Could the issue have been carburetor icing?
I definitely had some struggles on my first flight with icing and it would choke down performance massively.
It could. Personally, in cruise I run carb. heat between 5 and 10ĀŗC, just a notch above minimum yellow band. This way I know that I wouldnāt have any issues with ice and have a temp buffer so that during land I have plenty of time before ice gat me trouble.
If you forget about carb. heat for some time is advised to run high carb. temperatures for a while to give time to all ice to melt.
3 Likes
So, Iām not sure why the default en-US.locPak, etc. files were ignored. Hopefully getting rid of the aircraft.cfg fixed it. Since your version has the same paths as theirs, it should have been fine with your files just replacing the ones youāve included through the magic of VFS but still using all the rest.
Itās possible your including the aircraft.cfg without the [Variation] callout makes your plane replace their plane? I donāt knowā¦ of course, then what about all the other directories. The plane shouldnāt work if thatās the case.
You could also just include or tell people to copy the locPAK file of choice for their install to your directory.
Btw, hereās a link to the icao aircraft designators web page for future reference. So many developers get these references wrong, which in turn would make model matching not work.
https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC8643/Pages/Search.aspx
These would be the real callouts in the aircraft.cfg for proper model matching:
icao_manufacturer = BEECH
icao_model = 18 (piston)
icao_type_designator = BE18
icao_engine_count = 2
icao_engine_type = Piston
icao_WTC = L
icao_generic=0
Iām interested in what ATC calls the D18 in real lifeā¦
As defined in the aircraft.cfg, Microsoft is having it called āBeechcraft Beechā, as referenced from the base en_US.locPAK file. Seems weird to me, but, I donāt know how likely it is theyād call it āBeech 1-8ā or āBeech Eighteenā either? Next time Iām at the airport Iāll ask them.
Edit: I just noticed Carenado has a typo(s) in their en-US.locPAK file
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL.0.tex": "D18S",
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME.0.text": "Beechcraft",
Should be (if you use their designations, which I wouldnāt)
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.text": "Beechcraft",
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.tts": "Beechcraft",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.text": "D18S",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.tts": "D18S",
But, as I noted above, this wouldnāt be right, either. Nowhere is D18S official naming of the plane as far as ICAO or FAA is concerned (FAA uses ICAO conventions). My best guess would be āBeech Eighteenā, or
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.text": "BEECH",
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.tts": "BEECH",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.text": "EIGHTEEN",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.tts": "EIGHTEEN",
or
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.text": "BEECH",
"ATCCOM.ATC_NAME_BEECHCRAFT.0.tts": "BEECH",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.text": "ONE EIGHT",
"ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.tts": "ONE EIGHT",
P.S. As far as I can tell, that _ after NAME can be a ā_ā or a " " (space) in these things
BTW, this is how MSFS defines what ATC should say. In the locPAK file, you define what a term should sound like (the text to write/tts to say) for ATC to say using constructs like the lines above, then in the aircraft.cfg, you define which terms ATC should use for the plane from all the available definitions, hence the:
atc_type = "TT:ATCCOM.ATC_NAME BEECHCRAFT.0.text"
atc_model = "TT:ATCCOM.AC_MODEL BE18.0.text"
in the aircraft.cfg file.
So, whenever I add a livery, I check to see if the correct callouts are in the base en_US.locPAK file. If they arenāt I add my own en_US.locPAK file with all the information required, and add the correct lines to the aircraft.cfg.
Itās also how I get my hangar to always show the manufacturer. Whatever livery is first in line defines what the UI will call the plane. So I make sure my liveries show up before the liveries of the plane. I hate it when developers name the manufacturer their name instead of the actual manufacturer.
Hope thatās not TMI.
2 Likes
Iām using FSUIPC.
Thank you, it now works.
The manual says the name of the LVars for the oilshutters is:
DENARQ_OILSHUTTER_SET_1
DENARQ_OILSHUTTER_SET_2
but as I now saw in your screenshot it is:
Denarq_OILSHUTTER_SET_1
Denarq_OILSHUTTER_SET_2
I used the name from the manual and did not list the names of the LVars in FSUIPC as I normaly do.
Now that it works it makes this wonderful mod even better.
1 Like
The yellow zone is the temp at which carb ice will form. A few seconds of heat above 40 degrees will clear it. The inability to adjust RPM isnāt apparent below 6 thousand feet. The fuel and oil system work youāre doing is excellent, but i would prefer to have my Gen switches back. My biggest immersion killer is mousing switches in the cockpit, the more I can map to the keyboard the better. Youāve made this plane infinitely better, I canāt say thanks enough!
Sorry if this is not an issue for I am only able to get on my pc on weekends and canāt test it myself.
Iām using Neofly for my flights and I understand the oil tanks as part of the load management menu (sim handles them as fuel tanks?).
Since Neofly uses fuel sync to match the fuel in neofly and the sim, will Neofly automaticly reduce the oil when my fuel is at, letās say, 50%?
Or is the oil slider decoupled from the fuel sliders?
Can somebody test?
1 Like
I was a bit confused by the yellow band too. I always thought that the yellow band was the danger band for icing to form (and you needed to avoid it). At very low temperatures (below the yellow band) the air is too dry. At higher temperatures (above the yellow band) ice wonāt form as it is too hot.
The yellow band is the danger band. So it is the reverse of what is currently being done (at the moment we heat into the yellow band, which isnāt right).
The RPM issue does seem to be tied to altitude. Any constant prop real world pilots willing to chip in about whether this is realistic? I havenāt flown constant speed for a long time in the real world.
2 Likes
40 degrees Fahrenheit or Celcius?
Ops, sorry. I already corrected in manual and will be fixed in next update.
1 Like
Altough oil tanks were medelled using fuel tanks they are decoupled from fuel sliders and fuel system. I fly with āFSEconomyā that at the beginning of each flight, FSeconomy app sincronize with MSFS and adjust payload and fuel and I donāt have any problem with this mod. Oil quantity remains untouched.
But I never used Neofly so Iām not sure how it would work.
1 Like
Just want to say thank you. Your mod is brilliant and it is such a joy to fly. Love your sounds also. What a blessing to have people like you around!
3 Likes
I had already praised the mod once. After the last update, I was a bit frustrated because although I had read the instructions, I couldnāt get the mill into the air. Iām sorry, I had simply misunderstood something in the instructionsā¦
After I looked into it again today, I realised my mistakeā¦
I would like to formally apologise for my last post (itās time to uninstall the mod).
The mod is just as awesome as before, if not more!!!
Thank you so much for your work.
5 Likes
And you are right.
Thatās me that was completely misunderstood about carburetor temps. 
But there is a big problem around this. I didnāt did any code about carburator. Everything about carburator temps is done using MSFS default code. The only thing I did was to adjust a value in ENGINES.CFG ācarb_icing_sensiblityā that as far as I know is the only control we have over carburator.
And for high temperatures I donāt think there is any penalty in msfs code.
I was searching in my PDFs because Iām 90% sure I read that high carburator temps could cause detonation. Can anyone with more knowledge confirm this?
If this is the case we have a problem. Msfs have detonation modelled in its code but they donāt allow us developers to access it. The only way to use it is with overboosting and this is very frustrating because if we could use it it would open an all new range of possibilities.
A custom detonation code should be possible but Iām not sure if Iām up to the job.
In the meanwhile I will change the texture of the carburetor temperature gauge to match that one from the Canadian Expeditor.
2 Likes
I believe the POH you have is for a C-45B or C-45F.
Another POH that I have is for a C-45H and it has this:
Alex potentially has a third POH with guidance that is still different from either of ours. So what do you think Alex? Is this carb temp a system youāre going to change? You might need to investigate the various engines that were used through the life of this plane.
EDIT: I just read the post that you put in just before this one. 
3 Likes
Eheh, And I was just reading yours.
I have the Canadian PDF and have another for C-45H but mine doesnāt have that page. For the sake of consistency Iāll use your picture as source for texture because my main source is also for C-45H.
But my biggest problem is how to model detonation.
3 Likes
No worries.
Weāve all felt frustrated at some point. As long as everything is cleared up, letās move on.
Happy flights! 
2 Likes
Some info on engine combustion here Alex. Yes, high carb heat can lead to detonation in certain circumstances.
āOther causes of detonation are improper ignition timing, high inlet air temperature, engine overheating, oil in the combustion chamber, or a carbon build up in the combustion chamberā
1 Like
Thank you for the info. I think it will be no problem in Neofly, but I try to remember testing and posting here on the weekend.
And a BIG thank you for your service to us Twin Beech Lovers. Itās my favorite Local Legend. I even bought āIāll take the 18ā and loved it. You should read it if you havenāt already, just a few bucks for a kindle version and it gives some insight on this magnificent bird.
1 Like
The magnetos are all switched on when loading the aircraft to a parking spot. Is this intended?