Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - 4.12 development update discussion and feedback

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- Daidalos Team discussions (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=202)

- - 4.12 development update discussion and feedback (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=31734)

In most designs the landing gear is held in a terminal position (be it up or down) by a mechanical lock, not by an actuator, no matter is it electrical, hydraulic, or pneumatic. The actuating system at the terminal positions of the gear is usually in power off state to save on-board power and not to overstress the system.

So, by damaging the upper lock it is possible to drop down the gear, which is modeled in the recent update.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinnetti (Post 504604)

So you've taken it upon yourself to curate the internet now? I have owned a replica FW190, and studied the systems extensively. My particular interest is in landing gear design and I make working (flyable) miniature replica gear also. I have a good working understanding of both electrical and hydraulic systems, text books on gear design etc, and your comments mean nothing to me, nor does your video prove any poorly reasoned explanation you may have. If the FW system to a catastrophic hit in the gear retract motor it would drop like a rock, not motor down. Your video proves nothing other than that that gear was lowering under power. The system uses a highly geared motor that will not drop down with or without the gear uplock being functional. At worst it would just sag an inch or so taking up any gear lash in the mechanism. This is quite unlike virtually any other WWII aircraft, and it would be neat to see it modeled in accordance to the actual function. You are welcome to disagree, but it doesn't make your comments valid, nor does it invalidate my desire to see this unique function modeled.

Ah now I remember, yes you said this over at SAS too.
Great that you owned a replica 190, kudos.
But it was a replica, and you never had a thunderbolt raining .50 into you trying to kill you.
You know the old saying a picture is worth a thousand words. So get to typing or better get some video evidence supporting your claim.

See my favorite part of the video is where the 190 starts getting shot, and then the gear starts to drop miraculously. Amazing coincidence.

But ya he's probably surrendering, cause it's 1916 in the video.

Please read the article in the link at the bottom, the FW190 was a electrically geared system I cant see the gear dropping through damage only intentionally via the landing gear electrical switch.
Also there's a large red handle in the cockpit above the gear selection switches which iirc is a manual lock Notzug Fahrwerk lever the schematic operation of this I cannot find to hand at the moment.

Gear Operation
The gear is driven by an electrical motor.
As the gear retracts, a pressurized air bottle is loaded which lowers the gear in the event
of an electrical failure.
The electrical gear switches are located in the left console fairly at the centre in a
combined instrument along with the flap switches
The gear unlock mechanism is located left hand in the lower forward panel,
labelled “Notzug Fahrwerk”.
Retract gear: remove safety cover from switch and press it.
Extend gear: press switch to activate the gear motor,
next pull the lever to unlock the gear.
WARNING!
Always activate the gear motor before pulling the lever except in an
emergency. The gear can no longer be retracted otherwise.

I cannot see even if the electric motor was shot out and the gear locks the gear would drop it would have to be a miraculous shot from the attacker.

Of course I will stand corrected if someone provides evidence otherwise.

Not that any of this is important in the grand scheme of thing .....just for fun :)

I mean they still never corrected the spelling of the gear lock lever after all this time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinnetti (Post 504543)

looks great! - I know I've irritated people on the mod sites with this, but the FW had an all electric landing gear (one of, if not the first) - unless the motor got hit it wouldn't flop open like hydro systems do with pressure loss... few seem to want to model this correctly

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWMV (Post 504546)

:rolleyes:
At same mod site, and in same mod thread, I posted this video of an Anton getting shot up, and showing the gear dropping.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCdWYttR7s8

I don't recall you responding there but please, just stop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treetop64 (Post 504556)

Not only damage to the motors, but damage to the uplocks and any of the joints could cause them to drop as well. Just because the gear actuation was electric doesn't mean they were impervious to damage. Electrical systems are beneficial because they save weight and complexity, not because they are indestructible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spudkopf (Post 504564)

To me the footage is quite inconclusive in regards to determining if the gear dropping is due to damage or as a deliberate act by the pilot (like a sign of surrender), the fact that the pilot does not seem to take any evasive action at all just raises far too many questions as to the true circumstances of whats actually happening here. Further you can only see the starboard wing at the moment the gear begins to drop so it is also unclear what is happening on the port wing.

I'm not in any way disputing the possibility or non-possibility of a gear failure drop and do not have an opinion either way, but I do have to question the validity of the video evidence presented.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 504578)

Um, that was not a clip from a video game. It's war, no real combat pilot would take the gear comming down to have any meaning other than system failure due to damage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar (Post 504585)

I've once seen a different vid, showing a hit Fw190 extending its one gear. Dunno where to find though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treetop64 (Post 504587)

...In a naive, fairy tale world.

In the video, it is the real world, in a real war. The pilot doing the shooting doesn't have time to assume that the gear dropping is a sign of surrender. His job is to destroy the aircraft, and he sees signs of that occurring.

What if he thought "Oh, his gear is dropping. That means he surrenders. I'll leave him be now.", only to end up being shot at by the guy he just left alone after he had a change of heart. Kinda silly.

On the other hand, fighter vs. bomber situations over western Europe could sometimes play out differently, as there have been documented cases fighter pilots escorting badly damaged enemy bombers home, though that occurred very seldom.

Yes, it does raise questions. The pilot could already be wounded and unable to maneuver. He could have panicked and "froze". Maybe it's a novice pilot and he has no idea what to do. Maybe he's just given up to the apparently inevitable.

However, what is obvious is that a pilot in his aircraft is being shot down. No reason to imply that something else is going on here. It's war, and it's hell.

So, what?

Well, you're certainly free to do so. No real reason to bring the video footage to the fringes of conspiracy theory, however. It's fairly straight-forward.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spudkopf (Post 504593)

No need to treat me like I'm some three year old Hollywood inspired moron........I'll admit the surrender thing is probably fantasy and a wrong call, but there are numerous documented accounts of the dropping of gear including by mistake.

That aside my point is that as evidence, this clip on its own is next to useless without some knowledge as to the circumstances in which it was taken so unless there is an after action report or other data available or unless you are an expert in such things, then the only two people who really knew what happened in that clip are the pilots.

Sorry to be so negative.

Again I have no issues with the possibility that the gear could drop on the Fw-190 as a result of battle damage, just the assumptions made about this particular clip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuxCorvan (Post 504596)

Maybe... he realized he was near the ground and released the gear for a desperate landing (stupid, but who knows what we'd do in a panic)... Too many assumptions, we really don't know what was happening in there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinnetti (Post 504604)

Quote:

Originally Posted by felix_the_fat (Post 504633)

regarding possible reasons for gear drops:
Johnnie Johnson ["Wing Leader" Penguin edn 1959 p301] wrote this about some 190s in the act of surrendering to some Spitfires:
"The Huns waggled their wings, dropped their undercarriages, and generally behaved in a nervous manner..."

As he described it, this happened in the last few days of the war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by majorfailure (Post 504634)

I don't think the gear drops due to damage - I think the Fw190 pilot is on a landing approach. Would explain the lack of reaction to beeing fired upon.

And on the ground in the distance, ther are some white specs that COULD be parked planes. They could be anything else that is light coloured and of roughly 10-50m size though (BIG white elephants)...

And the speeds the planes have seem to be slow, based on the wobbling both planes do.
And if the video speed is realtime, then they seem to travel slow, but without knowing for sure and by "eyeball measure" that's rather guesswork.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaQSoN (Post 504636)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWMV (Post 504642)

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/f...dinggear_1.htm

From reading the page linked by Alpha, and the translated Fw 190-A8 manual here: http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/fw190a8.pdf

My conclusions are these:

- If the uplocks are shot, the landing gear will gently drop down (the sealed air piston will force the gear down, but the high geared motor will make this a slow process), would probably need some shaking to completely lock down.
- The same will happen when the pilots tries to lower the gear if the electric motor is damaged.
- A damaged reduction gear will most probably made impossible to lowering that landing gear leg.
- A completely destroyed reduction gear will made the landing gear drop like a stone (when either the pilot tries to lower the gear or the uplocks are damaged), but it will never lock on the low position, and will collapse on touch down.

photo 8 in that link had a dora 9, are those bomb or x4 racks under its wings?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_WOZ (Post 504654)

Yep, you got it. If I remember right, it's geared 144:1, so it might come down slowly, part way or not at all. Of course if the retract arm is hit, down it falls. The uplock isn't actually required, but it takes the load off the electrical system which would constantly have to put load on the motor without it (eventually burning out the motor).

Quote:

Originally Posted by MicroWave (Post 504461)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monty_Thrud (Post 504460)

Anychance of two weeks from today...? :D

Be sure.

And now :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWMV (Post 504642)

But ya he's probably surrendering, cause it's 1916 in the video.

I've already agreed that the idea of surrender was an unlikely romantic notion so please stop harping on about that point and try if you can to be respectful to others and constructive when expressing your opinion.

Bruce Carr was shot down in his P51, hid in a forest, stole a Fw190 from a nearby German airfield, and raced back to his base, figuring out the airplane as he went. Two days after bellying it in (and suffering his AA gunners' attention), a friend pulled on one of the "unexplained" controls, whereby the landing gear dropped down.

I know, pointless. But it's still funny.

The Fw190 landing gear, being electric, isn't going to "drop" unless the uplock is unlocked (a separate control Carr didn't know about) and the electric motor's gearbox is somehow damaged. The uplock is only needed for such a situation as the gear is otherwise quite immobile with power off. It might be that battle damage could short some circuits resulting in motoring an individual leg down, but the uplock would also have to be similarly damaged or previously unlocked.

(I've had to deal with some bizarre intermittent electrical problems on planes that resulted from somebody inadvertently running a drill bit into a wire bundle - lol. One had a DC-10 grounded for a week.)

Also, as the right leg moves the tailwheel moves as the two are cabled together, there being no separate tailwheel actuator.

Just doing my part to help build a potentially record setting thread.

zipper, Carr had figured out how to raise and lower the flaps. When he found the button to raise the gear, he assumed its mate was the lowering button. On final, he tried that button twice unsuccessfully. After a couple of days, he calmed down enough to take some friends to the wreck. One of them pulled on the lock and released the gear. What Carr meant by "drop," I don't know. Maybe it just dropped half an inch from backlash and made a sound. I used to think he meant to the ground until I read these forum comments. I think to model this well, various reactions to damage would be needed, and it would take several dedicated hit boxes. I don't know if there is a limit for hit boxes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buster_Dee (Post 504695)

An amazing story -- but

The true story

Quote:

from historian Steve Sheflin
The story of Bruce Carr “stealing” an Fw 190 and escaping from behind enemy lines is patently untrue. In AIRFOIL #2 , Steve Blake and I published a short article debunking this apocryphal story. As part of his research, Steve Blake spoke to Col. Felix Kozaczka, one of Carr’s wingmen, who was present during the flight and belly landing. Kozaczka told him in no uncertain terms that the more lurid aspects of this story never occurred.
Like many pilots after the war, Carr wanted to fly a German plane. Carr hitchhiked to Linz, Austria, where he chose the now-well-known Fw 190 A-6/A-8 hybrid, “31+ ~ Red” for his mount. After flying back to Ansbach with an escort of 354th FG P-51s, Carr couldn’t get the 190’s gear down and was forced to belly land it on the grass at Ansbach.
Post-crash photos of Carr show him walking around unhurt and wearing a neat, clean uniform—hardly the look of someone who had just evaded capture and flown a stolen Focke-Wulf to freedom.
I can’t believe that this story won’t just die and go away. Heroes like Bruce Carr don’t deserve to be tarred with lurid tales like this. Their real-life experiences should be more than enough for anyone.
Steve Sheflin

Maybe that 190 pilot in the video was just mashing the control panel in panic looking for the ctrl-e or disconnect buttons, and hit the gear button instead?

Lots of emotion over a small technical detail.

Somone must have done more than bend the truth. I don't have the Airpower magazine article here (it's at work), but it does a fair bit of supposed "quoting" from Carr. If all you say is true, and Carr was (is) still living, he must have been one pi**ed off veteran.

found this version?

More here
http://warbirdinformationexchange.or...lit=bruce+carr

Two sides to the story but the convincing money seems to be on the version that has the Fw190 taken from a captured airfield as a souvenir.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asheshouse (Post 504770)

Here is an REAL STORY about TRUE stealing of enemy Не-111Н-22 by soviet prisoner Michail Devyayaev and his comrades in 8.02.1945.

Devayataev was a fighter pilot, he was shot down on his P-39 in June 1944.
He and 10 more prisoners hijacked a new He-111H-22 from Usedom airfield.
Before this Devjataev studied He-111 cockpit with crashed spare parts and watched for pre-flight actions of german pilots. Also group was preparing rather long time. In 8.02.1945 ten half-dead prisoners killed one prison guard and captured "Heinkel", board number 13013.
Not everythig went smoоthly (for example, long time they tried to take off with no success, rudders were too tight for weakened
prisoners, Devyataev didn't know where was trimmer levers - and so on), but finally they did it!
Their He-111 made belly landing at Woldenberg (now Dobiegniew) on soviet territory. By the way, Davyataev's He-111 flew with released landing gear.
http://airaces.narod.ru/all6/devytav9.jpg
http://airaces.narod.ru/all6/devytav2.jpg
6 of 10 were sent on front and were killed in action.
Michail Devyataev became Hero of Soviet Union (decorated with Golden Star) in 1957 and died in 2002

Here is more(russian)

Devyataev could not operate at a normal work.
On the personal file was stamped unreliable element because he was in captivity.
Retirement, he received the minimum and no extra charge for participation in the war.
Realy sad story, but in Soviet Union we have many same story...

where is the patch?
I will start a new joke... One year left?

Two weeks.

Be sure.

When in doubt, refer to the Valve Time.

[REL] 4.12 Official Release:o

For all of those who doubted... tada! Now go play every single mission of the Finnish Hawk 75 campaign (you have to bear with the D.XXI and the Hurri Mark I for a bit too :)) that I put together with some help from a bunch of TD people.

First of all thank you very much for this awesome patch, just played a bit and really could see a LOT of differences that are good.
The only problem me and my fellow mates are countering is that, somehow we cannot use freetrack under widescreen. Is there any solution to that?

thx

I haven't encountered this type of problem! I've just installed the new patch over a clean 4.11.1 and everything it's fine! You might have a conflict somewhere!

Overall a great and much needed update. My only criticism is the smoke effect. It really just seems a little too artificial. The colours and density are great.....but the fact it doesn't fade out but just looks like a stuck on self contained Smokey bubble following the aircraft looks and is really distracting.

Is there any way to enhance it maybe so that the smoke is half the density but twice as long?

That way ot would at-least look like a smoke trail than a smoky non decaying stuck on blob?

Overall a huge step forward but I'd really much prefer a smoke trail than a smoke blob?

Cheers, MP

I agree 100%. I was noticing that myself.

Nice patch, but the sounds need a lot of work (Imo). A lot of engine sounds are the same, this is probably the worst part of the un-moded game.

TD Thanks for the gift of sound customized. This was an act of generosity on your part for the community, which I personally loved. You have my gratitude ... Beautiful patch TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickRuski (Post 505273)

Nice patch, but the sounds need a lot of work (Imo). A lot of engine sounds are the same, this is probably the worst part of the un-moded game.

4.12 didn't change the sounds but it did open the door to custom sound packs. The difficulty for TD to change sounds directly is because of copyright and licensing on recordings that would be necessary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sita (Post 418755)

GooD!!!

Hello,
I was trying to use S-79 AND RE-2000 but it is not even possible to look at the plane on QMB nor to fly them is anyone able to help?
regards

Wanted to try some level bombing in the SB 2M 100A, and it seems the level autopilot no longer works.

I checked and had to rebind the key combination I used to use, so did that, and yet it still is inoperative.

Nothing in the readme about it.

What's up?

As flying the aircraft and operating the bomb aimer's position is a recipe
for failure of the drop, how is bombing supposed to work in this aircraft?

Level autopilot is working for me, no change.

Please use 4.12 release topic for further discussion, this one's run its course.