FSX-MS Real Air Duke v2.0 Released

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

On my system, the new ones are listed last... the last 5 are V2.

 

There are 5 airplanes, the other texture folders are for panel textures.

 

You can edit the aircraft.cfg file and add v2 to the variation names (5x)

 

That way you can tell in the selection menu.

 

Or, change the original Duke variations by adding V1..

[jcomm 5,890]

 

 

Is the real Duke so light on the rudder?

 

I find the turn coordination and specially the effects of losing an engine very good now. As mentioned on the list of changes, standard rate turns are now spot on!!!!
 

[cloudswimmer 24]

Is the real Duke so light on the rudder?

 

Good question. I have no real life time in one either, but V1 felt more natural compared with my real Cessna time, but maybe this is how the real ac is. Using Saitek Cessna rudders with stock Win 7 drivers. Also I'm able to do a left standard rate turn coordinated without any rudder input at all, is this normal in this aircraft?

[KingGhidorah 209]

Good question. I have no real life time in one either, but V1 felt more natural compared with my real Cessna time, but maybe this is how the real ac is. Using Saitek Cessna rudders with stock Win 7 drivers. Also I'm able to do a left standard rate turn coordinated without any rudder input at all, is this normal in this aircraft?

 

You know, I hated to do this, but I changed the Rudder_Effectiveness from 1.0 to 0.7 in the aircraft.cfg.  The lack of pedal deflection and the touchiness was just bothering me and didn't feel quite right, not that I claim to know what the Duke really feels like.  I especially hated to do that because for all I know, the Duke might be one of those planes that only requires 2 millimeters of rudder to enter into the turn, and by changing things I'm second guessing the developers!  Like I said earlier, my Rudders sensitivity is set in FSX to be linear (meaning 50% slider) whereas the Duke Version 2 manual recommends putting your control sensitivities around 30%.  I must say, I really don't like to use control curves for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is having to change things around for every different plane. So, with this change from 1.0 to 0.7,  the airplane now requires just a tiny bit more rudder upon rolling into the turn, still almost negligible amount, and still less than in Version 1, but it's at least enough that I can feel my leg move now. :lol:  We're still only talking having to move the Saitek pedals less than an inch of traverse as a standard turn is initiated until the ailerons are recentered.  I guess if I somebody can convince me that I'm making the rudder throw and feel less realistic by doing so, I can always change it back to 1.0.  I would be interested in knowing what amount of rudder deflection the designers (Rob) has to use when banking into a standard rate turn to keep the ball centered, assuming he too is using hardware pedals.

[michaelth 76]

You don't; the two version can co-exist just fine, according to Rob of Real Air. See here: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/422397-real-air-duke-v20-released/?p=2813295

 

Thank you,

 

it installs in another sub-Directory. If one wishes, the previous version can be uninstalled afterwards without side-effect on v2.0.

 

Michael

[KingGhidorah 209]

:smile: "The Duke is a pig and will not run lean of peak."  I found this cartoon video on youtube quite amusing!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnCT24qod4M

[Christopher Low 5,341]

Are landing speeds in V2 significantly higher than V1.5? Or do I just have the levers in a different position when compared to V1.5?

[robert young 2,897]

Answering the above on rudder, the Duke doesn't have high aspect ratio wings so doesn't have much of a requirement to rudder a turn, but there is some need. in V1 we slightly increased the lateral drift and flexibility of yaw in order to enable side slipping and spinning (the spinning is there in order to practice recovery and avoidance rather than deliberate spinning for which the Duke is not cleared). In V2 the rudder authority is slightly stronger and the yaw tightened up a little but not so the original side slipping we are known for, was compromised.

 

If your controls are quite sensitive (mine are not) it might be a good idea to tweak the rudder authority in the aircraft cfg if that's what you like. But we are kind of in a lose lose situation here because I have only slightly increased rudder, as a compromise between "yaw looseness" and also achieving rate one turns, an issue that many customers requested us to improve.

 

Maybe I've gone just a tad too far the other way, but as I say, just a little adjustment in your aircraft cfg should fix this if your rudder control is sensitive..

Are landing speeds in V2 significantly higher than V1.5? Or do I just have the levers in a different position when compared to V1.5?

 

Hi Chris,

 

There were no deliberate changes in landing speeds between the two versions. We have souped up the overall performance though and the reasons for that are fully explained in the Flying Guide,

[GHarrall 494]

You know, I hated to do this, but I changed the Rudder_Effectiveness from 1.0 to 0.7 in the aircraft.cfg. The lack of pedal deflection and the touchiness was just bothering me and didn't feel quite right, not that I claim to know what the Duke really feels like. I especially hated to do that because for all I know, the Duke might be one of those planes that only requires 2 millimeters of rudder to enter into the turn, and by changing things I'm second guessing the developers! Like I said earlier, my Rudders sensitivity is set in FSX to be linear (meaning 50% slider) whereas the Duke Version 2 manual recommends putting your control sensitivities around 30%. I must say, I really don't like to use control curves for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is having to change things around for every different plane. So, with this change from 1.0 to 0.7, the airplane now requires just a tiny bit more rudder upon rolling into the turn, still almost negligible amount, and still less than in Version 1, but it's at least enough that I can feel my leg move now. :lol: We're still only talking having to move the Saitek pedals less than an inch of traverse as a standard turn is initiated until the ailerons are recentered. I guess if I somebody can convince me that I'm making the rudder throw and feel less realistic by doing so, I can always change it back to 1.0. I would be interested in knowing what amount of rudder deflection the designers (Rob) has to use when banking into a standard rate turn to keep the ball centered, assuming he too is using hardware pedals.

If you use the paid version of FSUIPC you can set up individual aircraft control profiles, including control curves. The profile will automatically load each time you use the aircraft.

 

I use that feature a lot.

[TrafficPilot 121]

Bought the update last night. It's worth buying for the landing light effects at night alone! Amazing.

 

So far have completed two circuits both with nice gentle landings. Will experiment with some heavier landings tonight just to hear what it sounds like dropping it on from 20 feet.

 

Great update thanks Rob and Sean. It makes the Duke feel alive and flies just like the real thing!

[Dirk98 354]

I'm getting the same spotlight shooting out from the sun in V2 as I do on the Legacy. Turning off VC Window Reflections and VC Window dirt gets rid of the problem, but I'd rather have some kind of reflections when flying. The Legacy, Duke V2, and Lionheart Fairchild are the only aircraft in my large hanger that display this phenomenon. Since I fly mostly in California, mornings and late afternoons, and the weather is clear more often than  not, this phenomenon is bothersome to me personally as the sun is always in line of sight. Is there any way you could talk to your texture guy about an alternative reflection texture that doesn't do this? Brilliant aircraft otherwise as usual

 

 

This is excaclty the frame part of the windsheild that I don't like so much how it is modelled in RealAir's Duke. The whole windshield perspective does not look authentic, nothing like, for example, in this video to my eye:

 

 

I like Real Air's planes, I have most of them, I appreciate all the system modelling etc., unfortunately Duke doesn't please my eye in the front view, doesn't look right. Sorry, but this is my main and only gripe with RA's Duke.

 

Dirk.

[Q_flyer 766]

/\ /\ /\ /\

 

The video displays a 'fish eye' effect, to the lense, so the windscreen frame and it's angle are distorted in that video, as compared to in real life.

[raymar 969]

:smile: "The Duke is a pig and will not run lean of peak." I found this cartoon video on youtube quite amusing!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnCT24qod4M

Funny as Heck.

 

 

(don't know how to post the link - Twin vs Single debate)

 

Same 2 pigs and even funnier, just think Duke instead of Baron.

 

Ray

[Dirk98 354]

/\ /\ /\ /\

 

The video displays a 'fish eye' effect, to the lense, so the windscreen frame and it's angle are distorted in that video, as compared to in real life.

 

Look at that vertical frame, note the length, width and angle etc.also there are 'flat' photos of Duke's windshield on the interweb. Don't look right to me.

 

Dirk.

[Q_flyer 766]

Look at that vertical frame, note the length, width and angle etc.also there are 'flat' photos of Duke's windshield on the interweb. Don't look right to me.

 

Dirk.

 

Of course that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.   But that would personally never stop me from enjoying all the fantastic fun features that this new v2.0 package offers.