• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

MSFS20 Saab MFI-17 "Mushshak (The proficient)"

a better option is AAM for me personally. Aircraft Airfile Manager.
 
For what it's worth. Contact Carenado and ask if you can use their Beechcraft T-34 sound file. The sounds are rich and throaty, and it (sound file) should serve until you can get an accurate MFI-17 sound of your own. Anyway, that's what I would do.
 
butterly said:
For what it's worth. Contact Carenado and ask if you can use their Beechcraft T-34 sound file. The sounds are rich and throaty, and it (sound file) should serve until you can get an accurate MFI-17 sound of your own. Anyway, that's what I would do.
Click to expand...

I am looking for lycoming IO-360 sounds, what engine does T-34 use?
 
The T-34 uses the Continental E-225. The lycoming IO-360 is a 4-cylinder and the Continental E-225 is a 6-cylinder. So I guess it won't work

But sounds shouldn't be too hard to find, since the IO-360 is widely used in the C172
 
Good morning! Roel is absolutely right on everything said. And since your plan is to utilize the IO-360, a Cessna 172 sound do. Keep in mind that the 172's cabin sounds will be different (quieter) than the MFI 17's. That said; just a couple things. The (Super Mushshak) see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_Super_Mushshak uses the Lycoming IO-540 V4A5 6 cylinder 260hp engine @ 2700RPM. My including this information now, is not my attempt to confuse of distract. It is only an attempt to inform and justify[?] the fact that this old guy really likes the Carenado T-34's sound. Again, Roel is absolutely right and a quick solution is the Cessna 172 sound.
 
I can edit the C172 sounds since I have had a few encounters with the Mushshaks. Let's try ..... :stirthepo

butterly said:
Good morning! Roel is absolutely right on everything said. And since your plan is to utilize the IO-360, a Cessna 172 sound do. Keep in mind that the 172's cabin sounds will be different (quieter) than the MFI 17's. That said; just a couple things. The (Super Mushshak) see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_Super_Mushshak uses the Lycoming IO-540 V4A5 6 cylinder 260hp engine @ 2700RPM. My including this information now, is not my attempt to confuse of distract. It is only an attempt to inform and justify[?] the fact that this old guy really likes the Carenado T-34's sound. Again, Roel is absolutely right and a quick solution is the Cessna 172 sound.
Click to expand...

That's why the title was changed to MFI-17 Mushshak and I removed "super mushshak!" Because the acrobatic Super Mushshak is a whole different story! :P
 
I didn't know a PAC Super Mushshak had been part of your initial plans. That's what happens when one arrives late to a party. A Lycoming IO-360 it is then!
 
FSX frame rates:

1.jpg
2.jpg
 
I purchased a new addon over the weekend just to find a problem with the lighting (beacon) system. The model was obviously not tested fully. Nice model - sloppy programming! If you need help in testing, feel free to ask.
 
Second that! I'm running betaphase already from March or so, just because users could be annoyed by any error/problem/anything.
 
Yes that's true Penz. However, when someone pays for a product they expect that product to work - now, not some time in the future. Think about that in your own life. You wouldn't want to purchase a new car that had a non-working horn or turn signals or starter. Would you? Same with a purchased $35.00 simulated airplane. The publisher does his/her best to get it right the first time. My job as user is to inform the publisher on what doesn't work. The job of publisher is to fix it and offer the user, me, an update. Obvious errors are usually the result of trying to rush the product to market - sloppy programming.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top