Sky Simulations DC-9 - FIRST UPDATE (coming soon)

[@mightymackrel5548]

Looks like this update fixes a lot of the major bugs! A few things I noticed: - The DME is multiplied by 10 - you're indicating 200nm away from the field at 34:44. Might be worth mentioning this to the dev - The strobes are triggered by weight on wheels. That said, I don't see them activated in the air either - I imagine the issues with the AP are to do with thrust, hence why the descent works fine. The unit looks like the SP150, same as in the 727, but the labelling is misleading (This might be accurate to the real aircraft). Instead of controlling the vertical speed, the wheel actually controls the pitch. This means the aircraft doesn't have enough forward momentum to climb at the attitude you were telling it to go to, and instead just slowed down. Don't forget, the instrument tooltips the sim gives might be wrong - The white knob in the middle of the ice protection panel is your pitot heat! You're fine flying outside of icing conditions, but you might find you get unreliable airspeed indications as the weather gets colder. Setting it to CAPT should be fine

[@PeterMatthess]

@mightymackrel5548 I think it's because there should be a decimal point...but there's not

[@mightymackrel5548]

@@PeterMatthess Typically those analogue DMEs read in hundreds, you don't see it much in the sim because the ranges are wrong. I've pulled FSX's navdata in and get readings from more than 150nm out now

[@rynovoski]

I just confirmed that that is correct, re: strobes. I know on the MD-80, some of the checklists I've seen have you set the lights to "BOTH" during the checklist for the same reason: strobes will activate on takeoff, but apparently DC-9s too, although apparently few DC-9-10s allegedly had them?

[@ceegnz]

I didn't know 'vortilon' either, so ... Vortilons are fixed strakes on the underside of the wing used to improve handling at low speeds. The original engine pylons on the DC-8 had to be shrunk to reduce drag, wind-tunnel testing on the DC-9 showed that fitting similar pylons to the DC-9 wings would be beneficial to wing lift and upwash at the tail at the low speed stall. So the shrunken pylon was shrunk even further and became a VORTex-generating pYLON - or "vortlon", because why not ... Vortilons were first introduced with the McDonnell Douglas DC-9 to achieve a strong nose down pitching moment just beyond the normal stall. cheers wikipedia :)

[@Mets747]

Would love to see a GPS unit added and the strobe lights fixed, I LOVE the rotating beacon, nailed that!

[@ghillif8228]

The vortilon works like a barrier that stop the stall coming from the external side of the wing that usually stall before, and try to maintain the laminar movement of the air under the wing. I saw this video and i notice other wrong behavior, the first one is that the APU BUS and the EXT BUS cannot be connected at the same time in parallel, electrical system can be powered or from APU or from the EXT source. The strobo lights probably start to works after the lift up of the Nose Landing Gear when the Ground Shift Mechanism give the signal to the systems that the airplane is in flight. In the Md80 series was Made this improvement but here really i don’t know. In the Dc9-51 series, as i remember there was also an autothrottle that worked only in Approach mode, not on cruise or in climb and the lever to activate it was the grey disc that you can see in the mid of the pedestal close to the power levers, for the activation the pilot must push forward the disc and the reference speed was selected by the knob in the Mach/Airspeed indicator. Also The behavior of the APU generator isn’t correct when you put the APU Master Switch to OFF because the blu light APU AVAIL must remain ON and the signal of the APU GEN comes ON in the annunciator panel. If the next update will fix all these bugs and the autopilot will works correctly i will buy this airplane. Bye

[@PeterMatthess]

@ghillif8228 thanks for your comments! Will forward them to the dev

[@LuisArgerich]

They need to get that AP working properly to stop the bleeding of reputation. It can be quite a decent add-on with a working AP. Of course they will also have to get rid of the magic chocks. If you are in contact with them please make them aware that the starter fuel pump is not used nor it is needed to start the plane, only the APU and then where is the starter mode A/B/Both that all DC-9s have, maybe I'm missing something but that is not even modeled in the overhead panel? Final thing: Did you check if you can push-back on reverse thrust? The Dc-9 was notoriously known for doing power-backs. Thanks for the review and hope you can do another if there is another patch. Really appreciated!

[@PeterMatthess]

@LuisArgerich hi, yea you can do powerbacks, I did one in my last video before this one so that's a thing. Yea the AP being fixed is primary

[@Realflight1986]

Those chocks tho 😂

[@ilarikousa1500]

Can you ask him if this will be on the Marketplace?

[@FSXVSB01Bolt3r]

Is there an option for an FMS or GPS navigation?

[@PeterMatthess]

no currently not

[@340ACP]

I’ll just say that the DC-9 is one of the most enjoyable aircraft I ever flew. Easy to manoeuvre around and to land….im not seeing this at all in that model. I’ve been waiting for a DC-9 for long time and was excited about this add on but sadly this isn’t it. Small wonder JustFlight took it off the market

[@PeterMatthess]

@340ACP yea that's an interesting point, this flight model feels like it has a wallowing feel to the controls, what are your thoughts on that?

[@340ACP]

@@PeterMatthessthe real aircraft didn’t behave like that at all. It was like flying a sports cars, very smooth and responsive, I real joy to fly. As far as the autopilot is concerned, most of us never used it except for a short time in cruise and there was no issues maintaining altitude. The aircraft was certified for ILS CATII approaches so it was quite capable. The developers have a huge amount of work to make this model work. It should have never hit the market in that unfinished state, in my opinion. Shameful really. And thanks for your honest unbiased assessment of the add on even if you received a free copy 👨‍✈️👍

[@PeterMatthess]

@340ACP no I didn't receive a free copy actually, I bought it on day one and fed back my thoughts to the dev who then got in contact as I'd offered help in testing updates. Yea lots of work still left to do, hopefully they continue to refine it.

[@SatThuVoBui]

That's awesome man. And see, this is actually a productive response rather than just attacking the devs and insulting them for releasing a bad product. Not to say people don't have a justification for being outraged or upset. They do, but this is what you do if you actually want the add on to be improved and eventually good. ​@@PeterMatthess

[@zamirmaduro2338]

thy shoud put option for GTN750 for better navigation

[@mazdajaune]

Well, it seems you have deleted my previous my comment. It's okay, you are the boss here. Another thing I want to know. Did you test if the DC9 produce contrails because on my side I don't see any.

[@PeterMatthess]

@@mazdajaune no I haven't deleted any comments at all. Maybe it was held for review or something

[@rshvkkt91]

looks promising but has a long way to go, better squish the bugs before somebody releases a proper 737-200 for the sim!

[@French28Pilot]

plz ask to the dev to put a gtn 750 plz

[@asoshkin]

This plane is a mess. Thank god I didn’t buy it. I hope some of you who bought it get a refund.

[@PeterMatthess]

@@asoshkin no chance, we will only just hope that it gets a lot better than this

[@Topofdescent55]

I asked for a refund... no reply from the dev🙄

[@joshuaspop8865]

I like the idea of flying these classics. But if anyone uses an ATC app, VATSIM, etc, this thing would at least need a GPS to fly RNAV procedures. VOR navigation isn’t really a thing anymore. Even a 530 would work.

[@PeterMatthess]

@joshuaspop8865 it's not a thing any more yes that's true but it doesn't stop people flying it as it used to be flown before GPS. There are good pre-gps airliners coming to msfs soon, such as the justflight a300b4 and the pmdg747-100, also the fss727 is also already in msfs2020 so there are options.

[@joshuaspop8865]

@ I get it, but I use BATC. If one wants to use any ATC app, or even VATSIM, not at least having a GPS would be difficult if not impossible, especially on long arrivals into big airports. I doubt any airliner or freighters currently operate without at least a GPS unit for RNAV procedures.

[@PeterMatthess]

@joshuaspop8865 no of course not that's true. But what I'm saying g is in a simulator we have the ability to wind the clock back and fly something like it's the 1950s for instance. And I personally prefer that to flying modern stuff, which is why I like to have my cockpits without modern GPS units and flatscreens. (That's not a hard rule of mine though, I break it for the good exceptions)

[@joshuaspop8865]

@ sure, as long as you’re not using a ATC program. Soon as you’re instructed to fly a STAR into a busy airport, you’d be lost. In the real world, you can just tell ATC you’re not RNAV equipped and they will vector you. Plus, every time there’s an AIRAC update from Navigraph, there are less VOR stations. They are dinosaurs and will be gone eventually. I like the F28 from Just Flight, if I want to be old school, I can. But it also has the GPS option form modern flying with ATC. Even if the developer slapped in a GPS, so you could actually fly current real world procedures, you don’t have to use it if you don’t want.

[@Scarebus_Driver]

VOR navigation is a basic function required for holding an instrument rating. VOR is still used widely especially now with gps jamming and spoofing widespread. Learn dont make excuses..