SinusJayCee

Thanks you very much for the information! I'm looking forward to the new version

Hey there, Since there have been a lot of changes to X-Plane with the latest updates, I'm wondering if the Saab can be considered to be fully compatible with the new version or whether there are any planned updates? Thanks for your replies!

I never noticed any abnormalities like missing touch-down sounds. I will observe this during my next flight. For camera shake, I'm using SimCoders' HeadShake, which works excellent with the LES Saab (and any other plane). Almost no plane in XP brings camera shake on its own. At least none of the planes in my hangar does.

Hi all, I've the "Remove flight surfaces" feature of XP enabled and it happened two times to me now that the flaps of my Saab were removes. Both times I had them at 7° and they were removed at about 160 KIAS. However, according to the manual, the max speed for flaps 7° is 175 KIAS. One times, I was flying with about 15° bank angle and the other time I had the wings leveled. In both cases, I was decending with about -1200 fpm. Am I doing something wrong? Thank you in advance for your help!

LES Saab 340A Air Bremen D-CHBB View File Air Bremen was active between 1988 and 1990. From the home base Bremen, the airliner offered flights to Brussels, Paris, London, and Copenhagen. It operated up to three Saab 340. The livery shows the second one with registration D-CHBB. It was created using the paint kit by Leen de Jager. It was really hard to find high-resolution pictures, but I tried to make the livery as good as possible. If anybody can share pictures of high resolution, in particular of the logo and the lettering, I can make an update. I appreciate any kind of feedback Submitter SinusJayCee Submitted 09/24/2018 Category Heavy Metal Livery For http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/product_info.php/take-command-saab-340a-p-100 X-Plane Version(s) X-Plane 11  

Thanks for the quick response! I'll give it a try with the normal maps. However, since I may need a little bit longer to get it right, I decided to release a first version of the livery and update the probs later:

Today I loaded the plane to a TOW of 28.000lbs according to the X-Plane Weight & Fuel menu and I suffered a stall during approach somewhere between 140kt and 160kt with flaps 0. Since this is way to high for almost any bank angle, I tend to say that the payload has to be set correctly while ignoring the TOW in order to achieve the correct performance. I'd appreciate feedback on this regarding the experience of you. *edit* I did some further evaluations. In particular, I choose different total weights and flap settings and evaluated the stall speed with zero bank angle. In one case, I set the total weight according to X-Plane. In the other case, I set the total weight using payload and fuel (i.e., add 6145lbs to the XP total weight to get the pretend value). For all flap/weight combinations, the stall speed matches more or less the charts (Charts.pdf, p. 30) when the setting the total weight using payload and fuel, while it is about 15-20kt to high if it is set according to XP total weight. This is strong evidence that setting the weight using payload in fuel while ignoring the total weight reported by XP results in the correct performance.

I tried to change the color of the prop. Unfortunately, they are very glossy, while looks quite good for black blades, but not for gray ones. Is it possible for me to change this with the livery? And yet another question: Is it correct that I've to colorize one of the horizontal stabilizers in order to paint the marked part around the beacon?

Thanks for the help! I found both textures. I expected that the prop is painted with a some parts of the standard texture set (fuselage, engines, etc.). I'll try how it looks like when I change just the Porp.png texture without changing the prop disc.

You are probably right about this. I'm maybe a little bit to pedantic about those thinks. The livery will be finished shortly Another question, only partially related to this topic: Is it possible to change the color of the probs? I haven't found the correct part of the texture for this.

Hi all, I'm currently working on an Air Bremen livery for the Saab. It has a horizontal red line on the engines, which starts at the lower edge of the prop cone (I don't know the exact name of this thing) and runs across the engine. After adding the line to my livery, I noticed that it is higher than expected compared to the fuselage and to the wings. Furthermore, when comparing the engine housing to the photos, I noticed that the part below the the wings is smaller compared to the real one. Finally, the leading edge are below the engine intake, while on the photos of the real plane, they are located rather above it. Here are two pictures for comparison: (Source of second picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Airbremen.jpg, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0) Have there been different engines or engine housings or is there a slight inaccuracy in the mounting position? Thank you in advance for the information!

Yeah, I probably should stop asking myself such questions as well Thanks for the info! However, p. 29 show the maximum speeds, while p. 34 is for icing conditions. I'm rather looking for the normal reference speeds. I went thought the documents again and found Vref20 and Vref35 in the charts.pdf on page 29. Since these are the most important once used for calculating the final approach speed, this helps already a lot. Furthermore, I found the chart to calculate the stall speeds for different flaps settings on p. 30. I guess those values are sufficient to calculate a flaps extension schedule. Or what is the preferred way to do the latter in this plane?

Thanks for your quick reply! I'll check this again. However, in the case I don't find it, it would be great if you could point me in the right direction or share the values I assumed that this is modeled as in reality. My question was rather why one would design it in this way. I guess the developers at Saab did this because of a specific reason. Thanks for the detail explanation! I didn't know about this.

Did you find anything out? During my last two flights, I tried to collect some evidence by comparing the performance in the sim with the expected performance from the charts. In particular, I evaluated the expected distance to reach the cruise flight level. The first flight was with 25,000lbs TOW to FL140. The second flight was with 27,000lbs TOW to FL210. In both cases, I used a medium climb profile and I set the weight such that the values in XP match the planning by adding the missing 6145lbs to the payload. During the first flight, the performance matches more or less the expected values. Except for 1-2NM more, the cruise FL was reached within the correct distance to the airport. In contrast, during the second flight, I needed a much longer distance. Furthermore, the plane was quite hard to fly but not unflyable. I hope that helps you.