Can we have a manual for how to trim this thing and how the ballonet system is supposed to work?
Before SU2 the Skyship was too heavy and now after the update its too light (it even floats away in the main menu).
Its become impossible to land.
1 Like
Hey so I popped back on here after being gone for a good while with the update making the Skyship too heavy.
I was relieved to see that you were saying it to light now, atleast they’ve done something lol.
The easiest fix i found for this is to double check in the efb before you spawn in that your fuel is at 100% instead of 50%
All that extra fuel kept me from floating away and I just had a good hour flight.
I need to check out all the changes they have made now that somethings operate very different from the original launch skyship.
But it is great to see that it is working again.
Thanks for leaving a comment because I wouldn’t have bothered logging on had I not know there were any changes!
Happy flying!
1 Like
I’ve had some luck figuring out post-update trim. The post-update default weights are definitely a bit light, but if you fill the tanks it seems to work out as KuhlBrieze suggests.
I’ve been able to get ballonet pitch control to work to some extent with both dampers in auto. In cruise it seems to be sometimes necessary to close the damper of the end you want to rise (closing the rear damper to nose down, closing the forward damper to nose up, while also operating the valves the way you would before SU1. I have not yet had any luck operating it in accordance to the checklists that have been posted here. I’m still not completely clear on how involved ballonet trim is meant to be during real operation, but in-sim I haven’t had much luck flying with aerodynamic trim alone. Overall it seems like ballonet trim is both most effective and most important at low speeds. Over 30-40 knots I’ve had the best luck running with all valves and dampers auto. Below 30 knots, level flight has usually involved leaving one of the middle air valves in the open position but the dampers both auto.
Hopefully this aircraft keeps getting some love. I’d also really like to see some documentation on building airships in the SDK. Aerostatics were the feature I was most excited for in 2024; there’s never really been an airship sim before.
2 Likes
Here’s a work-in-progress shot of a Skyship livery - coming soon-ish!
Edit: am away for a few days. I’ll get it finished once I’m back!
7 Likes
OK here’s the Fujifilm Skyship 600 livery. I’m battling issues with being unable to properly remove dynamic registration numbers in MSFS 2024, but there IS a workaround as described in the 2nd image of the fs.to page. I’ll hopefully find a better solution for that soon. Edit: found a workaround and uploaded fixed livery version 1.0.1!
https://flightsim.to/file/95949/asobo-skyship-600-fujifilm-n602sk
5 Likes
This is fantastic, thank you!
Think you can make this one next?
1 Like
This is really beautiful work. It’s perfect really. I grew up seeing this one all the time in NY. AT the beach or the park or just while driving. The good old days when you would also see the old goodyear, budweiser, and gulf blimp from time to time. Bravo Bravo Bravo. You put in hard work here.
2 Likes
Thanks for the kind words. It was quite the learning curve since it required an all-new (to me) technique for livery creation; using mesh decal materials instead of texture images. Essentially using vectors rather than bitmaps so it stays sharp at any zoom level. Otherwise I’d have probably needed VRAM-killing high res texture images since the airship envelope is so big.
The only exception here is the fan housings which are still bitmap textures for the time being.
It’s always fun learning a new skiil! 
2 Likes
I still don’t understand what the dampers actually do.
It’s ludicrous that they put this in the sim without an instruction manual. In fact, it’s worse than ludicrous, it’s insulting.
Does anyone have any video tutorial on flying this other than P Gatcomb (who I don’t watch on principle because he so often just gets things wrong and is impossible to follow)?
As someone who grew up playing flight sims with thick manuals it doesn’t surprise me given the digital age we live in now.
It doesn’t have to be a paper one, a digital one will do. I can understand it for planes that are similar to other planes, e.g. if you know how to operate the C172 you probably don’t need a manual to figure out the PA-28 Dakota. But for a singular aircraft that doesn’t operate anything like any other in the sim, it’s disgusting.
1 Like
That isn’t necessarily true. Disgusting? Not really in my opinion. A bit dramatic to think. Again we live in a digital age where this information can be found so easily (and recently AI has made this nearly effortless) which is why I think that drumming up manuals is slowly becoming a thing of the past. When the information can be found so easily elsewhere it’s just not worth the effort.
1 Like
I agree that “disgusting” is a bit overkill verbiage, but the sim shouldn’t have to send people off to find manuals that often don’t exist, or are behind paywalls, or that don’t match the exact aircraft type. At least not for stock aircraft, and doubly so for ones that are so unique that nobody really has an operations schema.
1 Like
If it would be so easy then why doesn’t Asobo deliver us these information? Furthermore, real world docs often don’t help for aircraft with incomletely modeled systems (that means virtually all). Some definitive information about how to handle the simulated functions is mandatory.
2 Likes
Good point regarding systems that aren’t modeled. That often renders a real-world manual moot, at least to a certain extent. Knowing or discerning where that line is can be the toughest part, especially if your sim experience is limited and/or your sim persuasions are of the more casual variety.
I said it’s so easy to find this information online. I didn’t say that it would be easy for Asobo to create and maintain them. People create and update / revise how-to guides all the time for the flight sim community so why would Asobo bother? That’s just my take on it. Anyway, I digress.
That seems to be the point of this sidebar: what ever happened to game developers providing their own instructions? That it’s being left to the community to do so, especially when there are so many variables hidden away and unexplained, is kind of annoying.
Perhaps it’s hard for folks to see this issue with “new eyes,”meaning how it looks to the uninitiated. You and I have been simming for a long time and we’re used to finding information; not just that, but good information. Some people don’t even know the terminology to look up, but but knowing what information should be rejected is almost more important than knowing what should be asked to begin with.
Consider those just starting out and being left to their own devices (or being subjected to the wide range of opinions here and in other fora). I can see how it can be really frustrating, and it’s a shame that’s the case.
1 Like
I’m not opposed to the idea at all. It just doesn’t surprise me that one isn’t included. I’ve bought games online that had no manual included and I’m left having to look online for information.
It’s silly we are even debating whether or not a developer’s product should come with instructions.
Pure 100% Lack of Care and Attention.
2 Likes
I’d love to see the developers flying this thing.
2 Likes