Does anyone know what the InitialPbh does? My guess is pitch, yaw and roll but in what order, I don’t know.
Oh yes you are right, thanks for pointing it out
In my original version, the seated position is alright but the yoke is slightly off
I’ve adjusted it to center the yoke while still having the full screen, and will upload to flightsim.to as version 1.1 soon
1 Like
Accelerated stalls seem to be off. I was climbing out following a DP that included a 30 degree bank turn and the airplane stalled at 184 KIAS. The 1g stall speed should have been about 114.2 KIAS for this configuration. At 30 degrees bank we will use a simplified 1.2gs and using the formula of SQRT of the load factor times the stall speed puts the stall speed at 30 degrees bank at about 125 KIAS. Even if you add in turbulence effect and asymmetric lift the stall speed at 30 degrees bank should not have been anywhere close to 184KIAS. I am not sure if this can be fixed in the mod or if this is something hard coded by Asobo.
I’d recommend the Blackout (v1.1) livery… but I’m a bit biased since I made it 
. Other than my own and the default, the only other one I really like is the N233CL, which is just an white/black/blue alternate color scheme to the original. And I agree… airliner liveries on corporate jets just don’t look right lol.
1 Like
Did the plane exhibit stall behavior or did you just get the “stall” audible warning?
You’ll get the audible warning sometimes in those situations if you arm the auto throttle and are well over your set speed (that’s the only time I’ve gotten it). If that’s what you did and your throttle cut to idle, you’ll get the audible warning. If you don’t turn the target speed up to 250 (or above whatever you’re indicated is), you’ll stall pretty quickly in a 30 degree bank w/ no thrust.
Stall warning since you do not want to do full aerodynamics stalls in aircraft with rear-mounted engines. The real jet is equipped with a stick pusher to keep you out of deep stall territory.
From AOPA:
The Longitude has overspeed and underspeed envelope protection, but no overbank countermeasures. When power is pulled back to idle, the nose lowers and the ATs spool up the engines just as airspeed bleeds off into the low-airspeed alert bands. Dive the airplane, and the ATs reduce power and the nose pitches up. As for stall protection, there’s a stick shaker/pusher system. If you somehow ignore the shaker—hard to do, because it physically shakes the control yoke—the pusher will automatically, and aggressively, force the nose to a lower angle of attack before the stall can occur.
Since none of the protections are built-in by Asobo I choose not to push it. As soon as the first indication of prestall activated, I executed a stall recovery.
Love the mod, one question - occasionally AT gets suck on and the force disconnect doesn’t work. Is there something I’m missing, or is this just an inhenherent bug with MFS (787 used to have this same bug)?
This has nothing to do with the engine location, but the T-tail configuration.
1 Like
I can’t say I’ve encountered this issue before but one thing is this: when you disconnect the AT, although it’s disconnected, the speed will be maintained because the thrust levers are at the exact spot that’s commanding the set speed (remember the thrust levers are motorized like in the Boeings). Another factor is where your physical throttles are. So what I do is, say for instance during an approach:
-
First of all, I move my physical throttles to a lower position than the current speed,
-
Close to the threshold, say around 100+ feet, I disconnect the AT but I don’t move my physical throttle(s).
-
As I pass the threshold, I move my physical throttles to idle.
The key is to not retard your throttles entirely until you’ve disconnected AT, otherwise it’ll maintain the speed after you’ve passed the threshold, and you’d need to move it forward and back = floating. On the other hand, you don’t want to have your physical throttles say at 70% when you disconnect AT, or else when you finally want to retard them to idle, there would be an instant spike in speed before reduction, causing you again to float.
1 Like
T-Tail and the weight of the engines aft are the two most common components. King Airs have had T tails since the early 70s and due to their wing-mounted engines are not suspectable to deep stalling. (According to Beechcraft Test Pilot reports.) The DC-9 (among others at the time) were the kings of the deep stall and was the airplane that led to the innovation of the stick shaker and stick pusher after a number of aircraft entered locked-in deep stalls. Hawkers and Falcons do not have T-tails but mid-mounted tails, yet they are susceptible to deep stalling. The F-16 has a conventional tail and a big heavy engine in the back and is also susceptible to deep stalling.
I know that aviation literature has blamed the T-tail for decades to the point that if it has a T-tail it is deep stall susceptible, but like many things in aerodynamics, it is an oversimplification. There is more to it than just simply having a T-tail. But, IMHO having aft-mounted engines do seem to be the more susceptible so while I would (and have done) full stalls all day long in a King Air, I won’t touch them in most Biz jets.
But, I am just a Part 142 UPRT Instructor and not an NTPS graduate so I suggest doing your own reading on the subject. 
1 Like
A straight wing turboprop and a swept wing jet don’t have a lot in common, especially not when it’s about stalling.
Furthermore engine location (hopefully!) doesn’t have anything to do with CG.
E.g. the MD87 is a very nose heavy aircraft.
All single engine jets have “the heavy engine in the back”.
On the F-16 it’s the deliberately reduced longitudinal stability and the aft CG which can cause problems if you really screw up. (Hence the F-16 pilots mantra ‘Don’t assault the limiters’).
Were have you got this info from? Dassault was always proud about the high aerodynamic qualities of their aircraft and at least the older ones 10, 20, 50 only have conventional stall warnings.
Quote from a Falcon 20 PIREP:
The Falcon 20 gives you plenty of aerodynamic warning and, like other Falcons, it does not have, need or require a stick shaker or pusher of any kind.
The stall characteristics of the Falcon 20 are excellent—it is even more docile than a Cessna 172.
1 Like
In SU4 Asobo modified the aoa / lift coefficients to produce the synthesized stalling behaviors more readily (earlier onset and more pronounced stall simulation). It seems from my limited testing that the stall behavior is similar or same for most or all aircraft in the game - although I’m happy to have someone check me on that. So a Cessna 172 stalls like an Airbus or a King Air. I don’t think they have asymmetric lift and aircraft specific stalling behavior modeled. Anyway, on top of this they apparently also modified the behavior of that same table to produce a more direct connection between aoa/lift and induced drag. I suspect this change may also had an effect on when an aircraft reaches its simulated stall limit. Previously I had made some changes to Longitude to try to create an actual stall behavior if it was flown too far into the high aoa region and this may now be causing stalls to happen at unreasonably high speeds or low angles of attack. At some point I can take a look at this.
Is there any key to save the VR default view? I can move left/right/up/down/forwards/backwards, but all that is reset as soon as I recenter. Thanks anyone. I know this is not the forum but just in case anyone here knows.
I would like to try on appropriate margin of stalling.
Do you suggest a approx benchmark?
I remember people in other forum is saying Longitude should have 135kt IAS at touchdown (50% payload) and it should be fine.
Or if I get stalled at 125 or something that would be considered too early?
50% Payload or 50% fuel? The Vref (and other Vspeeds) is calculated using the entire weight of the aircraft, including fuel, which is not part of the payload.
So, the highest Vref for the Longitude is 125 and corresponding Vapp is 137 and that’s with the maximum landing weight of 33,500 lbs.
Weight VAPP/VREF
23.5k 113/104
25.5k 118/108
27.5k 123/112
29.5k 128/116
31.5k 133/121
33.5k 137/125
3 Likes
Thanks, I will tune my landing weight for trying out the Vapp / Vref.
One side note, after SU4, I see cloud layer (not just precipitation) is now making significant engine power drop than those days before SU4. That in live weather it is more easy to get into stalling.
Just in case you don’t have the takeoff V-Speeds, here they are too:
Weight V1/VR/V2/VFTO (TFL = Takeoff Field Length (Runway length required for TO))
24-28k, 99/103/117/185 (>4000)
28-32k, 109/112/124/185 (>4700)
32-33.5k 114/115/126/185 (>5000)
33.5-36.5k 121/122/131/185 (>5800)
36.5-39.5k 128/128/137/185 (>7100)
2 Likes
All. I know my own Longitude mod forum probably isn’t the place to discuss another aircraft, least of all a military fast jet, but I’ve been involved for the past few months in a project to bring the F-22A Raptor to MSFS 2020, in particular because part of the development effort has involved creating a simulated fly by wire control system for the simulator to provide control system limits for pitch, G-force, roll, yaw, and to an extent, AoA, to mimic the F-22 (and other modern fly by wire aircraft) control systems, within the challenging limits imposed by the sim engine. This is brand new stuff and I’ve been excited to participate in this project. If you want a little break from flying your well heeled passengers in the Longitude and want a fun, fast, flight of fancy, come check out this all new aircraft model for the MSFS2020.
7 Likes