C101 EFM

[Xoho]

Absolutely fantastic job. Had a ton of fun throwing it around doing stalls, spins, inverted stalls and spins, tail slides, and knife flight. Didn't have an issue once. Takeoff had me worried, since I didn't think I had enough runway, but once airborne it just wanted to fly no matter what I threw at it. Airbrake behavior took a little bit of trial and error to get used to. (Hold for 1/4-1/2 second to deploy) Incredibly stable in the landing configuration where stalling was smooth and without issue, as the nose would gradually drop with full aft stick applied until airspeed increased.

Edited December 20, 2018 by Xoho

[kontiuka]

Thanks for the review!

[Rudel_chw]

The "light" on light attack plane is very deserved .. I loaded it up for CAS and the weight went to 120% :) ... had to take out fuel until less than 20% remained.

 

 

 

 

Other things of note:

 

 

- The trim readout now works.

- The rudders no longer control the nosewheel, have to use differential braking.

- The control bindings for CC and EB are separate, so will have to bind everything again .. but will try to see if I can export on EB and import on CC.

- Roll rate is much less than before.

- Take off runs are longer and it seems to me that now the aircraft requires more airspeed to rotate.

 

 

But overall, really happy with the new toy :)

[msalama]

Thanks for the sitrep guys, sounds really good. I'm on sick leave and will probably brighten my fluish week by purchasing this burdie tomorrow. S!

[golani79]

Short question: will we get force feedback support for EFM?

 

 

Even if it´s only centering force / buffeting like it was in the SFM?

[Vibora]

Short question: will we get force feedback support for EFM?

 

 

Even if it´s only centering force / buffeting like it was in the SFM?

Yes. Still WIP. Our apologizes.

[Zoomer]

Yes. Still WIP. Our apologizes.

 

Excellent module and very enjoyable. It puts the L-39 in the shade in it`s versatility, 2x Mk84`s, rocket pods, cannon and A2A missiles in one loadout. The array of ordnance it can wield is impressive, and it`s a pleasure to fly as well as being a little pitbull. A great aircraft to pick and a very well executed piece of work. Count me very interested in your next project :thumbup:.

 

Have you any more recent news on what`s in progress, the Mirage F1.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Zoomer

[golani79]

Yes. Still WIP. Our apologizes.

Wonderful - will make a great plane even better :)

 

Thanks a lot!

[msalama]

...aaaaaaand PURCHASED!

[LuSi_6]

Great job! I bought it on pre-purchase many years ago. Now I'm happy that I did. Great work!

[rrohde]

Great module, great EFM. Finally a worthy western trainer to accommodate the L-39. Great job Aviodev!

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Is the very significant nose-dive when you deploy the airbrake, how the real aircraft behaves as well, or is this to be tweaked later on?

 

 

I remember other modules having such initial issues with their flight model.

[Aginor]

Considering the size and the position of the air brake that's pretty much what I would expect it to do.

No clue if it is really that way though.

[Vibora]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3728221&postcount=12

[Sydy]

Hi guys,

 

Congratulations. Loved the CC vs and looking forward to flying it some more.

 

All the best,

 

Sydy

[Vibora]

Thank you guys! :)

[Vitormouraa]

Very nice FM indeed. Systems are very well made, the cockpit is gorgeous. I love the lighting, it' very unique.

 

But I was surprised by how slow the C-101 is, kind of a trivial question, but is that really the case? In terms of thrust at least, it's similar to the L-39.

 

Well done, Vibora and team! Looking forward to seeing more modules being developed by AvioDev.

[kontiuka]

But I was surprised by how slow the C-101 is, kind of a trivial question, but is that really the case? In terms of thrust at least, it's similar to the L-39

On this point, question to the devs. Is the CC version modelled with the higher thrust?

[Jethro11]

Well done team, love the new CC and flight model.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3728221&postcount=12

Sweet, thank you! :thumbup:

[Cobra747]

But I was surprised by how slow the C-101 is, kind of a trivial question, but is that really the case? In terms of thrust at least, it's similar to the L-39.

 

Yes, the power to weight seemed to be really lacking!

 

Curious to know how accurate this really is.

[Zius]

;3729828']Yes, the power to weight seemed to be really lacking!

 

Curious to know how accurate this really is.

 

Because I'm lazy I'm quoting Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-39_Albatros#Specifications_(L-39C)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CASA_C-101#Specifications_(CASA_C-101EB)

 

 

L39C:

Empty weight 3,455 kg (7,617 lb)

Thrust 16.87 kN (3,792 lbf)

 

 

C101EB:

Empty weight 3,800 kg (8,380 lb)

Thrust 15.8 kN (3,550 lbf)

 

 

So, yeah, the L39C has lower weigth and more thrust...

 

 

I bought the C-101 yesterday, and I think it's great. Even more easy to fly and operate than the Albatros! :thumbup:

Edited December 22, 2018 by Zius

[kontiuka]

The C-101 was built more for range than for power which is probably why it has it has lower rated engines.

[golani79]

I need to test the EB in EFM - only have tried the CC yet.

But is there a difference recognizable in power to weight between EB and CC as the CC should have a better ratio I think?

 

 

Has anyone compared already?

[Vitormouraa]

The C-101 was built more for range than for power which is probably why it has it has lower rated engines.

 

We have a difference of 1,07 kN of thrust from the L-39. The difference isn't that great. And the specific fuel consumption of the Garret and AI-25TL is the same! So nope! Even if that was true it wouldn't explain why the C-101 is so slow compared to the Albatros. Obviously, they are not the same airframe, the aerodynamic system is different, but I was surprised by how slow the C-101 is compared to the Albatros which has almost the same engine in terms of thrust.