I have no idea, but now I want to fly into icing conditions to see if the same thing happens to me.
1 Like
I did have some issues with the transponder after I had changed the cfg file. I returned it to the normal state and the transponder worked fine. I don’t know if the two were related. Priming the engine really isn’t much of an issue really.
The requirement for priming has just recently been added so that is one possible reason. I’ve also noticed that the fuel selectors although indicating correctly are not always doing what the control says. The solution is to cycle the fuel selector.
1 Like
I use the PMS GTN version daily and I’m not using it. So that’s proof enough it’s not required. Install and keep It updated If you want.
As I said, it’s not required if you don’t want the extra features the WTT version provides.
1 Like
EGT is not zero it’s just below 1200.
Did you have enough fuel? None of your pics show the fuel qty.
Is the aircraft also offered in other shops? Unfortunately I haven’t found anything yet. Flysimware only offers credit card and PayPal as payment options and that is definitely out of the question for me.
I just spent the last 20 minutes or so flying through snowy weather. Though I noticed a reduction in performance, and started to lose altitude until I applied nearly full power, there wasn’t much in the way of visual icing. None at all when viewed externally, and hardly any on the windshield. Just a little at the edges. None on the side windows which was unexpected, but given the rest perhaps an as yet undeveloped part of the model, rather than a deliberate act. Pretty much every plane I have flown in the sim has a lot of icing on the side windows, and not just on the windshield.
I also didn’t notice any reduction in RPM from either engine, so what I experienced was probably ice build-up on the airframe, rather than engine icing?
1 Like
hello. yes, fuel was around ~95%
the key thing I noticed besides the obviously-unable-to-maintain-altitude was the reduction in fuel flow. I can’t remember what it was at upon takeoff, butt something around 12-14gph. Then I began to notice it steadily dropping, with the left engine dropping faster. Eventaully it was 5gph, then 2, then 1. By the end there you can see it was essentially cut off almost completely. So I’m wondering it the fuel lines froze? Is that even a thing? hmmmm
I must admit I didn’t look at fuel flow, though I did keep a close eye on MP, and RPM, and saw nothing out of the ordinary. However I very quickly noticed how heavy the plane felt, and the reduction in performance requiring higher, and higher MP just to remain aloft.
I have no idea whether fuel lines can free, but I’m going to have a peek at the SDK now just in case that is documented.
Did you turn the propeller heat on? Propeller ice will kill your performance…
I did not, as I was testing what happens when you deliberately have no de-ice systems on, expecting to see the same lop-sided loss of performance or fuel flow, which never happened.
I turned on the de-icing systems, and performance recovered. The visual aspect of ice accretion needs a little work. There was next to no build-up on the windscreen yet performance was severely impacted, and there was no icing mesh visible on the exterior.
I’ve just been looking over icing in the SDK. I can see there are only three options available, and all three are set in the systems.cfg file:
[DEICE_SYSTEM]
structural_deice_type
structural_deice_rate
windshield_deice_rate
I didn’t find anything related in the flight_model.cfg, however looking over the SDK I can see there is a section that is absent, [FUEL_SYSTEM]. This section seems to allow for further fleshing out of the fuel system, enabling you to create a kind of block diagram of the fuel system, lines connecting component to component.
In theory you could enable locational damage. Say for example you had a very hard landing on one side. It looks like it would be possible to simulate having a fuel line on that side severed, simulating this by closing a virtual valve on that line, or by scripting the reduction in fuel quantity in that tank to simulate fuel loss.
I also noticed in the Line.N section the following:
FuelFlowAt1PSI
Perhaps it would be possible to simulate a damaged or iced line by reducing fuel flow on that line? It all looks really intriguing.
Sorry I’m late to the party @SinfulDanTheMan, but I notice in your screenshot here that you’ve got the throttles pegged and your manifold pressure is way up there at 41 inches. Whenever I’ve done this I eventually end up “damaging” the engines and lose a LOT of power and you can see the EGT in your guage isn’t even registering.
Try this flight again, but this time back the throttle off so you never leave the green line in your manifold pressure (leave it at about 35 inches). I think you’ll find that your engines are much happier there and will maintain power all the way up to higher altitudes.
1 Like
roger that will try
I hadn’t read that engine damage was modelled. I’m pretty sure I’ve left the throttles fully forward for extended periods without causing any damage. Do you have an idea of how long it would take to cause damage? I’m guessing really abusing them, by leaving the throttle fully forward then pulling back on the prop levers would accelerate this process?
I had no idea that damage was modeled on this one either. I don’t recall seeing anything about it in the manual.
Isn’t that a setting in MSFS options?
Those damage options I think end your flight with the black screen.
1 Like