wf971

Hear hear

Starting from 10.000 ft, diving to achieve 200 kt ias, and pulling up to try to stall the plane, there's evidently no stall possible in this aircraft. It just goes for a loop (if you let it), otherwise holding straight ahead, it'll lose speed until 20-40 kt ias and begin to drop straight down.

I put the airplane at 14200 rpm and into a climb that never ends. This plane exhibits the same behaviour at FL180 as it does at FL290. I think it should at least stall a bit..?

Reducing the throttle from 10% to 9% ends in higher RPM than it started at, and vice versa. I was wondering if this is a way to kickstart the plane during ground movement; if overcoming the inertia was so hard to deal with that the devs assigned an extra bout of thrust to help get the airplane rolling. And that, weirdly, it happens during -all- transitions between 9 and 10, not simply those meant to increase thrust.

I don't suppose this was done intentionally? The ADF2 radio knob is in the on position "ADF" by default when starting cold and dark.

There is a not too pretty greenish light in the cockpit which seems set to a timer, which makes the entire cockpit 'pop' with new light. It's an immersion breaker, and not a critical issue. It acts like a certain time or certain amount of sunlight will turn the effect off. I propose that instead of having a discrete on-off for this light effect, inibuilds programs it to better follow some sort of gradient or curve.

There is a bug whereby weather effects will come inside the cockpit. Video example. To reproduce this, simply spawn the aircraft and either have live weather snow, or use a preset for snowy weather. You don't need to do anything in the aircraft.

I submit to this thread that the Spill Valve and the Ground Cooling Fans are mislabelled (FS2020). And I think the performance issue is... weird. The aircraft climbs at 150 IAS until FL330, which is when it finally stalls out (at MTOW). It's as if someone took a look-up-table where this thing flies to FL220, then took the performance at Sea Level and just copied it for 10.000 feet, moving the old values even higher up. If that makes sense? This thing acts at 20.000 like it should at 10.000, or even like it should at 18.000.

Now I don't want to go and sound entitled, but this really would bring the aircraft's standard up. How many youtubers don't you see incorporating these open-door photos to help sell the reaslism? And it is strictly speaking impossible to do so without embarassing the makers. Because it DOES embarass artists who've really put work into this YS-11. Which I don't put that way to sound like an asshole, but to convey some sympathy with professionals whose creative projects I too should like to gleam and give them satisfaction, as the end product does to me.

Hi there! I think there's an easy bug to fix; some low-hanging fruit; something that should only take a minute or two to fix for the artist in charge 😄 In the YS-11's cockpit, on the lower right panel by the FO, an annunciator light row sits next to four switches. I think they have been mislabelled. As you might begin to suspect, when you see there is a RESET button for the cooling fans. Whoever heard of resetting a fan? A valve, on the other hand... To be specific, LH and RH cooling fan switches are labelled MANUAL/AUTO. Whereas the Spill Valve switch is ON or OFF. It should be the other way around; it's not the on/off that's wrong, it's the "Cooling fan" and "spill valve". This goes for the associated warning lights as well -- one says "Spill Valve" (it is the Ground Cooling Fan light). It should say "Cooling fan". You get the picture (png). I think the servicing manual we have access to makes clear that the cockpit writing is off on this one (p. 909 onwards). The Spill Valve switch in the manual position is responsible, as you see on p.910 and plainly on 919, for moving a spill line to "open"; but there are TWO entries for air into the spill lines, one from each engine, so there're caution lights in the cockpit to suggest which valve is spilling its air. (Another clue is that the cooling fans, which irl there -are- two of, are not left and right; but front and aft.) Aside from this little critical mention - and many others come to think of it - regardless I very much enjoy what you put together with this aircraft!! I think there is a really, really outstanding artistic performance here which is WORTHY of there being flight systems of higher quality!

I don't suppose you might ask them for an ETA on looking into this? It would be very nice to know for certain whether or not work is being done. It feels good to have that information as a customer, and I'd consider it a part of the customer service experience. Your thoughts about information sharing are probably a bit more 'economical' and I don't lambast you for it -- it's quite common -- but perhaps it would serve you to reconsider. 😄 You never know.

Hear hear!

Hi there I am wondering about a technical definition. It regards the NAMC YS-11, which according to most sources seems to have a service ceiling around 22.000 feet. As the very comparable FH227, with a few thousand pounds less and nearly the same engines, can achieve a cervice ceiling of 28.000, I suppose the ceiling can be related to climb performance? That has certainly been a concern for people who bought the YS-11, and find it overperforms (rather extremely!) In sim we can easily get to FL330 on the hottest day at MTOW, but irl it was reportedly very, very sedate and didn't climb half as fast as IniBuild's aircraft does. But could it instead, feasibly, be determined by a pressurization system that isn't quite as capable as Fokker/Fairchild-Hill's system? (Leaving now aside the ridiculous climb performance of the YS-11 (youtube)). The YS-11's servicing manual (pp.931-41) seems to, at the end of its chapter on pressure, suggest a cabin altitude around 10.000ft plus/minus 300ft will produce an alarm in the cockpit. In the game Inibuilds did not provide a pressure regulator (png) -- but we can plainly see the max pressure differential (png). The manual describes a system that only manages 8900ft cabin altitude by the time it gets to 4-4.5 psi. Which altogether suggests to me this system is either designed economically to fit beneath the stated service ceiling, or it is simply the component whose weaknesses bottlenecked the YS-11. I could be outrageously wrong here. Maybe those pressurization systems have nothing to do with the ceiling. Certainly it fits the underperformer-image of the YS-11 to suggest the service ceiling is determined by the powerplants. (I'll probably find more answers by asking on random age-old Piedmont Airlines youtube videos ;D ex-pilots and ex-handlers always seem to appear in those comment sections. Although they won't know about the inibuilds plane)

You should think it was possible to include a feather, as AFAIK the PMDG DC-6, one of the very first truly excellent addons for this franchise, achieved the effect of a throttle-linked autofeather system.

This is really a shame, as the YS-11's performance seems way better than it ought to be. We routinely zoom through FL200. I thought perhaps adding maximum Wear/Tear parasite drag could help us negate all this horsepower. Unfortunately it amounted to nothing. Neither does the fuel filter bleed air heating system; which supposedly (going by the NTSB's report into Reeve Aleutian flight no. 69) saps about 4% of thrust from the engine. How much really? you might ask -- but enough, anyway, that Reeve and other operators practised having this system turned off for landings in the event of go-arounds/pull-ups. So marginal was the performance that this system -- its influence great or not -- was deemed worthy of help by way of being turned off. This era and technology of aviation really hangs on by a thread in Asobo's 'ecosystem' of aircraft. It would take so little improvement (in the fuel metering system, in the performance calculations/LUTs, etc etc as mentioned here on the forum) to have this aircraft stand as a formidable example among its peers. Some of these systems are "behind the scenes" in SOME aircraft experiences, sure, but here they amount to so much that they can't well be left out or given only an economic amount of development time. Please! You can try yourself by giving the aircraft above MTOW -- full payload -- and it won't actually touch climb performance.