jetdodger

I have really been enjoying the MU-2 that you have developed in XP12. Based on the outstanding job you have done there, I am suggesting a new project that I would like to see done by your team. That project is the Cessna 441 Conquest II. I believe that you could lever your experience with the MU-2 in the 441 (e.g. both have variants of the TPE331). After overcoming some initial issues in the real world, the 441 showed outstanding performance and value using the combination of its speed and range to rival even some jets because it could travel at high speed with needing a fuel stop for up to 2200 nm. From what I can see, it appears that the Conquest II has had similar cockpit evolutions from the original gauges and avionics through modern glass cockpits. Obviously, I don't know what you have already been considering for development projects, but this would seem to be one for which you may already have a significant headstart should you decide to take it on. As another TPE331 powered possibility, I would also be interested in the PA-42-1000 Cheyenne, a real hot rod although with less range than the Cessna 441. I would certainly be looking forward to either of those suggested products and will be keeping my eyes open for whatever you do have in the pipe.

X-plane 12 has been out for quite a while and the MU-2B Marquise uses the GIZMO plugin and has turbine engines. Everyone who has the TBM 900 has been anxiously awaiting the update for more than a year. I'm sure there are others who have seen the reviews and are waiting to purchase this aircraft after the XP12 version comes out. Is this aircraft ever going to get an update?

We are a year and 3 months past the last comment on this. Still no XP12 TBM 900 or TBM 900 Navigraph?

A small item in XP12 as the files in the attached zip show. The strips just inside the windshield posts that I believe are associated with the windshield de-ice are fragmented with irregular fragments flickering in and out. The phenomenon seems to vary depending on the light level. This did not appear to occur in a flight I made with the Marquise in XP11. In XP11, I believe that the strips stayed fully visible for the entire flight as expected. Not what I would call a high priority item, but something I noticed in each XP12 flight of the MU-2 that I have made. 994799144_MU-2windshieldirregularities.7z

Sounds good, you know your code, your explanations seem reasonable, and the workaround is probably the best practice anyhow. So, everything is good as far as I am concerned. Again, thanks for your quick response.

I noticed an issue as I have been going through the setup procedure for hardware setups like mine. This showed up as the condition levers jumping erratically after I assigned them per the instructions. Specifically, the condition levers on the displayed panel in the simulator would seem to move with the levers on my throttle quadrant and then go to emergency stop position. My control hardware setup includes the CH Eclipse yoke, the CH Pro Pedals, and two of the CH Throttle Quadrants (i.e. 6 levers on each, 12 total). By default and before I reassigned levers per the procedure outlined in the MU-2 documentation, the throttle quadrant levers were assigned from left-to-right as: Throttle 1, Throttle 2, Throttle 3, Throttle 4, Prop 1, and Prop 2 on one the first quadrant; for the second quadrant left-to-right as: Prop 3, Prop 4, Mixture 1, Mixture 2, Mixture 3, and Mixture 4. To make a long story short, I re-assigned the first two levers to Throttle 3 and 4 respectively, the next two to "NONE", and left the last two assigned as Prop 1 and Prop 2, respectively. The lever assignments for the second throttle quadrant were left alone. The response curves for the levers assigned to Throttle 3, Throttle 4, Prop 1 and Prop 2 were done as directed in your procedure. My finding was that the condition levers on the screen were responding to the levers assigned to Prop 3 and Prop 4 on the second throttle quadrant as well as to those assigned to Prop 1 and Prop 2 on the first throttle quadrant. In fact, it seemed that the simulator levers responded at least as well to those assigned to Prop 3 and Prop 4 as to Prop 1 and Prop 2. The fix was to reassign the Prop 3 and Prop 4 on the second throttle quadrant to "NONE". This resulted in the expected responses to the levers assigned on the first throttle quadrant. I have yet to get through to the point that I have started the engines in the simulator, but I don't have any reason to expect a problem now that the levers are not bouncing around due to conflicting inputs. This did make me wonder if there was some repeated code between the throttle sections and the condition lever sections as you read the hardware levers that were not corrected for the prop portion (i.e. the throttles are using the Throttle 3 and Throttle 4 axes, if some, but not all references in copied code stayed at 3 and 4 versus 1 and 2 for the prop axes that would be a possible explanation for what I observed). I am not a software engineer so there may other explanations, but I thought it would be good to give you the information. The attached files are zipped versions of the XP12 log.txt files, the mu2b60_manips.txt files, and screen shots showing the Prop 1 (i.e. same as Prop2), and the Prop 3 (i.e. same as Prop 4) axes setup or response curves for the case with Prop 1, Prop 2, Prop 3 and Prop axes all assigned, and when Prop 3 and Prop 4 axes are unassigned (i.e. all the second throttle quadrant lever axes were unassigned. Hopefully, this will help with any investigation that you would undertake. I believe the earlier text files are the ones with the second quadrant axes assigned and prop axes on both throttle quadrants being manipulated. The later text files would be with the all the axes on the second quadrant unassigned. This is not a major issue for me since it appears that I fixed it by disabling the axes on the second throttle quadrant, but it was confusing for some time. I haven't gotten to actually starting the engines yet. So, we will see if anything else pops up, but I am not expecting any issues. Thanks for your efforts. mu2b60_manips.7z Log.7z Log.7z mu2b60_manips.7z

Guess, I didn't look closely enough. I assumed that it was the link that I copied from the "README.txt" file. Thanks to both of you.

Yes, it is in the"README.txt" file in the Mitsubishi MU-2 Marquise v2 -> Documents folder after the aircraft installs in XP12. Please give us the corrected location. Thanks.

I am having no luck finding the documents download that is listed as: http://togasim.com/mu2docs/mu2docs.zip I keep getting a "Not Found" error. Please let me know the steps required to get to the downloadable documents.

I found the solution to my problem, which I believe was a result of recently installing the X-Aviation Avanti II. I found that I could not get the Avanti II to work under the current XP11 version and believe that it may have had an undesired effect on the Gizmo64 plugin that is required by it as well as the TBM 900. I now have everything working as I expected it should. I was able to create and recall the paint/callsign combinations that I had assigned to the six different airframes that I created. I saw some questions in addition to my own as I was trying to figure out what was wrong as I attempted to save new TBM 900 airframes using Airframe Manager. So, I made a checklist that is attached that describes the steps I used to successfully create and recall airframes with chosen paint schemes and call signs. Creating and Recalling TBM 900 Paint & Callsign Combos with Airframe Manager Rev A.odt

I have searched the documentation that was included with the aircraft as well as searching this forum and other places but have not found what I need. I have tried to create airframes such that I get a specific paint job/livery with a specific registration number/callsign when selecting the specific airframe. For example, selecting airframe 1 would always give the Red Devil paint job with N191RD registry; selecting airframe 2 would give the Crimson Ash paint with N902CA; and selecting any other that I create would give a specific paint and specific registration without any need of changing anything to get there. I have tried several sequences as I use the Airframe Manager with no success in getting the combinations that I thought I had created. I would get a different paint job and/or a different callsign than what i thought I had created for at least some of the airframes. I thought that what I have described as my goals for this was specifically what Airframe Manager was designed to do. I have seen some other questions that seemed to be related to this as well. So, I would appreciate a specific sequence of the proper steps to create new airframes that will result in the specific paint and callsign when selected, regardless of the state (i.e. paint and callsign) of the previous airframe flown. Some questions that should be answered by this would be: Do I select the paint before I hit the "Create new airframe" or after? Does hitting the "Set" for the registration/callsign actually lock in both the currently selected paint and the callsign? How do I select the paint that I want to saved on a specific airframe, from X-plane 11 Flight Configuration or some other way? Thank you very much to anyone who can clear this up for me. I have had a lot of frustration with trying to create six airframes for the TBM 900 that each have a specific paint job and callsign despite going as far as reinstalling the aircraft multiple times to clear previous failed attempts. I have Version 1.1.13 of the aircraft, and I am running XP 11.55, which I believe are the latest of each.