The problem word is increase. If you increase the radius of something it gets bigger. No matter how you use the word increase it still incorrect. You reduce the radius I.e.make it smaller. You can’t make your turns tighter by increasing the radius.
4 Likes
I want a Stinson … just for the sound …
5 Likes
Right - incorrect application - increase the turn rate instead of radius maybe…it’s moot now as I have made the correction to the original post.
More coffee before writing first thing in the morning from now on
2 Likes
That’s a fabulous video… thanks so much for sharing!
Perfect touchdown: stall horn followed a tick later by tire squeal. Doesn’t get better than that! 
Actually, it does seem like a controller calibration issue. I’m using the Honeycomb Alpha yoke and have calibrated it with the default settings. This has worked well for every other aircraft I fly, including other Carenado planes. I can usually see that the yoke in the virtual cockpit is matching my Alpha movements pretty well. In the 170B, however, I find that the Alpha yoke must move much more to get a response from the virtual yoke. I have to peg the Alpha at full 90 degrees before the virtual yoke moves at all.
I could, of course, adjust the sensitivity settings for this aircraft, but I don’t want to ruin it for my other planes.
1 Like
I have found that linear sensitivity on the yoke does not translate to consistent linear movement on the virtual displayed yoke in any planes in the sim (certainly not in the 172, which displays a non-linear behavior).
I’ve optimized for comfortable flight characteristics over visual consistency, and linear has been fine for me in most planes including the 170B on the Honeycomb Alpha.
I haven’t noticed any aileron issues in the 170B, but on other planes like the Aerolite 103 with slowly responding ailerons, you get much better response by using the rudder and aileron together during turns.
1 Like
If the joystick is set to linear, the flight controls are linear as well.
The problem is the wrong yoke animation.
3 Likes
After working with it for another little while, I’ve found that the sim yoke matches the movements of the Alpha yoke pretty much as well as any other aircraft I’ve tried. It’s just that the 170B seems so much less responsive to aileron movement than any other plane its size–at least to me. It actually reminds me of the feeling of flying one of the airliners. I can certainly deal with this if it’s accurate to the real life plane. I’ll just have to get used to it. But I was just expecting it to feel more like the 172, or at least in between the 152 and 172. The 172 feels nimble as an XCub compared to the 170.
Again, that’s a bad idea for the above mentioned reason!
I’ve been away from the flight sim for 3-4 months now. I’m glad to see the Cessna 170B! I’ve been “flying” low and slow since late 2003. I see there are some other low & slow offerings that I’ll pick up also. Thanks Carenado!
2 Likes
Dears. Did any one of you is having problems with the temperature and a drained battery?
Just waiting for those things to be fixed in a patch I think, Carenado is aware of both issues.
2 Likes
Carenado makes good looking planes but the flight models are not that accurate, I fly a Cessna170 in real life and this one is not even close, feels so unrealistic makes me dont want to fly the Carenado 170.
Default FS2020 planes have a much better flight model than Carenado IMHO.
Hope someone can modify the FM, because graphically its pretty good.
Can you be specific? What things are wrong with the flight model?
1 Like
Since this is a marketplace-only release, user tweaks to the flight model are probably not possible.
Unverifiable internet criticisms aside though, I find this rendition of the 170B “believable” and enjoyable to fly, certainly a lot more character in the air than some of Carenado’s other products.
I think I have figured out why the 170 feels so longitudinally unresponsive to me. My honeycomb Alpha yoke has a turn radius of 90 degrees while the yoke of the 170B seems limited to 45 degrees. So I have to move the Alpha yoke twice as far for the same amount of turn! Once I got that figured out I could turn the plane normally, I just had to move my yoke a lot further to get the same turn radius.
This begs two questions:
- Am I correct about the 170B’s yoke turn radius?
- Why is the 170 the only plane in my hangar that behaves this way?
100% deflection on your yoke equals 100% deflection on the virtual yoke.
If the deflection range differs, there will be difference in movement between these limits.
Yoke design differs a lot IRL. Some yokes turn 45°, some 90° and some even 135°.
There is absolutely no yaw, you can turn it like a fighter .
In a 170 you have to initiate a turn with rudder or else the nose points to the opposite direction where you want to turn and becomes a very uncoordinated turn.
The L19 from Black Box simulation feels a lot more realistic.
Here is a video of me flying my 170, I am not a newbie flying simulators ,I helped A2A testing their 182 for Prepar 3D, been flying simulators for 30 years, even before real planes, have very good controls Precision Flight Controls and MFG pedals, just pointing out how this plane feels compared to real life, which to me it is disappointing sorry if this offends anyone.
9 Likes
Nice landings!.
Well, yes. That’s exactly what I am saying. My Honeycomb yoke is at 200% of the sim yoke’s deflection rate. That’s my problem.
I would like to hear from any other Honeycomb Alpha users who are successfully flying this aircraft. I don’t think it’s just me.