Is it maybe possible that the startup procedure is incorrect?
-
If the intention is to sell this aircraft for consoles (which I believe it is), then you probably also have to consider the practical aspects of using a controller. If you’re cranking the starter, is it then possible to advance the mixture simultaneously? Maybe it is, I don’t use a controller. But before complaints start to roll in, from controller users that can’t start the engine, might be worth checking out.
@ploodovic said in Is it maybe possible that the startup procedure is incorrect?:
If the intention is to sell this aircraft for consoles (which I believe it is), then you probably also have to consider the practical aspects of using a controller. If you’re cranking the starter, is it then possible to advance the mixture simultaneously? Maybe it is, I don’t use a controller. But before complaints start to roll in, from controller users that can’t start the engine, might be worth checking out.
Now that's an awful thought. Not being able to add realism just because it needs to work on consoles using a button controller. That would certainly keep me away from buying this aircraft
Surely there can be an optional helper coded in somewhere, selectable in the tablet for people flying with an Xbox controller. -
Food for thought: Most of these fuel-injected engines can be started using mixture-rich and mixture-ICO. (Of course you should follow the approved procedure in the checklist).
Starting from ICO is commonly approved for a flooded engine start, but can be more forgiving to use for a normal start since fuel injected engines can flood fairly easily. Mixture ICO prevents additional metered fuel from being delivered while the engine is cranking. Cranking continues to draw air through the cylinders, clearing and diluting the excess fuel (If very flooded, some may be expelled through the exhaust) until a combustible fuel-to-air ratio is reached. Starting with mixture rich should still work fine so long as you don't over prime the engine. It would be very cool to see all this modelled in the future, but as of right now I am extremely happy with the engine model improvements.
-
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi All. I wanted to share a contemporaneous example of why it can be a difficult decision to to intercept user input as a developer. I am NOT trying to make an example of this user, but please take a look here to see today's example of the many users who struggle to bind the mixture in my turbocharged aircraft where I do exactly that.
As you see, I have done my best to address this in the FAQ, but there are often several different ways of accessing the same inputs from your hardware, and not all of them are "intercept-able". I have never had any trouble with this myself, but the number of users I see ask the same question, despite the FAQ, gives me some indication of what the results would be for all my aircraft if I adopt this feature. Like I said, it's all-or-nothing, so there is no possibility for an "enable advanced mixture control" option, for example.
However, now that my aircraft have been in the wild of a long time, and everyone seems to learn and get over any mixture control confusion, I am only now feeling confident that I could implement this feature without mass chaos.
Sorry for the long post. Since this is the issue du jour of this aircraft (each aircraft has one), I wanted to provide you a full explanation of why it can be such a difficult decision.
-
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi All. I wanted to share a contemporaneous example of why it can be a difficult decision to to intercept user input as a developer. I am NOT trying to make an example of this user, but please take a look here to see today's example of the many users who struggle to bind the mixture in my turbocharged aircraft where I do exactly that.
As you see, I have done my best to address this in the FAQ, but there are often several different ways of accessing the same inputs from your hardware, and not all of them are "intercept-able". I have never had any trouble with this myself, but the number of users I see ask the same question, despite the FAQ, gives me some indication of what the results would be for all my aircraft if I adopt this feature. Like I said, it's all-or-nothing, so there is no possibility for an "enable advanced mixture control" option, for example.
However, now that my aircraft have been in the wild of a long time, and everyone seems to learn and get over any mixture control confusion, I am only now feeling confident that I could implement this feature without mass chaos.
Sorry for the long post. Since this is the issue du jour of this aircraft (each aircraft has one), I wanted to provide you a full explanation of why it can be such a difficult decision.
@Black-Square „Thank you for the detailed explanation, Nick! It makes total sense now, and I’m really looking forward to the update. This will be amazing!!
-
Thank you @Black-Square for your post, I understand your concern and think it speaks for you that you want to provide your customers with products that are effortless to configure and use.
That example you are linking is something that is seen all over the MSFS community and I think is inevitable. Increased complexity and realism will always increase the chance of people running into issues, your products are certainly not the only ones. But what is the alternative? Keep systems arcade-ish just so that no one will ever get stuck during setup? This is of course heavily exaggerated, but I think there's no need for you to shy away from complex stuff because of people running into issues. That's what the community is here for... and your FAQ, and your manuals, and YouTube, there's so many places where people can and will get help. And in the end, when it also works for those who had encountered issues, they will enjoy the increased realism just as much.It's the nature of the game with MSFS. If you want complex stuff on an open eco-system, then sometimes it takes a bit of effort to get things going. And remember, people complaining after not reading manuals or FAQs are ALWAYS just a loud minority.
-
@Black-Square Thanks for shedding some light on the complexity of the issue, I fully understand compromises had to be made. I am pleased you are feeling confident to implement more realistic startup procedures in future products, maybe even as updates to current ones that need it. Your already excellent products will get even better. Have a great weekend.
-
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi all. After much thinking in the shower, I figured out how to implement this in about six lines of code. Of course this spawned several hours of other code edits, adding more Lycoming behavior, and testing, but it was still easier than I expected.
This had the byproduct of allowing me to implement the delay between mixture cutoff and engine shutdown that many have been asking about for a long time.
It's surprisingly easy, so long as everyone is okay adopting the mixture control bindings of my turbocharged aircraft. (It works with the native bindings, so I'm not sure why people continue to struggle occasionally.) If they revolt, I will send them your way
Kidding, of course.EDIT: I cannot tell you how fun it is starting the engines this way that I am so familiar with from the real world
-
@Black-Square Wow Nick, this is absolutely incredible news!
I cannot thank you enough for diving into the code right away and making this happen.The fact that a simple shower thought solved the axis interception problem with just six lines of code is amazing! And getting the realistic engine shutdown delay as a bonus feature is a dream come true for all realism-minded pilots.I’m so glad you are having fun starting the Lycoming engine the proper way now. It’s going to be a massive improvement for the Commander 114 and it really shows why Black Square is top-tier. Bring on the angry hardware users, we’ve got your back! Thank you so much again for listening to us. I can't wait for the update! -
@Black-Square Fantastic news you figured it out so soon already! I hope you didn't leave the water running too long
Like I said earlier, it will make the Commander 114 even better and more immersive than it already is. Thank you for listening to our feedback, your support is much appreciated. -
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi all. After much thinking in the shower, I figured out how to implement this in about six lines of code. Of course this spawned several hours of other code edits, adding more Lycoming behavior, and testing, but it was still easier than I expected.
This had the byproduct of allowing me to implement the delay between mixture cutoff and engine shutdown that many have been asking about for a long time.
It's surprisingly easy, so long as everyone is okay adopting the mixture control bindings of my turbocharged aircraft. (It works with the native bindings, so I'm not sure why people continue to struggle occasionally.) If they revolt, I will send them your way
Kidding, of course.EDIT: I cannot tell you how fun it is starting the engines this way that I am so familiar with from the real world
@Black-Square said in Is it maybe possible that the startup procedure is incorrect?:
It's surprisingly easy, so long as everyone is okay adopting the mixture control bindings of my turbocharged aircraft. (It works with the native bindings, so I'm not sure why people continue to struggle occasionally.) If they revolt, I will send them your way
Kidding, of course.Nick, I should really know the answer considering I own just about every single one of your aircraft, but the native Mixture Axis/Mixture X Axis bindings map to the K events you need, yes? I don't think I've had any issues making use of them previously, but I haven't looked too closely at whether they're using K events or the A var you specifically say not to use.
-
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi all. After much thinking in the shower, I figured out how to implement this in about six lines of code. Of course this spawned several hours of other code edits, adding more Lycoming behavior, and testing, but it was still easier than I expected.
This had the byproduct of allowing me to implement the delay between mixture cutoff and engine shutdown that many have been asking about for a long time.
It's surprisingly easy, so long as everyone is okay adopting the mixture control bindings of my turbocharged aircraft. (It works with the native bindings, so I'm not sure why people continue to struggle occasionally.) If they revolt, I will send them your way
Kidding, of course.EDIT: I cannot tell you how fun it is starting the engines this way that I am so familiar with from the real world
@Black-Square That's awesome man!!! Looking forward to it!
-
@jasmits Sorry for the late reply to your question, i have talked with my Aircraft mechanic for you. You are actually 100% correct about the "why"! The Lycoming Bendix system is a continuous flow system, so it floods the engine immediately on "Rich" before the engine catches. Continental's system is engine-driven and RPM-dependent, which is why it doesn't flood during start. Spot on!
-
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi all. After much thinking in the shower, I figured out how to implement this in about six lines of code. Of course this spawned several hours of other code edits, adding more Lycoming behavior, and testing, but it was still easier than I expected.
This had the byproduct of allowing me to implement the delay between mixture cutoff and engine shutdown that many have been asking about for a long time.
It's surprisingly easy, so long as everyone is okay adopting the mixture control bindings of my turbocharged aircraft. (It works with the native bindings, so I'm not sure why people continue to struggle occasionally.) If they revolt, I will send them your way
Kidding, of course.EDIT: I cannot tell you how fun it is starting the engines this way that I am so familiar with from the real world
@Black-Square said in Is it maybe possible that the startup procedure is incorrect?:
@Flocat89 @Rimshot @ploodovic @Esoteric @jasmits @kityatyi @mburkhard @SadBucket
Hi all. After much thinking in the shower, I figured out how to implement this in about six lines of code.
Must be a special kind of water supplied to your place!
Thank you, well done sir, appreciate your efforts massively! I just went ahead and bought the Commander, even though I'm still waiting for that Virpil yoke that seems to take forever to arrive on the market
