Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[woofiedog]

Excellent addon for some North Sea action... Thank's 

[WhoDatNotSayin]

why does It nose over all the time, is at a FM problem, or am I trapping badly?

I noticed the same problem with the Sea Gladiator. I'm fairly sure that there the cause is the sudden stop from the wire causing a pitch-down, as the hook pivot is positioned well below the centre of gravity. Basically, the braking effect from the wire is just to great for a lightweight aircraft. Whether anything can be done about this I don't know - I'd imagine it is the carrier, rather than the plane that would need a mod.

I've had odd nose-overs on occasion from other aircraft, and one I did in a stock Corsair proved to be the result of the brakes being on on landing! I ran the replay through DeviceLink to confirm this. Whether this was a random glitch, a fault with my controller, or something more significant, I don't know.

It might be worth looking at replays of the Sea Bk-534 landings to find out where the problem is.

[norm]

I will try to upload a track.

[WhoDatNotSayin]

As it stands, my DeviceLink setup will only work with stock aircraft, so I can't check the brakes, though it should be possible to see where the problem arises just by watching. A track won't be any use unless the plane is installed anyway.

Looking at the Gladiator track again, it is noticeable that the plane rolls as well as pitches down when the wire stops it - this is probably a gyroscopic effect though.

A 'brakes on' landing in a taildragger is easy enough to spot, as long as it comes in fairly level - if one wheel touches first, the gear will possibly collapse, so it may just look like a hard landing. The 'sudden stop' pitch-down from excessive arrestor restraint(?) may occur while the wheels aren't even on the deck - in fact, a perfect three-pointer with no bounce might stop this happening.

With a bit of forward motion on the carrier, it isn't that difficult to land the Sea Gladiator without using the hook. Perhaps trying that with the Avia might be worthwhile too - this should confirm where the problem is,

[tooslow]

I was really excited when I saw this post and I downloaded the plane immediately.  While I enjoyed the new carrier biplane, I was disappointed to find out that it did not have the 20mm cannon and was therefore a B-534 not a Bk-534.  I had been told some time ago that the cannon armed Bk-534 was in progress and I thought when I saw this Bk-534 post that it had been completed.

The Bk-534 was the 20mm cannon version of the B-534 that I requested in my November 2009 post (https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,1948.0.html).  The plane in this post is a B-534 that has been converted for carrier service, not the Bk-534 which historically was the one Avia converted to a carrier fighter. 

Please don’t take this as a complaint, but as an additional request for the real Bk-534 armed with a 20mm cannon.   Your new plane, the Avia Bk-534 (sea), provides the Sea Gladiator with a worthy opponent from the same generation … Thank You.

[SAS~Skipper]

I did what me asked the man. I do not know how to use 3Dmax .. If any living creature fix hooks weapons (add a point on the propeller spinner), I'll do it right. For me even enough to make CF _D0 in text form. I then edit himself
Now I can make only a gun, but it will shoot a machine gun instead of (((.

[FlyingBoxHead]

Where do you get that skin?

[caldrail]

The original aeroplane noses forward as the picture at the top of the page shows. But an odd idea in the first place? Firstly that in 1940-41 the Bf109T was being specifically developed for that purpose, thus at first sight the Avia effort was redundant unless it was considered a competitive or backup design.

Even stranger when you consider that work on the Graf Zeppelin was suspended in 1939 and halted permanently in May 1940, so you have to ask yourself why the Germans authorised the development of the naval B534.

[Fusek]

The original aeroplane noses forward as the picture at the top of the page shows. But an odd idea in the first place? Firstly that in 1940-41 the Bf109T was being specifically developed for that purpose, thus at first sight the Avia effort was redundant unless it was considered a competitive or backup design.

Even stranger when you consider that work on the Graf Zeppelin was suspended in 1939 and halted permanently in May 1940, so you have to ask yourself why the Germans authorised the development of the naval B534.

Maybe for research?

[Killer Ghost]

Yay a german carrier plane, nice work

[tooslow]

Skipper ... Thanks for the quick reply.  I was hoping you would know how to add the cannon, but obviously that is a different skill than adding a carrier hook.  Is there anyone else that could do it (Beowolff)?  In my original post requesting the Bk-534 RealDarko showed some 3D changes that would be necessary to make a real Bk-534.  The 20mm version only had 2 machine guns along with the cannon, but I would be happy with just the addition of the 20mm how ever it could be done.

I enjoy flying the early aircraft, especially the biplanes, and I've wanted an early fighter with good firepower (4 machine guns is not good firepower).  The addition of a 20mm to the B-534 would probably be step in the right direction.  The cannon armed D-XXI and P-24F are about only two I know of with good firepower and neither are a biplane.

Again, thanks for the quick rely.

[caldrail]

Maybe for research?

That's always a possibility, but what did they stand to gain from it? In the back of my mind I can't help wondering if the Germans (or Avia themselves) were thinking of using carrier technology in the field, so to facilitate operations from very short fields and thus increase operational flexibility by reducing dependency on fixed airfields. That's just speculation though.