbirds and wanted that kind of detail in a GA airplane they could use for training. For about three years, I had to apologetically turn them down saying something along the lines of "we're really a company that makes airplanes we are passionate about, and right now we still have Warbirds we want to complete."

Then in 2012 I ended up going back into aircraft ownership and bought a Comanche (largely because I hated taking the airlines to destinations). And I was bitten by the GA bug... big time. My first airplane was a Cherokee, bought about 20 years ago, so my time on a 172 was just a few hours. So, I went out and rented a 172 to just get familiar with it. Well, the aircraft intrigued me largely because while on paper it was pretty much the same performer as a Cherokee, it flew entirely different. And my personal mission was to LEARN about the 172, and then the Hersheybar wing Cherokee (I owned the later tapered wing). When we announced the Cherokee, we had some similar grumbling - same type of airplane as the 172. But after we released both, the community embraced what we had accomplished, if not from anything else, from an aviation experience pov. Still to this day, you can't really get good information about how the 172 and Cherokee differ. Now, anyone can buy FSX for cheap and get these two Accu-Sim planes and experiment for themselves.

The Skylane was really just an airplane I've dreamed of owning as it just looked so beefy and powerful. And then, of course, the Comanche 250 which for the most part, has been a forgotten airplane that never quite got the respect it so rightly deserved. Was the Comanche the Bonanza killer? Well, actually it kind of was when you consider what the goal these two airplanes had. The Comanche, just out performed it in every practical way, except the landing gear on the Bonanza is more rugged and advanced.

I have to tell you, the first Beechcraft I flew was a Debonair. And, to me, it just flew like a nice airplane. And from talking to Bonanza V-tail owners, most will say their airplanes fly pretty close to the Deb. But that is not the case, not even close. They have just gotten used to their airplanes and are no longer conscious of how different that v-tail behaves. The first time I flew in a V-tail, I felt "this is just like the Deb." In fact, the entire first flight I was hands off.

Then on the second flight, I took the controls and... WHAM!. I was just floored how different this airplane was to my Comanche (and the Deb). In fact, the Deb and the Comanche have more in common from a flight physics pov than the Deb and the V-tail. The V-tail radically changes things.

The Deb's ailerons feel like the V-tail, but the rudder and elevator are so different. The V-tail, has perfectly balanced ailerons, rudder, and elevator. But that v-tail makes the airplane very unstable in the yaw axis. This is why people often get sick in the back seat of a v-tail. The nose / tail is literally in a constant back and forth motion when even in just light turbulence. I personally find it a bit crazy, but... it's exciting and fun. In much the same way the T-6 is fun and challenging to fly.

I was speaking with my friend Tom LeCompte about the V-tail instability and his response was "oh yea, when we fly formation you can see the v-tails just moving all over the place." My first response when I grabbed the controls of the v-tail was "omg, this thing feels like that Spitfire I flew in England a few months back." But it takes an experienced hand to tame the v-tail in flight. You literally learn to anticipate and dampen these oscillations.

So, this v-tail to me is really a full circle for us in the single engine GA line. We do have a Mooney partially built, and that is something I would like also to make some day, but after the Bonanza we want to move out to other areas, hence the new flight testing and tech we have gotten pulled into.

So, my main goal here is to deliver a v-tail with all the nuances we've experienced, and right now the aircraft we have in alpha does appear to be that airplane. When this comes out, I want this to be a similar experience the 172 / Cherokee customers have. And I want people to really think about why the Bonanza does what it does and why the Comanche does what it does. Just from an aerodynamic aspect, it's a great discussion to have an experience to fly.

Scott.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:11 pm 
Offline
Airman

Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 6:11 pm
Posts: 21
I am genuinely surprised by some people stating they are disappointed with the next aircraft. I for one am excited and am already creating flight plans and checklist for it. In my opinion, the A2A general aviation series are released in a way that allows the sim user to grow as a pilot. Growing from the small trainers to larger, more capable air frames and engines. The Bonanza is another step up from the Comanche in terms of being more powerful and focused on cross country. I find the progression of A2A aircraft to be not only realistic, but ideal. Also it was mentioned that there are three different STC's for this Bonanza. It is possible, if not likely that one of these STC's will be a turbo-normalized or turbocharged engine. Which again would be the next logical step up from the Comanche. This will be a day one purchase for me and for anyone saying they are disappointed, no one is forcing you to purchase it.

bartp71 wrote:
Hello all,

If you compare the bonanza to those aircraft, it is not very diverse!


I respectfully have to disagree, the aircraft is very diverse with its V-tail configuration. As Scott mentioned, they have taken what i can only imagine to be an immense effort to differentiate the effect of a straight tail and the V config.

I don't mean to come off as rude, I just would like to share my support for this choice of aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:23 pm 
Offline
Senior Airman

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:48 pm
Posts: 129
Location: West of the Pecos
Okay Scott. You win. :roll: I guess I'm going to have to have it then. :)

It does look nice.

_________________
Image Image Image
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:26 pm 
Online
A2A Chief Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:31 am
Posts: 4640
Location: East Coast United States
Cessna781 wrote:
I am genuinely surprised by some people stating they are disappointed with the next aircraft. I for one am excited and am already creating flight plans and checklist for it. In my opinion, the A2A general aviation series are released in a way that allows the sim user to grow as a pilot. Growing from the small trainers to larger, more capable air frames and engines. The Bonanza is another step up from the Comanche in terms of being more powerful and focused on cross country. I find the progression of A2A aircraft to be not only realistic, but ideal. Also it was mentioned that there are three different STC's for this Bonanza. It is possible, if not likely that one of these STC's will be a turbo-normalized or turbocharged engine. Which again would be the next logical step up from the Comanche. This will be a day one purchase for me and for anyone saying they are disappointed, no one is forcing you to purchase it.

bartp71 wrote:
Hello all,

If you compare the bonanza to those aircraft, it is not very diverse!


I respectfully have to disagree, the aircraft is very diverse with its V-tail configuration. As Scott mentioned, they have taken what i can only imagine to be an immense effort to differentiate the effect of a straight tail and the V config.

I don't mean to come off as rude, I just would like to share my support for this choice of aircraft.



You are right. The Bo with the 30 degree V Tail has subtle differences in handling to that of a straight tail configuration. The differences are not earth shattering but can be confusing to the pilot flying the Bo for the first time. The plane "moves" a bit in yaw while in flight. I found when I flew it years ago that this was easily controllable by planting my heels on the floor boards and using subtle countering rudder pressures while in flight. This behavior will be represented in the new A2A Bonanza and should be fun for the sim pilot as they learn to deal with it to gain smooth coordinated flight.
The new A2A Bo will be a new challenge and a ton of fun mastering something new and different. You can fly the Bonanza like a straight tail aircraft and you won't bend it, but to fly it WELL, you will have to master a new technique. After you fly the V Tail a while it becomes automatic but make no mistake.......this one's a whole new airplane !
Dudley Henriques


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 6:48 pm 
Offline
Senior Airman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:58 am
Posts: 179
Location: US
Will it have some anti-icing gear? That would be real nice... :)

Also, thank you for making your GA planes so we can pick a girl pilot! \o/

_________________
i7-7700K 4.9 Ghz (OC), ASUS MAXIMUS IX HERO, 32GB DDR4-3200 RAM, EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified 6GB, EVGA 850 G3 Gold ps, C:=1TB WD Black D:=4TB WD Black, Win 10 Pro, Prepar3D v4, AFS2, FSW, Tons of Orbx :)
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:06 pm 
Offline
Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:10 am
Posts: 1071
Location: Arendal, Norway
DHenriquesA2A wrote:
Cessna781 wrote:
I am genuinely surprised by some people stating they are disappointed with the next aircraft. I for one am excited and am already creating flight plans and checklist for it. In my opinion, the A2A general aviation series are released in a way that allows the sim user to grow as a pilot. Growing from the small trainers to larger, more capable air frames and engines. The Bonanza is another step up from the Comanche in terms of being more powerful and focused on cross country. I find the progression of A2A aircraft to be not only realistic, but ideal. Also it was mentioned that there are three different STC's for this Bonanza. It is possible, if not likely that one of these STC's will be a turbo-normalized or turbocharged engine. Which again would be the next logical step up from the Comanche. This will be a day one purchase for me and for anyone saying they are disappointed, no one is forcing you to purchase it.

bartp71 wrote:
Hello all,

If you compare the bonanza to those aircraft, it is not very diverse!


I respectfully have to disagree, the aircraft is very diverse with its V-tail configuration. As Scott mentioned, they have taken what i can only imagine to be an immense effort to differentiate the effect of a straight tail and the V config.

I don't mean to come off as rude, I just would like to share my support for this choice of aircraft.



You are right. The Bo with the 30 degree V Tail has subtle differences in handling to that of a straight tail configuration. The differences are not earth shattering but can be confusing to the pilot flying the Bo for the first time. The plane "moves" a bit in yaw while in flight. I found when I flew it years ago that this was easily controllable by planting my heels on the floor boards and using subtle countering rudder pressures while in flight. This behavior will be represented in the new A2A Bonanza and should be fun for the sim pilot as they learn to deal with it to gain smooth coordinated flight.
The new A2A Bo will be a new challenge and a ton of fun mastering something new and different. You can fly the Bonanza like a straight tail aircraft and you won't bend it, but to fly it WELL, you will have to master a new technique. After you fly the V Tail a while it becomes automatic but make no mistake.......this one's a whole new airplane !
Dudley Henriques


Now, all of this talk about the coordination from you and Scott... hmm... It rings a bell, doesn't it?

The T6, incorrectly and uncoordinatedly flown in slow flight will kill you at the drop of a hat. Is the V-Bonanza somewhat similar? Hence the "Doctor Killer"-tag it has? These wobbling traits could possibly be an issue if not coordinated in slow flight, say in the base-to-final turn...

I, for one, am stoked to finally have this beautiful aircraft available. Bring it on! :-)

_________________
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!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:09 pm 
Offline
Technical Sergeant

Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:20 pm
Posts: 858
Location: Hampton, VA
Personally I have to share Scott's point of view of these things. Being a huge military aircraft guy, and an actual mechanic at first I was kind of miffed when they dove in to the GA arena with the 172. However from the Cherokee onwards I have bought and love all the rest. Particularly the Comanche, but I think the V-tail will be the GA single to dethrone it in my hangar. It is interesting how all these aircraft that I thought were bland, stupid, and boring actually turn out to be fun to fly. Heck before the Cherokee and Comanche I used to never even both trimming airplanes in FSX. Those lessons have change my whole world with flying the warbirds. So if nothing else they are extremely valuable learning tools, and have made me a better virtual pilot I feel. The only thing on my wish list for this puppy that I want to see is the 300hp STC engine. I am all about maximum performance, and all the speed mods I can get. :mrgreen:

_________________
S. Jordan
AM; United States Navy
FSX Hours: 3000 and counting! All A2A birds in the hangar except the 172 and Bonanza.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:23 pm 
Offline
Technical Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:15 pm
Posts: 599
Location: KTYR
Buffy Foster wrote:
Also, thank you for making your GA planes so we can pick a girl pilot! \o/

The Texan has a female pilot as well.

And thanks for the Bonanza, Scott. It was always at the top of my GA wish list. I bought the Comanche as a substitute last year, but will be thrilled to get this one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:24 pm 
Offline
Technical Sergeant

Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 2:50 pm
Posts: 657
So if you don't control the yaw the passengers in the back seat are going to complain about getting sick?

_________________
Some old computer stuff, some A2A airplanes, some Orbx scenery, and that's about it. I forget exactly what.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:36 pm 
Online
A2A Chief Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:31 am
Posts: 4640
Location: East Coast United States
[/quote]
Now, all of this talk about the coordination from you and Scott... hmm... It rings a bell, doesn't it?

The T6, incorrectly and uncoordinated flown in slow flight will kill you at the drop of a hat. Is the V-Bonanza somewhat similar? Hence the "Doctor Killer"-tag it has? These wobbling traits could possibly be an issue if not coordinated in slow flight, say in the base-to-final turn...

I, for one, am stoked to finally have this beautiful aircraft available. Bring it on! :-)[/quote]

The Bo has a fairly stable stall behavior and slow flight is no problem. The main behavior that sets the Bo apart from a straight tail is associated with random yaw excursion into Dutch Roll. Takes some getting used to to be smooth.
The Doctor Killer tag relates not to slow flight but the other end of the envelope. The Bo is extremely clean so any nose low condition results in a rapid increase in airspeed. Because of it's high cruise speed the Bo was a natural to attract high end buyers who found advantage in it's cross country capability. Because of it's high price the Bo attracted high end buyers many of whom were Doctors with minimum to no instrument experience.This unfortunately put a lot of VFR pilots into a condition where they were entering IFR conditions during enroute flying.
When this happened pilots naturally tried to make 180's to get back into VFR conditions. Because of inexperience, many pilots would find themselves nose low in the turn due to the split lift vector requiring back pressure they were not applying properly. in a banked turn with increasing airspeed on instruments now with no training to speak of, pilots made the fatal mistake of applying back pressure to decrease the airspeed without first getting rid of the bank. This only made the nose low turn worse as the airspeed continued to rise. This is what we call the "Graveyard Spiral". Without first leveling the wings, the back pressure being applied only tightened the spiral and caused the airspeed to rise.
Usually about this time panic set in causing more back pressure until Vne was reached. This coupled with the high g loading would cause structural failure with predictable fatal results.
The rule that would have solved this issue is actually quite simple really and knowing it would have saved a LOT of lives.
If finding yourself nose low with increasing airspeed, Always..........ALWAYS..........level the wings BEFORE application of back pressure to deal with the airspeed.
Dudley Henriques


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:57 pm 
Offline
Senior Airman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:46 pm
Posts: 116
Location: KPAE
I for one am extremely excited about the Bonanza. When the Comanche first came out, I enjoyed reading the handbook with it about similar planes like the Bonanza and Mooney. I’m sure it was no easy task modeling the v-tail I’m thinking this model could be used for future planes such as a Cirrus Jet perhaps?

Personally I enjoy the translations from the 172 to the T6. If anything, all of it has helped in real world flight training and honing skills. The experience is also like Scott mentioned earlier, it allows me to test fly planes that I would consider owning in real life. So far, I’m leaning towards a Comanche 250 but now I get to try the Bonanza.

Thank you again,
Ron


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

_________________
A2A Planes: Cub, 172, 182, Cherokee, Comanche, Bonanza,T6, 377, Spitfire, and P51
Hardware: i7(3.8ghz), 16GB; GTX970; 1TB HD; 240GB SSD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:57 pm 
Offline
Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:10 am
Posts: 1071
Location: Arendal, Norway
DHenriquesA2A wrote:
The Bo has a fairly stable stall behavior and slow flight is no problem. The main behavior that sets the Bo apart from a straight tail is associated with random yaw excursion into Dutch Roll. Takes some getting used to to be smooth.
The Doctor Killer tag relates not to slow flight but the other end of the envelope. The Bo is extremely clean so any nose low condition results in a rapid increase in airspeed. Because of it's high cruise speed the Bo was a natural to attract high end buyers who found advantage in it's cross country capability. Because of it's high price the Bo attracted high end buyers many of whom were Doctors with minimum to no instrument experience.This unfortunately put a lot of VFR pilots into a condition where they were entering IFR conditions during enroute flying.
When this happened pilots naturally tried to make 180's to get back into VFR conditions. Because of inexperience, many pilots would find themselves nose low in the turn due to the split lift vector requiring back pressure they were not applying properly. in a banked turn with increasing airspeed on instruments now with no training to speak of, pilots made the fatal mistake of applying back pressure to decrease the airspeed without first getting rid of the bank. This only made the nose low turn worse as the airspeed continued to rise. This is what we call the "Graveyard Spiral". Without first leveling the wings, the back pressure being applied only tightened the spiral and caused the airspeed to rise.
Usually about this time panic set in causing more back pressure until Vne was reached. This coupled with the high g loading would cause structural failure with predictable fatal results.
The rule that would have solved this issue is actually quite simple really and knowing it would have saved a LOT of lives.
If finding yourself nose low with increasing airspeed, Always..........ALWAYS..........level the wings BEFORE application of back pressure to deal with the airspeed.
Dudley Henriques


How fascinating and alarming! Too bad they didn't have flight simulators back then, loaded with A2A-planes... :P

_________________
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!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 370 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 25  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DHenriquesA2A, Paughco and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group