Jump to content

Aerosoft Aircraft: Twin Otter (released)


Mathijs Kok
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Heiligs Blechle said:

I'm afraid that you need a NASA computer to achieve such resolutions and fly (simulate) smoothly with 50-60 fps :)

 

 

 

With a 3090 at 4k Ultra you can achieve those fps if you are not near the ground..... :)

The GPU to generate 4k Ultra @60fps near the ground has not been invented yet. The 4090 is coming in ~Nov 2022, maybe that will do it!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JasonmCork said:

My god! What GPU have ye used? this looks real! and the clouds look crisp!

 

Haha! Thank you for the kind words all for the screenshot. Believe it or not - I'm playing this on a GeForce 1070 with a i7-6700K CPU and 64 GBs of RAM. The screenshot is taken on high-end settings capped to 30 fps. I have a VRR screen which makes it look way more than that. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2021 at 6:42 PM, Transair27 said:

Now that St Barts is being well and truly utilised for Otter testing, can you tell me if you're using Beta props on the approach? that should keep the speed at about 70 knts.

Sorry for the late reply....

Did not use beta, was light (after dumping all those jumpers, hehe), and managed the approach with idle thrust and a healthy dose of reverse on touchdown.

Still working out throttle settings in the beta (beta test, not the prop beta range, hehe)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2021 at 5:35 PM, Transair27 said:

apprec your response and greatly respect your comments - clearly flight crew. But we def did use Beta (yellow lights on) from 400ft, and stall warning went off on touchdown.  Speed was 'lower'!!!!

Hmm I am curious as to when this was. DeHaviland have banned beta range in-flight for a long, long time. This includes operators prohibiting "approach beta", as the risk of moving into beta reverse was too high - doing so would almost certainly result fatally in most scenarios. The Captain would have been subverting SOP, and while I have been witness to this, it speaks to a lack of confidence of both own piloting skill and aircraft. An idle thrust approach at standard vref and flap setting will allow for any safe landing at any destination capable of the Otter. That you can rely on, and I would encourage you and other otter simmers to experience her for what she can do within her operational limits (and have some fun with "experimental techniques" after) ;) I would have not flown with that Captain again! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, angernerve said:

Hmm I am curious as to when this was. DeHaviland have banned beta range in-flight for a long, long time. This includes operators prohibiting "approach beta", as the risk of moving into beta reverse was too high - doing so would almost certainly result fatally in most scenarios. The Captain would have been subverting SOP, and while I have been witness to this, it speaks to a lack of confidence of both own piloting skill and aircraft. An idle thrust approach at standard vref and flap setting will allow for any safe landing at any destination capable of the Otter. That you can rely on, and I would encourage you and other otter simmers to experience her for what she can do within her operational limits (and have some fun with "experimental techniques" after) ;) I would have not flown with that Captain again! 

A good exemple of accident is the one In Saint Barth. A Twin operated by Air Caraïbes, crashed onto a house near the approach end of the runway. In fact the captain was in a hurry to watch a soccer game. He did the approach faster than usually. And try to put the reverse on short final. He had not flown the Twin in a while as I believe, he was affected to the Dornier 228. When he realized the plane had not enough energy, he went full throttle. But engines spooled up inharmoniously resulting in a deadly spin. 
 

As far as I know, at least for Saint Barth, they never land with the Beta until the plane touchdown. But even without that, I have seen both from inside and outside, plane landing with an approach speed way below 70 kt and stopping in less than 300 ft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, angernerve said:

Hmm I am curious as to when this was. DeHaviland have banned beta range in-flight for a long, long time. This includes operators prohibiting "approach beta", as the risk of moving into beta reverse was too high - doing so would almost certainly result fatally in most scenarios. The Captain would have been subverting SOP, and while I have been witness to this, it speaks to a lack of confidence of both own piloting skill and aircraft. An idle thrust approach at standard vref and flap setting will allow for any safe landing at any destination capable of the Otter. That you can rely on, and I would encourage you and other otter simmers to experience her for what she can do within her operational limits (and have some fun with "experimental techniques" after) ;) I would have not flown with that Captain again! 

My understanding is that the aircraft is not certified for 'reverse' in flight but Ok for BETA.  Not sure in the St Barts accident which they used, and whereby one engine failed to come out of beta/reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, steve dra said:

Sorry for the late reply....

Did not use beta, was light (after dumping all those jumpers, hehe), and managed the approach with idle thrust and a healthy dose of reverse on touchdown.

Still working out throttle settings in the beta (beta test, not the prop beta range, hehe)

That's Ok Steve.  As is angernerve, I too am curious as to what is used.  We def had the Beta lights on, on short final, and we stopped before Taxiway C - about half way down the runway.  I'm sure we also landed on SABA using Beta on short final. And again, the stall warning sounded right on touchdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously excited for this addon, been following it since I saw the announcement.

 

I'm not familiar with MSFS' modelling structure, and I have a question that is not specific to this aircraft but I feel it's important:

If liveries are not included in the base pack, does this make it harder for modders to skin planes with the Tail Number changeable using the in game settings?

The reason I ask is I'm seeing some planes (not Aerosofts) released with a changeable (dynamic) tail numbers (even the base game planes), but when the dynamic number is not in the right place for the skin it seems as though reskinners are applying a fixed tail number by editing the skin, then we end up with TWO tail numbers in the game (one fixed and the other one I set) and I find it annoying. I don't mind if some liveries I would like to see (mostly Loganair) aren't included but if is not easy for reskinners to create these liveries with a dynamic tail number then I would rather see them included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Root Admin
1 hour ago, LeeEnfieldAS37 said:

Seriously excited for this addon, been following it since I saw the announcement.

 

I'm not familiar with MSFS' modelling structure, and I have a question that is not specific to this aircraft but I feel it's important:

If liveries are not included in the base pack, does this make it harder for modders to skin planes with the Tail Number changeable using the in game settings?

The reason I ask is I'm seeing some planes (not Aerosofts) released with a changeable (dynamic) tail numbers (even the base game planes), but when the dynamic number is not in the right place for the skin it seems as though reskinners are applying a fixed tail number by editing the skin, then we end up with TWO tail numbers in the game (one fixed and the other one I set) and I find it annoying. I don't mind if some liveries I would like to see (mostly Loganair) aren't included but if is not easy for reskinners to create these liveries with a dynamic tail number then I would rather see them included.

 

Will need to ask about the number but repainting MSFS aircraft remains not very easy as you can't do decals. So to get somewhat sharp details you need 8k textures while we use 2K with decals to get a far better result with far less memory use. We do not plan more liveries at this moment though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Root Admin
34 minutes ago, Tal A. said:

Amazing job! A "dirty" version of that livery (and others..) would look so awesome! Are any planned to be released with the plane?

 

We'll see. Keep in mind we have already 14 models (!) for a very modest price so I need to be careful to add stuff. Right now we only want to get it done.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Bikiniweekend said:

 

Cooool. I'm waiting for this plane to do the route around the world together the DC6. It is sooo exciting, I'm just scared of the manual size 😅

Manual can't be chunkier than the CRJ's, right? RIGHT? 😆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Mathijs Kok changed the title to Aerosoft Aircraft: Twin Otter (released)
  • Mathijs Kok locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...