Cessna L-19 BirdDog Update 1.6 Available

Discussion Hub Aircraft
143

absolutely :slight_smile:

1 Like
144

I didn’t say gauges on this plane were octogonal, I said it’s the way to go on MSFS 2020, since asking them to seem round is asking too much to the sim, and it makes it drop FPS from 60 to 30 


1 Like
145

Don’t make me take screenshots to prove you wrong, 'cause I’ll do it. :wink:

146

Your opinion is that the interior is “awful.” I strongly disagree. Those are our two divergent opinions, and as you have said, “to each his own.”
PS, your English is just fine.

1 Like
147

CirrusFlyer23 Quote "performance and in this plane with the choice of textures, polygon count, etc. I can land the amphibian on the Hudson at over 60FPS on max settings with stunning scenery. I struggle to get over 30FPS in any of the other aircraft "

This is the problem many have with you and the dev Cirrus
 you can’t make these types of claims.

I’ve told you this before, you’d be better of sticking with the “this is a fun little bird to fly” line than these wild claims that are clearly untrue.

It makes both you and the dev look like they are out to deceive people.

This is not an opinion, we cannot vary on this:

  • THIS DOES NOT INCREASE YOUR FPS BY 100%

  • THE FLIGHT MODEL IS NOT ACCURATE

I can agree that this is a fun little bird, and if you can get over the interior being an FSX port and the price being the same as an A2A Accus-Sim model while clearly not offering the same level of detail or simulation, then we can agree to disagree on the value of this product. There isn’t anything wrong with that. I am having fun in this as the dev fixes the issues that prevented me from flying it.

I’ll not comment on the varying issues right now as the dev seems to be making a concerted effort to fix them. For the sake of this argument, lets assume it all works.

I still don’t think it’s worth $40, but that is subjective and contextual on a per-user basis.

What isn’t subjective is the above in caps


Please stop this, it makes me post a reality check again, and I’d rather steer clear from this thread and issue, but I won’t stand for the deceit, intentional or otherwise.

5 Likes
148

It’s not really an opinion, I’ve seen better free models on X-Plane, but it wouldn’t be an issue if it didn’t cost so much. And, all things aside, quality of internal textures and models can be seen from screenshots and people can make up their mind from there. The issue was in the hidden troubles, not really the quality of the interior.

6 Likes
149

A lot of me reviewing something is how its represented.

If you represent to me “a fun little bird to fly”, and the value (admittedly there is some value here) is in the fact that there are 3 models (lets be real, its not like there are 3 different models) and lots of liveries (which there are, and I appreciate btw, they are nice liveries) all for a reasonable price, then I will give my opinion within that context.

But that isn’t what was represented here. What was represented was “the Most” accurate flight model in MSFS to date and an assumption at this price that the model would be at least MSFS default aircraft quality and fully functional (considering the sparsity of the aircraft in real life).

On top of this is the hyperbole presented to potential buyers that it gets 100% frame rate increase or that problems that have now been fixed in updates did not exist when customers asked about them, or that reviewers of the product are lying and biased with some sort of agenda.

Drop that @$#@ and be honest with the community.

Personally, and this IS just my opinion. Had you been honest that this might still need some work, but we will work to have fixes quickly (which the dev has been doing, kudos), but we want to get this to you quickly as an open beta for testing at $20 even, this would have been of much greater value, and reviewed in a much more serious nature within that context.

6 Likes
150

Just because I mentioned that I’d post
 not sure what caused this before, but 10k needle is moving.

(to be clear for others, its working)
 if otherwise ever, I’ll hopefully record and send it to you.

Would still like a inches mercury window kollsman if you can put that in your list.

151

In the interests of not misleading anyone (which was never my intention) I’m going to edit my post but in doing so I’m making the following comments:

  1. I get the best performance in this bird compared to any of the default planes. Good performance is also mentioned in the RE-view posted above.

  2. Please test the stall warner in the SEP’s. Trim the C152 trim for straight and level flight at 80 knots, clean. Pull back on the control column a bit hard, just a nudge backwards and you will see you get the stall warner although you are around 20 knots over the stall speed depending on weight. It may not be flight model per se it could also be an over sensitive stall warner?

Thanks again for your observations.

152

Yes, I won’t dispute you get the best performance with it, but that’s because it has a lower quality model compared to the default planes.

3 Likes
153

Please test the stall warner in the SEP’s. Trim the C152 trim for straight and level flight at 80 knots, clean. Pull back on the control column a bit hard, just a nudge backwards and you will see you get the stall warner although you are around 20 knots over the stall speed depending on weight. It may not be flight model per se it could also be an over sensitive stall warner?

This might be relevant with a power-on stall and nudging the flight stick back.

I did neither in the flight test and is exactly why I performed a power-off stall and kept the flight stick as level and non-erratic as possible at that speed.

In prior posts you mentioned you had a humble computer setup. I find it hard to believe you can run this simulation at max (Ultra) settings because of this aircraft.

5 Likes
154

I feel like all of these messages by friends of the aircraft are meant to derail the conversation from what needs to be fixed to what is so amazing about a ■■■■■■ quality product. All this effort by the developer and friends to sell us on this plane preventing COVID could be better spent on simply bringing the product up to default MSFS aircraft quality (which isn’t saying a lot to begin with).

6 Likes
155

Depending on how hard you pull back on the yoke/stick, that’s correct.

An aircraft doesn’t stall due to a too low airspeed, but due to a too high AoA.

If you pull back on the yoke you are increasing the g-load and hence you reach the critical AoA at a higher airspeed (but at the same AoA) than at the standard 1G stall speed.

Hence the term accelerated stall (sometimes incorrectly referred to as ‘high speed stall’)

That’s why the 152 POH quotes a Vst of 40kias for 0° bank angle, but 57kias for a 60° bank angle.

3 Likes
156

A great video regarding recovery procedures.

157

IRL stall tests are being performed with a deceleration rate of ~1kt/sec, which usually means a descent.

158

IRL stall tests are being performed with a deceleration rate of ~1kt/sec, which usually means a descent.

PZ, I don’t want to start going back and forth with you here as this is regarding the L-19.

IRL “stall tests” have numerous different names and procedures which are all different. You just defined all stall tests as having this procedure which not only is incorrect but would be impossible for many stall tests.

I Honestly don’t have any idea what you are trying to say here. Are you trying to say that a power-off stall needs to be performed by decelerating at 1kt/sec while descending?

That just isn’t correct. Nothing about a power-off stall is defined by a deceleration rate or descent.

-reduce throttle
-maintain heading and altitude
-pull back on the control stick to maintain altitude
-aircraft will slow down
-you will eventually stall

You may have a certain instructor that likes you to perform certain procedures a certain way, but they are certainly not defined as such.

1 Like
159

So the definition of a power-off stall differs from instructor to instructor? Or perhaps how they demonstrate it?

160

Purchased the Bird Dog last night despite the drama so I could form an opinion of my own and have some more aircraft to play with. So far flew only the regular model, not the amphibious one nor bush one. So far, here is the deal.

POSITIVE:

  • It flies nicely, the flight model seems to be pretty good!
  • The exterior model is pretty good looking as well - I picked the toothed USAF livery. I was missing some of that bare steel look!
  • BlackBox provides VERY detailed manuals for the aircraft with everything you’d want to know on operating procedures. It’s stellar.
  • Everything you technically need to fly this works. Started from cold and dark and flew a VFR flight in Indonesia (in zero visibility weather, mind you)
 Landed safely.

NEUTRAL:

  • I haven’t flown a real one and can’t comment on how realistic this is, but I had issues stopping it - the roll seemed to last forever. I didn’t run out of the runway, thankfully. But once I slowed down enough, I did try to pitch up to push the tail down to help stop it. It didn’t work too well - I had stall beeping and it took a bunch of attempts. Eventually pitch up along with breaks seemed to do the trick but it was pretty ungraceful.
  • I’d am not big on aircraft with no GPS - I love the steam gauge aircraft with some sort of GPS like what Carenado did with Mooney, but that’s just my preference - it’s neither here nor there and doesn’t affect the reality that considering how old this thing is, it probably wouldn’t be appropriate to fit it with one. It would actually take something away from the immersion of flying an old rust bucket that this is.
  • I will admit, I haven’t read on the fuel capacity of this old rustbucket. But I ran out of fuel in both tanks for a 98 NM flight! I guess this is on the default MSFS fuel load of 50%. What’s the range of this thing? I had to cheat and refuel mid-flight to not crash.

NEGATIVE:

  • The godforsaken interior textures are atrocious. I don’t have much gripe with the instrument panel and the imperfect gauges that aren’t perfectly round. That isn’t awful. What IS awful though, are those ■■■■ window and door frames that are green and have TERRIBLE texture that doesn’t come up to standards of MSFS aircraft. Something has to be done. BlackBox, PLEASE retexture that if possible, for the love of god, it’s an eye sore! I get that it’s a rustic aircraft, but the quality just isn’t there for rustic textures
  • Missing sounds from the switches. This is not HUGE, but would be nice to have. Shouldn’t be too hard to fix.

It’s not as bad as people say. If these few textures can be improved, this will be a solid addition and a decent value! Will post more when I fly the float version later today.

4 Likes
161

no it wouldn’t


a power off stall is listed above.

I’m open to the idea that instructors may for one reason or another have different ideas of:

what is a safe altitude to perform this at 1500’, 2000’ etc


lets reduce throttle slowly instead of to idel right away
 etc, etc


none of this defines a power off stall specifically,

in other words the person who felt 1500’ is safe isn’t wrong if another is instructed that 2000’ is safe.

1 Like
162

I think my rule of thumb going forward may be to only buy aircraft that are on the in-sim store. My assumption here is that MS/Asobo would have done some kind of quality control before allowing it on there in the first place.

1 Like