SOH P-61 project

**fliger747** · October 9th, 2010, 15:50

Prop gear ratio should be 2.0...... Now getting the correct possible prop speeds, but engine power is something like 4200 hp.............

Standard low speed theory limit for FS seems to usually be 80.... Have had good luck with this value. Beta Min value is typically around 17-18 or so, never seen it zero before.

Still think the MOI for the props is way too high, perhaps by half an order of magnitude.

Nose strut could be a bit stiffer.......

As someone pointed out, Two steps forward and one step back is still a step forward. We'll get there.............. T

**warchild** · October 9th, 2010, 23:20

Please forgive me, but on top of several other things happening today, ilearned that a close friend was killed this afternoon while riding his bike.. I may not be around for a couple days.. My aplogies..
Pam

**warchild** · October 10th, 2010, 18:08

I'm chasing several holy grails here, but the main one is maintaing a top end speed and gaining the ability to slow down.. I've come kinda close in this release, but i'm not fully happy yet...

Other changes in this release..

Prop MOI recalculated for an 864 pound four blade propeller..
Prop tables re calibrated for higher rpm and less torque
rudder effectiveness vs mach was made smoother
elevator effectiveness vs mach calibrated for more of a smooth curve.
engine mechanical efficiency and friction tables were adjusted to allow for a 350 mph top end while providing enough friction to slow down in a reasonable amount of time..
all other elements stay the same..
trust me, your gonna like it

..
Pam

**GT182** · October 11th, 2010, 16:09

I've just seen this thread on you guys doing a P-61 for FSX..... congrats.

As most might not know, MAAM's P-61 had it's tail booms on as of June's WWII Weekend. As to how much has happened since, I've no idea as I haven't been up to the museum since then. I do know that Bill Rambow is planning on doing a P-61 for MAAM Sim, but as to when that will start I don't know. The last I asked him about it he said in the future. I do know that can't do any sounds work until their 61 is flyable, and that's a ways down the road. They still need their one and only engine rebuilt, and they need find another one for her.

FYI, she now sits outside under her own enclosed canopy. She can no longer fit in the hangar with the B-25, Avenger, and the rest of the aircraft.

**warchild** · October 11th, 2010, 16:39

All my opes, and fears are riding on the MAAm p-61.. We intend to make this version we are doing, the most accurate version of any plane done in FSX.. Gods know we're putting the effort and skill into it.. MAAM's P-61 will become the only flyable P-61 in the world, and i'm hoping i'm still around to see it.. Therein lay all my fears.. Yeah sure we have documentation, but a lot of stuff has to be extrapolated from pilot reports and stories and third party hearsay. and then theres the limitations that come with FSX, shich we've butted against at every turn for the last month.. i want this plane of ours to fly identically to the real P-61, but until MAAM's is flying, there's no way to tell..

**warchild** · October 11th, 2010, 16:52

Ok.. I gotta ask..GT182?? is that the Nine 0 nines or the Belle next to that goat???

**GT182** · October 11th, 2010, 18:27

No it's not 9O9, it is Memphis Belle. And I must tell you the truth Pam, it's the movie Memphis Belle, not the real one.

Actually the real Belle is being restored but will never fly again. She will be permanently on static display, but hopefully inside of a museum. And I think Bob Morgan would like that.

**warchild** · October 11th, 2010, 19:22

I agree. I think he would too

.. And that lady earned her rest the hard way..

**N2056** · October 11th, 2010, 19:43

This week I shifted to doing some external mapping. The focus is on the left fuselage boom, which should be easily cloned to the right boom which will have it's own texture sheet. This is still very much W.I.P. I'm trying to get something together so our painters can get to work.

Attachment 21160 Attachment 21161

**stansdds** · October 12th, 2010, 02:09

That is really looking nice.

**jimjones** · October 12th, 2010, 03:47

Originally Posted by stansdds

That is really looking nice.

Agreed.

***jankees*** · October 12th, 2010, 03:49

I'm sharpening my brushes....

**James** · October 12th, 2010, 03:53

WOW. Looks great everybody. Is it going to be freeware, donationware, or what?

**peter12213** · October 12th, 2010, 05:39

Its really good watching and following you pro's at work sharing your problems and solutions it's really interesting! This also is really starting to look nice and I'm looking forward to flying her!

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 09:08

Thanks Peter, and everyone.. There are a few issues with getting fsx to read out exact horsepower that Fliger is working on with me at the moment, but her general behavior in the air reminds me of something like a big cat or an eagle. She's effortless, and yet, she'll do anything you ask her too with such ease and grace. Roberts work speaks for itself. The Pics dont really do it justice.. he hasnt shown you the inside yet. Your gonna love it.. He's got the chromium oxide paint matched almost perfectly. Thats something i havent seen in any other model.. Pretty soon David will be able to come on board and work with Robert. I'm not sure how they'll figure out who's doing what, but I would trust both with my life, and the plane is certainly one of those that has enough work for everyone to keep busy.
Once Robert has the base textures done, I'll turn Jankees and Butch Loose on them. I'm hoping Butch is still interested. He's the worlds very best on shadowing and detail.. I wish we could get Gizmo to do the normals. With those three people, this plane would be incredible. As is even with only Jankees and Butch its going to be very very awesome..

In answer to the query above about freeware or payware. The plane will be donationware to support SOH. But, dont let any preconceptions cloud your thinking. Every single one of the core team is obsessed with the P-61. Its not just a plane. We each are taking extra steps above and beyond anything we've ever done to ensure that this model is the most accurate and complete plane anyone has seen. Hell, we even have buffeting in the flight model, and we havent done any systems programming yet. The effort though very much parralels the story of the seven blind men and the elephant. There just isnt enough data to form a complete picture, so each person is working on a specialized area. Roberts got the gauges and systems along with David, Fligers an expert on the R-2800 series of radials, Jankees has been doing research and colletion of as much information on the paints as possible, and I've been focusing on control surfaces and flight characteristics, interfacing with Fliger where those characteristics meet up with the powerplant, and generally making sure that all the pieces of the elephant come together to form an accurate picture.. :;chuckles:: That accuracy is a B**tch. It's the force driving every single one of us. Sometimes we have different means of obtaining it, and sometimes, there are disagreements, but its all because we each very much care about this plane, and we each have our own very unique ways of achieving that accuracy that sometimes collide with another members ideas about how to achieve it. But as long as we keep in mind it's the plane that counts, and we've been pretty good about that so far, we'll give you a product unlike anything youve experienced before. And i say that with all confidence. I'll put my professional reputation behind those words. Its the only thing i have, and not something i would risk for anything.
I'm "hoping" for a release date somewhere around February or March, but i'm not guaranteeing anything there. i wont push my team beyond their abilities. They each and every one of them know exactly what they're doing, and know how long they'll need.
I HAVE had this insane idea however. I've been thinking about converting one of our B models to a C and using it to chase all these P-38's in the upcoming race, so we can have pictures this year.. I need to work that out with the organizers though..
Stay tuned into this thread

.. theres lots more coming up..
Pam

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 09:25

Originally Posted by peter12213

Its really good watching and following you pro's at work sharing your problems and solutions it's really interesting! This also is really starting to look nice and I'm looking forward to flying her!

Hey Peter?? Wanna be a Test pilot?? Your a straight up kinda guy, and i need that. Fliger and I are both looking at numbers, comparing datum, matching performance values with known data, and we may be seeing things though our own pre-conceptions and ideals. I'd really like it if you would test this thing and give us your objective opinion on it.. We need someone who can shred it till it cant be shred any more..
Whatta ya say??

Pam

**fliger747** · October 12th, 2010, 12:38

I am sure that the racer bunch would like a C model.

Here is the chart for the R2800-10W as used in the F6F, esentially the same series of engine as in the P-61.

Shows HP vrs MP/RPM and altitude.

T

**peter12213** · October 12th, 2010, 13:39

Originally Posted by warchild

Hey Peter?? Wanna be a Test pilot?? Your a straight up kinda guy, and i need that. Fliger and I are both looking at numbers, comparing datum, matching performance values with known data, and we may be seeing things though our own pre-conceptions and ideals. I'd really like it if you would test this thing and give us your objective opinion on it.. We need someone who can shred it till it cant be shred any more..
Whatta ya say??

Pam

I'd love to Pam, it would be a pleasure! :salute:

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 14:00

welll, it would have to be C conversion. There's enough differences between the panel for the B and C models that it may as well be a whole new plane.. On the exterior, the only real difference is in the cooling vents below the cowling, but internally they are quite a bit different..

Fortunately, the C and F-15 had the same speed range..

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 14:05

Originally Posted by peter12213

I'd love to Pam, it would be a pleasure! :salute:

Thanks Pete.. Just sent a PM

..

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 14:10

Ok.. I just uploaded the sound files i'm using at the moment.. These are not going to be the sound files we use for the release however.. They're simply better than the ones that we started out with.
Feel free to use them or not. They came from the freeware sound files for a B-17.
Pam

**Pips** · October 12th, 2010, 16:59

I have to say that this project is easily the most fascinating one I've have the privilege to watch.
The painstaking attention to detail, the constant searching of information sources, the obvious luv for the aeroplane ....... and all played out in front of us. Shows the best in enthusiasm for this sim of ours.

Any time you guys come up with something new on the performance or specs of the P-61 (or even just clarifying points) I pull out my bible on American fighters - that wonderful tome "American's Hundred Thousand" - and make additions to the relevent section.

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 18:00

AHT.. The sacred boat anchor.. err, ship anchor ::lol;; That is one of our primary sourcces of information, and i'm glad its there.. other sources we use come from authrs around the world and pilots stories. The stories are actually sometimes the easuest to pull information from as they dont change much from one pilot to the next.. Numbers are harder.. Each "authority" has their own set.. That means that either the FAA, The Army or Pratt & Whitney are wrong. we just dont know which one.. Its sparked a few discussions amongst team members..

no worries, there'll be plenty more coming..

**warchild** · October 12th, 2010, 23:25

Originally Posted by fliger747

I am sure that the racer bunch would like a C model.

Here is the chart for the R2800-10W as used in the F6F, esentially the same series of engine as in the P-61.

Shows HP vrs MP/RPM and altitude.

T

Yup.. I'm using the chart to calculate the results of our current settings and they're a little high..
I'm getting 32 inches of MP at 2250 RPM at 34000 ft. That doesnt translate.. At least not according to the chart.. at 34000 feet we sould be down to 28 inches on manifold at 785 HP at that rpm. So yeah, we're a little high there.. balancing out the prop tables though to get that 366 mph top end is gonna be a real pain though.. fun fun fun ::LOL::..

PS. i wouldnt mind a C model myself.. Those under the cowl scoops are downright sexy

.. It ocured to me today just how at home the P-61 would look in with a flight of B-17s.. It has the same posture and attitude ( appearance wise ).. It would disappear in a flight of B-25s, it's the same size kinda.. She's just a big beautiful brute of a plane..