Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'l1011'.
Found 4 results
-
Hello! I downloaded a few Ruth/Cantu L-1011 repaints from https://library.avsim.net/search.php?SearchTerm=ruth+tristar&CatID=fsxacrp&Go=Search In the instructions, it never says which model should I use the textures on. I downloaded the "original" with the LTU repaint. (https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/4478/fsx-ltu-lockheed-l1011/) It doesn't work correctly, the textures I downloaded from Avsim are way darker than they should be (see screenshot) Then I downloaded the "FSX/P3D/FS2004 Lockheed L1011-1 Tristar FSX Native Base Pack" from Simviation. The textures are completely black this time I really don't know what to do now. Which model should I use for success? Maybe I misunderstood something, but I hope somebody can help me here. Thanks in advance! -CsCsanad
-
Lockheed L-1011Publisher: Captain SimReview Author: Meng YuSuggested Price: $39.99/images/fsc/wbicons/pilot-shop-buy.pngFrom the opening scene in "Lost" tothe movie "Passenger 57", the Lockheed L-1011 has seen its share ofrepresentation in popular culture. Yet, such representations don'tnearly do enough justice as to how intricate an aircraft the L-1011really is. The L-1011 represents Lockheed's last ventures into the commercialaviation market, following iconic airliners such as the Constellationand L-188 Electra. Dubbed the "TriStar", it was arguably one of themost advanced airliners of its time, and the first to be certified forILS Cat IIIc operations, allowing the TriStar fly in zero visibilityconditions. Whilst taxiing in zero visibility may prove...interestingfor the pilots, as an auto-taxiing system was curiously not installedin the TriStar, this certification does illustrate the technologicalmarvels the engineers at Lockheed were able to accomplish. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext1__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext1__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext1__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext1__4_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext1__5_.jpg Alas, for all the technological accomplishments, only 250 exampleswere constructed (compared to 446 DC-10s built). This was due in partto developmental issues surrounding the Rolls Royce RB-211 engines,with Rolls Royce almost going bankrupt during development. By the timeLockheed considered switching to a more basic General Electric engine,it was too late as the TriStar's airframe has already been configuredto accept RB 211s. As a result, Lockheed lost many potential customersfor the Tristar to the DC-10, and only eight planes remain operationaltoday. However, thanks to the wonders of flight simulation, we are able toexperience flying this aircraft with this Captain Sim add-on. Eventhough it may be slightly dated, it remains as one of the fewrepresentations of the TriStar currently available and on first look,arguably the best looking. InstallationHaving gotten the product from theFS Pilot Shop,installation was rather straightforward: download a zip file, unpackit and follow the installer's instructions. Owners of previous CaptainSim products will find this process highly familiar as the installerisn't all that different from that of other products, such as their737 and 757. If you're unable to connect to the internet using the system you'reinstalling the L-1011 Captain on, Captain Sim has an offlineactivation featurehere,though this process may be slightly troublesome as it would involvetransferring a text file between two computers. Nonetheless, it'sgreat that a solution is available to users should they encounterissues with their internet connection. ExteriorUpon installing the aircraft, it may be found under themanufacturer "Lockheed" or publisher "Captain Sim", with uniformthumbnails showing which livery they represent. Captain Sim hasincluded eleven liveries, including two Air Canada ones. Airlinesrepresented by these liveries include British Airways, Delta, AllNippon Airways and Cathay Pacific. Should your favorite airline notbe represented in this selection, Captain Sim promises over 49 freeliveries(found here),which are well hidden on Captain Sim's web site. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/liveries__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/liveries__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/liveries__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/liveries__4_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/liveries__5_.jpg Some of the liveries that come bundled withthe L-1011 Captain. The L-1011 Captain features the initial production model (L-1011-1)of the L-1011, and includes a myriad of animations, ranging from thenose cone down to the engine cowlings. Captain Sim has also includedemergency escape slides should you be feeling adventurous or simply"land" yourself in a sticky situation. Moreover, Captain Sim has alsogone to the lengths to model black smoke for the TriStar's engines,which I'm tempted to argue is an accurate representation of just howenvironmentally friendly the TriStar really was. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext2-1.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext2-2.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext2-3.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext2-4.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/ext2-5.jpg More external views of the L-1011. Note theblack smoke on takeoff.Besides the fluff, we still retain the basic animations includingwing flex, wingtip vortices and of course, the flight attendant that'spresent on all of Captain Sim's airliners, with an added bonus ofremovable pilot models. All in all, I'd say that Captain Sim hasreally put the choice in your hands with however you want your planeto look, leaving no detail to spare. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/anim-1__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/anim-1__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/anim-1__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/anim-1__4_.jpg Animations on the starboard and port sides ofthe aircraft....and a shot of Captain Sim's flightattendant.All textures on the aircraft are also in 4x resolution, wherebythey are "four times as high as regular high resolution textures",according to Captain Sim. In the simulator, this grants the user somewonderful eye candy and ensures that the textures remain sharp evenwhen zooming into the minute details that Captain Sim has includedwith the exterior model. The high quality textures also allow the useof aircraft views, of which Captain Sim has provided several, to be anenjoyable experience, with no pixilation in my experience. One issue I did face though, was the comparatively limited numbersof liveries of this particular add-on compared to other Captain Simadd-ons. However, I do agree that one issue with recreating anaircraft that saw limited production and use by limited airlines doesresult in, well, limited liveries. Additionally, the free liveries onCaptain Sim's web site do augment the included liveries very well. Additionally, the virtual cabin is also modelled. Upon zooming intothe aircraft when in the exterior view, one can observe the cabinthrough the windows. Some passengers stare at you, others seem to beminding their own business. This provides additional realism comparedto other add-ons which simple feature a fully textured window insteadof modelling the cabin. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/cabin-1.jpg The cabin as viewed from the entrance.However, such eye candy inevitably takes its toll on performance ofthe product. With my laptop, I was able to achieve an average of about28 fps with the aircraft using default scenery. For a computer thatwas originally purchased in 2012 as a last-generation model, I'd saythat frame rates are rather acceptable, and those with more powerfulcomputers should have no issue with obtaining much higher frames thanI have. InteriorThe aircraft continues to impress when stepping into the interior,with excellent visuals and additional quirks. As owners of otherCaptain Sim products will surely know, the cockpit of Captain Simaircraft typically have clickable miscellaneous items. In this case,this includes interactive armrests, adjustable seat height(unfortunately this does not appear to have any effect on theviewpoint) and sun visors. One point to note is that clicking theemergency exit hatch from within the cockpit somehow opens the mainpassenger door instead. Upon opening the emergency hatch using theanimation control panel, clicking the now open hatch still toggles themain passenger door. I believe this to be a bug with the aircraft. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/extras__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/extras__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/extras__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/extras__4_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/extras__5_.jpg From maps to moving seats and even an escapehatch....that controls the passenger door?Various lighting options also allow the user to customize howtheir cockpit will look when flying at night, with options forinstrument lights, glare-shield lights or overhead domelighting. Textures in the virtual cockpit are once again of very highresolution, which is handy when transitioning to the aircraft as youare able to read the labels on every switch. Unfortunately though,documents on the engineer's table are not readable, as are thereference information on the cockpit door. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__4_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__5_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/lighting__6_.jpg The cockpit at night... you can make howeverbright, dim or red you like!Beyond the visuals, Captain Sim has created a suite of customgauges, including a fully functioning engineer's panel, which reallyallows the pilot to have an understanding just how complicated anaircraft the L-1011 really is. Included in the package is also a fullyfunctioning autopilot, with autoland capability, much like the realTriStar does. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/interior-1.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/interior-2.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/interior-3.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/interior-4.jpg The beautiful interior of the L-1011TriStar.The cockpit also features a fully functioning Inertia NavigationSystem (INS), allowing for navigation using GPS waypoints. However, Ido find it somewhat disappointing that Captain Sim has not published acomprehensive tutorial for the INS, as this is a somewhat difficultsystem to utilize for newer users and an integral part of makingflights with the add-on. A Captain Sim exclusive feature is that of the weather radar,positioned to the left of the captain's dashboard and the right of thefirst officer's. This appears to be a similar, if not the same, gaugeto theCaptain Sim - Weather Radaradd-on, available in the FS Pilot Shop for 15 dollars. Due to systemperformance reasons, I was only able to test the weather radar ratherbriefly, but the weather radar does indeed work, although it has tofirst be switched on using the controls on the center console, beforethe pilot range knobs have any effect. Personally, I find such afeature a neat add-on that distinguishes this L-1011 product from theothers. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/wxradar-1.jpg The weather radar that comes with the L-1011Captain.A feature that some may find disappointing is the omission of avirtual cabin, unlike on add-ons such as the 767 Captain. Whilst it istrue that the loss of such a feature does bar the user from performingcertain actions such as playback of a landing using the interior view,I feel that the loss of this feature many not be a deal breaker formany, as the efforts of the development team can now focus on morepertinent components, bringing overall development costs down. Additionally, I wish there was a panel state control utility andfuel management utility directly in the simulator. Currently, the onlyway to obtain a cold and dark panel is to load one of Captain Sim'sprovided flights, which spawns you in at Seattle Tacoma airport'srunway in the old Air Canada livery. Fuel is managed via the defaultFSX or P3D fuel load manager, which can be confusing as the number 2tanks in the FCOM below are simply represented by "External 1" and"External 2". Whilst somewhat functional, this method seems rathercrude, and the need to reload the simulator to both relocate to anappropriate airport and switch to a desired livery is quite asignificant bit of trouble to go through, especially for a 40 dollarproduct. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/fcom-1.jpg Tank 1 and 3 are labelled "Left" and "Right"respectively, whilst the 4 tanks (2L (I), 2L(O), 2R (I) and 2R (O))are labelled "External 1" and "External 2".All things considered, I feel that the Captain Sim development teamhas done a great job with the virtual cockpit, being able to achieve abalance between comprehensiveness and performance, whilst not skimpingat all on minor details, including the audio test panel, and variouslighting options. Whilst the omission of a virtual cabin may beoff-putting to some, I personally feel that this was a correctdecision on the part of Captain Sim, as this allows for betterperformance and allows for lowered costs on the final product. Infact, despite being roughly seven years older than the 767 Captain (whichdoes include a complete virtual cabin), the L-1011 Captain stillmanages to beat the 767 Captain in terms of price. Flight DynamicsCorrectly modelling the flight dynamics on an FSX add-on is arguablythe most important and arduous task. In this case, the Captain Simdevelopers likely faced even greater challenges considering thecomplexity of the systems on the L-1011, coupled with the severelylimited numbers of operational L-1011s. In an interview with thedevelopers, a Captain Sim representative has stated that they heavilyutilized aircraft manuals, videos as well as ex-TriStar pilots to helpthem accurately model the flight dynamics of this aircraft. To test the systems and flight dynamics, I took the aircraft on atest flight around Hong Kong International airport (VHHH). As per the manual,I accelerated to approximately 180 knots (V2 + 20, using an assumed V2speed of 160 knots) to 1000 feet, then used the autopilot's verticalspeed mode to accelerate to 240 knots (V2 +70) whilst climbing at arate of 1000 feet per minute. Upon reaching 240 knots, I switched tothe autopilot's IAS mode, which pitches the nose to climb at a presetspeed. At this time, the autothrottles remain off, and climb power wasused. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/climbout__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/climbout__2_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/climbout__3_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/climbout__4_.jpg The L-1011 in all her smoky glory...This rate of climb was maintained until 3000 feet AGL, whereby thevertical speed mode was used to accelerate to 250 knots, after whichthe IAS mode was used once again. I climbed to an altitude ofapproximately 10,000 feet where I used the heading mode on theautopilot to make a series of turns to line back up with therunway. During descent, the vertical speed mode on the autopilot was usedonce again, until the point of approach, where the A/L mode wasarmed. The aircraft was able to capture the glideslope and theautopilot entered the "alpha" mode, which sets the VREF speedautomatically and slows down to it. The Direct Lift Control (DLC) system was also seen in action as theflaps were lowered beyond 33 degrees, with the spoiler panels 1through 4 raising to 7 degrees up, as per the flight crew operatingmanual of the L-1011. Upon proper configuration of the aircraft forlanding, I simply sat back and watched the TriStar gracefully landitself on the runway. After touchdown, the spoilers automaticallyextend fully up as per the Auto Ground Spoilers (AGS) system, with theautoflight system aligning the plane with the centerline of therunway. The autothrottle system also automatically disconnects, andreverse thrust can be manually applied. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/dlc__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/dlc__3_.jpg The Direct Lift Control system inaction, note the deployed spoilers. The FCOM page outlines the spoilernumbers circled in red.Upon slowing down, I took over manual control of the aircraft, andtaxied off the runway. Spoiler panels 1 through 4 do not retract untilthe flaps are raised to below 30 degrees, a phenomenon corroborated byvarious videos of landing TriStars. The spoiler panels in the videosclearly depict the spoiler panels remaining in the up position untilthe TriStar exits the runway. I later retried the landing manually, a rather difficult feat. TheDLC system does take some getting used to, and the L-1011 requirescontinuous pilot input to stay on the glideslope and to keep theaircraft above stall. The reduced pitch movements due to DLC alsocauses pilots new to the aircraft to over-control the aircraft onapproach. Unlike modern airliners too, the aircraft seems to have alonger delay between advancing the throttles and seeing tangible speedincreases in the landing configuration, which is yet another thing tolook out for if you're flying this aircraft manually. Overall, I'd say that this aircraft is definitely a handful to flymanually, and I have certainly gained much respect for the real-worldpilots of this aircraft. Nonetheless, despite the quirks, I find thisaircraft to be a delight to fly and I would certainly recommend anyonewho likes a challenging aircraft to give the TriStar a go. DocumentationWhilst Captain Sim did do an excellent job at modelling a wonderfulaircraft so far, I am tempted to argue that they did a poor job ofdocumenting what they have created. There are no manuals included withthe install or download, though three manuals can be found on the CaptainSim web sitehere.Three manuals are included: the User Manual, which explains theinstallation process, the Aircraft and Systems Manual, which gives adetailed account of various gauges, switches and knobs of theaircraft, and the Normal Procedures Manual, which outlines theclimb-out path, approach path and various other situations. These manuals provide a good picture of what the aircraft iscapable of, and which systems are modelled in the aircraft, but failto explain how to use the product. The Captain SimYouTube channelhas a brief engine start guide, but Captain Sim itself provides nochecklists, nor a step-by-step tutorial flight for novice users. Assuch, when starting this review, I find it extremely difficult to getin the air and navigate properly. For beginner pilots, this lack ofdocumentation will no doubt be a letdown. Fortunately, the flightsimulation community has come up with several getting started guides,and videos on how to use this TriStar, although for a product withsuch a price tag, I would expect the developers to better document howto fly such a complicated aircraft. Freighter Expansion ModelCaptain Sim has also included a Freighter model of the L-1011-1,available as aseparate expansion package.This package comes with the L-1011 freighter model, complete with asingle Arrow Cargo livery. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/freighter__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/freighter__2_.jpg The L-1011-1 F, in the Arrow Cargo livery.In reality, Lockheed did not manufacturer any L-1011 Freighters,and the freighter versions of the L-1011 we see today were allconverted from passenger variants. However, due to the complexity ofthe aircraft, such conversions was not very common, and only fewL-1011s were ever converted. As such, this further compounds the "limited operators" issue,resulting in the single Arrow Cargo livery being packaged with thefreighter expansion package. The main value this expansion adds to the L-1011 Captain is that ofan extra exterior model, with modified animations to suit a freighter,including side loading cargo doors with a cargo loader. The cargoloader is especially interesting as it's a fully animated loader,complete with actual moving cargo containers and the ability to slidethe cargo containers around once loaded using the loader menu,removing the need to reload the aircraft if one were to use the ACEconfiguration tool. A slight downside to this system is that only one cargo container canbe loaded at a time, and the loading process itself is very handson. Perhaps an improvement that can be made in future products wouldbe the ability to set the cargo load and have the loader automaticallyget to work. /images/reviews/csl1011/t/cargo-loader__1_.jpg /images/reviews/csl1011/t/cargo-loader__2_.jpg All in all, I would say that whilst this expansion certainly isn'tboring or a letdown -- in fact the freighter was beautifully modelledand the cargo loader is very interesting -- I do struggle to see theappeal of this expansion to an average user, unless one is a collectoror simply prefers flying cargo over passengers. Final WordsTo sum up, I would say that the L-1011 Captain is an excellentproduct that is, in my opinion, worthy of its price. It works welleven on modest computer systems and gives the user a lot of choiceregarding what he or she likes their aircraft to look like. However, asthe TriStar did in reality, we see comparatively fewer liveries forthis package as there simply weren't that many operators of thisaircraft type. As I'm not a pilot, I'm perhaps not qualified to say if thisaircraft handles realistically as I have no experience flying such anaircraft. However, I would say that the flight model of the aircraftis believable for an aircraft of this era and size, and several of myown observations, such as my difficulties on approach, do corroboratewith pilot reports of difficulty in initially adjusting to the DLCsystem. All in all, I'm pretty impressed by the L-1011 Captain Package,although I have to comment that even a year or so after its initialrelease, there are still some things that are left to be desired aboutthe package as a whole. I would say that if you're looking for aL-1011 to fly, the L-1011 Captain provides a compelling choice againstits competitor's offerings. /images/reviews/csl1011/captain-1011.jpgMeng Yu Purchase Captain Sim L1011 Back Pack For FSX Purchase Captain Sim L1011 Freighter Expansion
-
Head-2-Head Feature II: DC-10 Versus L-1011 By Ron Blehm (August 2, 2011) Notice and Disclaimer: Just a few days ago I published a feature called, "The Turboprop Commuter Challenge". Unwittingly, what I had done was to start this brand new feature for FlightSim.Com called "Head-2-Head" where I will present comparisons of various aircraft. These are not meant to be reviews of specific aircraft as it is not my point to bash any certain designers or teams. With a little sleuthing around, I'm sure you can figure out that I used Erick Cantu's EMB-120 or the Dreamwings Q200 in that feature. It was not my point to have you walk away from that article thinking, "Geez, that Antonov really sucked." In fact, considering the power and range and lifting ability of the real-world model, it has sold far more than the EMB or Dornier over the years! Some guy we'll call "Adam" pointed out that the empty An-24 outweighs a full Embraer so how could I call it a fair comparison? Several months ago I was watching the American Version of "Top Gear" with my son and they had a challenge, "Cobra versus Viper" which pitted an AH-1 helicopter with infrared beam against a Dodge Viper. Well Adam, the Cobra can fly and the Viper can't but it was still a lot of fun to watch! (And the Cobra did tag the Viper three times before he made it across town.) So, I hope you enjoy these head-to-head challenges and sure enough, you may find some aircraft you want to add to your own hangar. I already have a couple of these Head-2-Head Challenges ready to go but a couple of you asked what .air files or .cfg settings I was using on my turboprops. I can tell you that I really don't know; I have a hangar full of planes and simply unzip them as needed. I'd have to go back into the download area of FlightSim.Com and look them up again to find that information and more than likely, you all can figure that out just as well as I can. However, since the question came up about the .cfg files, this feature addresses a couple of those points. In the late 1960's American Airlines began asking for a 250 passenger, wide-body, medium-range airliner that could operate from most existing airports. The resulting head-to-head competition between the Lockheed and Douglas (McDonnell Douglas) companies may mark (to my recollection anyway) the first time in aviation history that two companies, working in separate factories, built (for all intents and purposes) the same aircraft. I have never read any reports about the sharing or stealing of information yet the similarity in design and function of these two aircraft is remarkable. Although the L-1011 boasted a better power-to-weight ratio and better efficiency, early powerplant problems resulted in initial delivery delays and ultimately the slightly larger, slightly heavier, longer-range, "less-advanced" DC-10 sold nearly twice as many airframes as the L-1011. The DC-10 first flew 29-Aug-70; The L-1011 on 17-Nov-70; twins born at basically the same time. The last L-1011 was completed in 1984 while the final DC-10 rolled off the production line in December 1988; however changes and retro-fits for FedEx continue to keep the DC-10s flying to this day. So, I downloaded and installed FSX-compatible DC-10 and an L-1011 aircraft as well as several repaints for each. You all should know that everything in my hangar is freeware and not necessarily designed specifically for FSX. Here is today's challenge: With plenty of gas and a 50,000-pound payload we'd fly 2,300 miles from Troutdale Oregon to Wheeler Army Base in Hawaii. Troutdale is a GA and business airport with a 5,400-foot runway. Wheeler is at 837 feet ASL and has a 5,600-foot runway. I loaded the DC-10 and departed into the rising sun. With lots of elevator trim and moderate back pressure I was able to rotate just in time (pictures above)! I cruised at only 29,000 feet and arrived into Oahu in the mid-morning. Landing and slowing without any braking was easy and I parked up having burned 77,057 pounds of gas. Next I loaded the L-1011 in the same fashion and departed Troutdale. The improved thrust-to-weight ratio they aren't kidding about because I rotated with a good thousand feet of runway left and was blasting through my 250 knot barrier before the flaps were fully retracted (pictures below, left and center)! I set the autopilot and quickly climbed to FL290 for the cruise to Hawaii. Seven hundred-fifty miles short of the islands I was out of gas and falling from the sky! At this point my article became about how to tweak the aircraft .cfg files to better meet your personal flying needs. Now as I stated earlier, I'm not here to bash designers or those who spend too much valuable time giving the rest of us free stuff to play with; their efforts are nothing short of generous and self-sacrificing. But sometimes I have to wonder if any testing was done at all. If nothing else, perhaps this feature will become a venue for some pre-release beta testing of freeware models. I really am not in a position to write a technical "How To ..." article on this topic because I'm really not that knowledgeable and I'm quite sure that there have been other, more appropriate articles written in the past. But, I'm not afraid to make little tweaks to the aircraft.cfg file to meet my needs either; and in this case, I needed more range out of the L-1011. According to the paperwork, both aircraft should fly about 3,500 to 4,000 miles with "normal" load factors. According to my math on the DC-10 flight I had just done, the range would have been just over 4,000 miles. So, I went into the aircraft.cfg file and scrolled down to the Engine and Fuel Flow data. There should be an entry there called "Fuel Flow Scaler" with a number listed. The DC-10's number was 0.85000. This means that the plane will burn fuel 85% fast. (It's not a proper use of language I know but hang with me.) I wanted to burn a little more fuel and have a little less range so I set that number to 0.90000. Now I'll burn gas 90% fast, just a little faster than originally programmed. Next I accessed the fuel setting in the .cfg for the L-1011. It said, "Fuel Flow Scaler = 1.0000" meaning it was burning fuel at 100% speed. Since I only made it 2/3 of the way to Hawaii I needed to boost the range at least 35% so I set the number to 0.60000. Now the L-1011 would burn fuel only 60% fast - giving me greater range. As I played with the gas settings I began thinking about the rocketship factor I had experienced out of Troutdale. In the same area of Engine and Fuel data in the CFG there is a setting for "Static Thrust" with the number which is the pounds of force per engine. I decreased that about 6% for the L-1011. (I was recently watching some video about Texas Turbine jet engines for Cessna Caravans and I've tweaked the static thrust of the default Caravan for better performance. Now I can take off from truly short runways; I can cruise at ALMOST 200 knots and still land at around 80 knots in under 1,000 feet. It's great!) With the .cfg changes in place I loaded an Eastern Airline livery and repeated the flight. I still got airborne in 5,000 feet even with the 50,000-pound payload - that was better than the DC-10. Now I was able to get the gear and flaps up according to placard speeds while holding the N1 at 93%. I set the autopilot as I had done before and climbed up to FL290 but my speed was dropping. The autopilot only holds 90% N1 and with the decreased thrust it was a struggle to reach that level. Well, many times the older airliners had to do a "step-climb" and cruise at a lower level until some of the gas was burned off so this seemed reasonable to me. With the speed dropping to near stall speed I took over manual throttle and set it at 97% N1 and was able to reach 29,000 feet reasonably well. Eventually I reached Mach 0.70 and could have climbed higher had I not been doing "scientific research" for you all. The approach and landing into Wheeler Field was slower and easier in the L-1011; it's a very nice-flying, stable machine. (You can see from the screen shot above left that I was, in fact, nose-high and probably too slow for a "good" approach; see pictures above center and right). Even so, I had burned twice as much gas as the DC-10 and a quick bit of math showed that my .cfg tweaks gave the L-1011 an improved range up to about 2,700 miles. So I went back into the Fuel Flow Data section of the .cfg and changed my 0.60000 to 0.45000. That should be about right. I figured with these changes I should have a more realistic match between these fraternal twins. Having made these tweaks I wanted to confirm my settings so I loaded up a 1,600-mile flight from La Paz to Rio and put in 75,000 pounds of weight in each aircraft to test their ability to take off from 13,300 feet ASL and at the other end we'd land at the smaller, Santos Dumont airport. The DC-10 just barely was airborne before the numbers but still manageable (pictures above). Cruise was uneventful and we landed smoothly and had no problems stopping (below, left and center). Some quick math showed the fuel burn range to be 2,280 miles. It looked like the DC-10 was pretty close, maybe one little tweak for fuel flow. (I'm thinking 0.88000.) I loaded the same flight and heavy load for the L-1011 and was sweating bullets trying to get the thing airborne (picture below, left)! I pulled up the gear and tried to hold just 100-200 fpm of climb but despite my best efforts I was dropping - with the gear still retracted! I think I shaved the top off the VOR which is about 2.5 miles from the end of the runway but then I started a very gradual climb out over Lake Titicaca. Finally I was through 18,000 feet and holding 200 knots. I turned on autopilot for the rest of climb up to the cruise portion of flight. Five minutes later I checked back on the PC to notice the stall horn blaring and that I was at 150 knots falling back through 19,000 feet. I quickly disconnected Otto and took manual control back and hand flew the beast up to FL290. I guess my pulling the power back 6% was too much so I went into the L-1011's .cfg and added 2% back to the thrust settings. I again enjoyed my approach and landing into Rio and calculated my L-1011 range at 2,419 miles with the heavier load and high-altitude departure with difficult climb (pictures, below). That is pretty darn accurate for the fuel flow numbers now. (I could probably get by with a setting of 0.47000.) So now, here we are pages into this challenge and no clear-cut "winner" has been noted. I'm sure some features will just go like this. If this were simply a "review" I'd have to say that the L-1011 was initially presented as quite poorly done and should be avoided. However, I hope that instead this "challenge" has been both helpful and inspiring. Next time I will take my turboprop commuters to Nepal and see which one can perform there. Ron Blehm pretendpilot@yahoo.com -
View full article
