Jump to content

MMcCl

Members
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About MMcCl

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

280 profile views
  1. MMcCl

    What’s next?

    The new Bonanza G36 has a very similar avionics package.
  2. MMcCl

    Exciting take off runs...

    My observation about how the TBM handles on the ground is actually an observation about how X-Plane itself handles the physical forces at work. Going from a real aircraft to a simulation of an aircraft points out most of the major shortcomings of sitting in a chair and not moving in physical space vs. constantly receiving physical inputs and sensations from the physical world. It has always felt to me that X-plane is superior as a simulator in modelling aerodynamic forces, however there is still something missing in the way it models the mass of a moving object and inertia. There seems to be a greater prioritization of aerodynamic force over inertial force. As the TBM begins to move at low speed everything seems to be fine because there is a low effect of aerodynamic force on the moving aircraft. But once the plane picks up speed, it seems that inertial force nearly falls away entirely with regard to the direction the aircraft is moving. By placing a higher priority on aerodynamics prior to the aircraft achieving lift, many X-plane aircraft are all over the place; heavy aircraft behave like they have the weight of a GA aircraft. This is a symptom of how X-plane behaves, not the specific aircraft. Some designers have managed to tweak the aerodynamics to simulate greater mass/inertial authority, but that shouldn't be necessary if X-plane modeled those forces properly. Further, without the physical sensations of inertia at work, it has always felt strange to me to adequately predict the control inputs necessary to maintain precise directional control on the ground. We all eventually learn to do it.. as I am learning to do by flying the TBM (which is definitely my favorite aircraft right now).
  3. MMcCl

    Exciting take off runs...

    I wonder if you might want to ask more than TBM pilot to evaluate ground handling. While I understand your position that a TBM pilot has given the thumbs up... that is still only one pilot's opinion. Given the amount of user comments on the topic, you might want to find a second opinion to verify and provide users with a wider assurance that more than one TBM pilot confirms ground behavior. I've been using flight simulators for over 35 years (Yes... since Bruce Artwick's version for the Commodore 64), and have 430 hours of real flight time in aircraft ranging from Cessna 152s and 182s, Piper Archers and Arrows, and a Bonanza A36. This aircraft is pretty much at the top of the list in terms of ground handling difficulties. I've now taken off and landed your TBM at least a two dozen times... only the last 4 have remained on the runway during both takeoff and landing. During take off, if I keep torque below 60% until airborne, I'm able to control the excessive yaw instability. Once airborne, I can apply power to 90% torque for a normal departure. Landings are slightly more stable, so long as prop reverse is never used and touchdown occurs slightly above stall speed.
  4. MMcCl

    when Warthog meets TBM 900

    I'm curious about how you are binding an axis to the "Lo/IDLE" side of the throttle. I can't seem to find an axis that let's me control that movement of the throttle from Cut-Off to Lo-Idle to Flight Idle. I use a Saitek TQ. The far left lever controls the left side of the throttle, and the center lever full-back button controls the "toggle reverse" switch. I'd love to use the far right lever to control Cut-Off to Flight Idle.
  5. MMcCl

    Option for no persistence-wear and tear?

    I also feel that the persistent wear and tear feature of this aircraft has given me an entirely new perspective on the way I think about my simulator time. While all other aircraft in X-plane allow you to get away with practices that would destroy a real aircraft, the TBM-900 actually requires that you think like a real pilot. If you don't, you are reminded of the consequences of your sloppy behavior. I flooded the engine yesterday on my start up... the consequence of moving too fast and not thinking... $148,000 for a new combustor. Yes, the TBM-900 isn't for simulator pilots that just want to jump in and go... it requires that you think! To me, that is a welcome challenge.
  6. MMcCl

    1.0.9 Broke my plane

    Same thing for me... 1.0.9 update resulted in many broken parts. When I "fixed" them, it shows a cost of about $285,000.00. So... if I delete ALL of the files in the TBM900/state/ folder, will it reset the persistent maintenance cost to $0.00? There are 4 files in that folder. Do I delete all of them?
  7. MMcCl

    VNAV

    What does the FMA on the Captain's PFD say? Does it show that VNAV path is armed or active?
  8. MMcCl

    some issues with the lights

    Have you checked your graphics settings to ensure that HDR is on?
  9. MMcCl

    Correct sequence of pushback and engine start?

    If BetterPushBack isn't working, make sure you have disconnected the GPU prior to starting the pushback.
  10. MMcCl

    Take Command! Saab 340A v1.5.1 Update Released!

    Has the ability to control cabin lighting been removed? I was unable to use the panel next to the main door to adjust cabin lighting after updating to 1.5.1. Do I need to delete a preference file in order to restore this function? For a possible future update... I find that the annunciator lights on the main panel that indicate the status of Anti-Ice and Auto-Coarsen to be a bit dim. I am referring to the double column of lights to the left of the warning panel. During daytime operation, I can barely tell if the status lights are illuminated. Annunciators on the overhead are fine.
×