Flyable Avro York

Post by **Garry Russell** » 13 Feb 2007, 22:17

James

The York was built by Avro

Dan Air had several..

Garry

DispatchDragon · Post by **DispatchDragon** » 13 Feb 2007, 22:52

Paul

Yeppers I was slightly over MLW LOL - even so she handled beautifully if just a little fast - for those of you you havnt done it - try landing on grass fields and watch the oleo struts

they are a thing of beauty

Dave - sometimes I think we all should go into the flight instruction biz -
Theres enough of us here with ALOT of experience on Ricks,DMs
DaveG and DelPs aircraft , BTW the performance stuff is almost
ready - Ive run it through FSBuild and it has some glitches still
bt Im getting there

Leif

jab · Post by **jab** » 13 Feb 2007, 22:56

Garry Russell wrote:James

The York was built by Avro

Dan Air had several..

Garry

Thats the one

cheers garry for update :huf:

James

mjahn · Post by **mjahn** » 14 Feb 2007, 13:12

Bridon Bear:

One tiny thing I noticed on the MK22 was the Starboard Mass Balance on the rudder detatches itself when the rudder moves left or right....a minor detail that I am sure could be fixed. Plus a slight delay on one or other undercarriage leg when retracting/extending would, for me be the icing on the cake.

I think I had that mass balance fault in an earlier model. At any rate I cannot replicate it in the current one. Could you check whether your active York.mdl file is dated 24 January and is 1,116,190 bytes long?

As to the u/c: you could tinker a litle with the extension/retraction times specified in the aircraft.cfg. Find the [contact points] section, then in the point.1 and point.2 lines (left and right main u/c), which look like this (abbreviated) ...

point.1= ... 0.691, 8.000, 8.000, 2, 181.0, 190.0
point.2= ... 0.691, 8.000, 8.000, 3, 181.0, 190.0

... modify the values of extension and retraction, both currently set at "8.000" (seconds). If you get a satisfactory result, please let us know.

Have just uploaded an Aeronavale repaint ... mustn't do RAF only ...

Post by **Bridon Bear** » 14 Feb 2007, 14:21

Could you check whether your active York.mdl file is dated 24 January and is 1,116,190 bytes long?

Hi mjahn,

Just checked and it is indeed 24th January and 1,116,190 bytes. This is on the Avro_York but the mdl file on the Avro York M22 (which is the one giving the effect) is dated 09 November 1,064,138 bytes.

Thanks for the U/C tip, I'll give that a go and see how it looks.

Regards.

BrianG

Post by **Bridon Bear** » 14 Feb 2007, 15:15

Me again....Just altered the U/C sequence to 9.000 and 14.000 and I find the resulting retraction/extending sequence pleasing. It is just 'artistic licence' as I have no idea what the times for the York really were in the real world (if anyone knows the figures I would love to know what the timings were)

I hope you don't think I was being hypercritical, you and the team have done a fantastic job on this one but I felt that there would be an inevitable asymetric operation on the undercarriage due to various factors and this 'adjustment' for me has added a few more degrees of realism to a fantastic model.

Regards.

BrianG

mjahn · Post by **mjahn** » 14 Feb 2007, 15:25

BrianG,

Ah, that explains the mass balance problem. Simply use the newer mdl file (there is just one mdl, at this point, for both the M22 and 24 variants) and it will go away.

Best,

Post by **Bridon Bear** » 14 Feb 2007, 16:02

Sorted....Thank you. :dance:

Regards.

BrianG

mjahn · Post by **mjahn** » 14 Feb 2007, 16:04

Bridon Bear wrote:
Me again....Just altered the U/C sequence to 9.000 and 14.000 and I find the resulting retraction/extending sequence pleasing. It is just 'artistic licence' as I have no idea what the times for the York really were in the real world (if anyone knows the figures I would love to know what the timings were)
Will try out these values. Just checked and noticed that the designers of PlaneDesign's Lancastrian have 12.0 and 15.0 for point.1 and 15.0 and 18.0 for point.2. Seems a bit drawn out but then the parts' animation specifics may be such that the actual display takes only a certain fraction of the time.

BTW, I saw Yorks take off when I was young but was always busy clambering for cover so as not to get my eardrums busted. So I have no recollection of how the u/c actually folded ...

I hope you don't think I was being hypercritical.

Certainly not, just the kind of observation one needs!

Best,

Ed Walters · Post by **Ed Walters** » 14 Feb 2007, 17:34

The extension/retraction times on the Lancastrian were taken from a video of a Lancaster taking off, so they should be pretty close