flyingfudge Posted January 14, 2022 Report Posted January 14, 2022 (edited) Flying an RNP Rwy 08 approach at EGJJ fully automated, the aircraft didn't maintain the 3 degree descent path and was significantly high at each mile checkpoint. ( appx 250 ft high ) As per the attached pics it looks like the aiming point of the FD on the HUD is pointing at the threshold of the opposite end of the runway. Log.txtFetching info... Edited January 14, 2022 by flyingfudge Added Navigraph plate
dlrk Posted January 14, 2022 Report Posted January 14, 2022 (edited) Could you post a full plugins list? I had this bug and it mysteriously went away after rearranging and deleting some Edited January 14, 2022 by dlrk
flyingfudge Posted January 14, 2022 Author Report Posted January 14, 2022 (edited) Hi @dlrk Hopefully it is a plugin as I'm having quite a few problems at the moment. Sometimes my thrust levers become inoperable, especially after a saved situation and a few other oddities. Appreciate it if you'd look at the attached plugin list. Only some are activated as you can see by xOrganizer. Many thanks ....... Edited January 14, 2022 by flyingfudge
flyingfudge Posted January 15, 2022 Author Report Posted January 15, 2022 I've taken all plugins out and still getting the same problem. Also tried on another copy of xplane in OpenGL with the same result.
flyingfudge Posted January 15, 2022 Author Report Posted January 15, 2022 The plot thickens! It would appear that the aircraft is starting the descent too late and maintaining that altitude error on the GP. It should start down from 2000ft at 5.3nm from the threshold of 08 but as seen in the pic. it's just commencing the descent at 4.5nm from the runway. It then maintains this error throughout the remainder of the approach. Could this be a Navigraph issue?
flyingfudge Posted January 16, 2022 Author Report Posted January 16, 2022 (edited) New install of Xplane and aircraft. No custom scenery or airports. No plugins except Navigraph, Simlink & WebFMC, and it's exactly the same. I suspect it's a Navigraph problem but appreciate it if one of the Devs could check it out and confirm..... Log.txtFetching info... Edited January 16, 2022 by flyingfudge Added Log.txt
flyingfudge Posted January 16, 2022 Author Report Posted January 16, 2022 Same flight with a different aircraft. It descends at the platform altitude at the correct 5.3nm FAF point and maintains the approach profile correctly throughout the descent. Something strange is happening with the CL650.
PhilippK Posted January 16, 2022 Report Posted January 16, 2022 Hey, I got the same problem you have. I try to use RNAV LPV approaches, but I'm always to high. The Glidepath never matches up to the PAPIs along the runway. Maybe the problem is, that the final descend into the GP begins too late. I tried it with Temp Correction on and of, because I first though about the problem in front of the PC, but it happens always. And Temp Correction should only be used, when Temp is outside of the limits (published in the charts).
Henksu Posted January 16, 2022 Report Posted January 16, 2022 Same here. Everytime I fly LPV, this happens, "normal" RNP (or AR) with no WAAS/EGNOS works fine.
flyingfudge Posted January 16, 2022 Author Report Posted January 16, 2022 Thanks guys, I thought I was going mad! I also tried it with Temp Correction on/off but it made no difference. Hopefully the Devs will pick this up and have a look at it.
PhilippK Posted January 17, 2022 Report Posted January 17, 2022 (edited) Sorry, posted it twice… can’t delete it Edited January 17, 2022 by PhilippK
PhilippK Posted January 17, 2022 Report Posted January 17, 2022 On 1/16/2022 at 1:15 PM, Henksu said: Same here. Everytime I fly LPV, this happens, "normal" RNP (or AR) with no WAAS/EGNOS works fine. Expand I also tried an RNAV approach and deselected LPV, flow Baro references instead. Works well, so the LPV-function seems to be not really okay… hope they will fix it with the next update.
flyingfudge Posted January 17, 2022 Author Report Posted January 17, 2022 On 1/16/2022 at 1:11 PM, PhilippK said: Hey, I got the same problem you have. I try to use RNAV LPV approaches, but I'm always to high. The Glidepath never matches up to the PAPIs along the runway. Maybe the problem is, that the final descend into the GP begins too late. I tried it with Temp Correction on and of, because I first though about the problem in front of the PC, but it happens always. And Temp Correction should only be used, when Temp is outside of the limits (published in the charts). Expand @PhilippK What airports are you flying at when the problem occurs? Apparently Toto is aware of my problem at EGJJ but doesn't think it happens on every airfield with an LPV approach.
Henksu Posted January 17, 2022 Report Posted January 17, 2022 I had it when tried EFKE RNP 36, CYUL RNAV 24L at least what I can remember.
PhilippK Posted January 17, 2022 Report Posted January 17, 2022 On 1/17/2022 at 11:43 AM, flyingfudge said: @PhilippK What airports are you flying at when the problem occurs? Apparently Toto is aware of my problem at EGJJ but doesn't think it happens on every airfield with an LPV approach. Expand I tried it at LEPA 06L, EDVE 26, KHND 35L… maybe a few more. Right now I think it occurs on every LPV. Since now I have never flown a LPV approach in the.
dlrk Posted January 17, 2022 Report Posted January 17, 2022 I don't think it has anything to do with the airport.
flyingfudge Posted January 17, 2022 Author Report Posted January 17, 2022 No definitely isn't. Same approach with LPV de-selected and it flew it perfectly in LNAV/VNAV.
Kikis0507 Posted January 18, 2022 Report Posted January 18, 2022 Hi There, I had the same experience yesterday whilst performing an LPV approach CYUL 06R? The GP indicator told me I was spot on. However if I would have followed it I would have flown myself into the ground. I actually tested it to proof (see screenshot) the problem by having the RNP set up on the left side and the ILS for the same runway on the right. This showed that the GP was completely misaligned as the glide slope indicator for the same runway was correct and showed I was much too low. Anyway @toto and the guys are aware and they are investigating the issue. Regards Frits
PhilippK Posted January 21, 2022 Report Posted January 21, 2022 @Graeme_77 Has this problem been forwarded? Is it a bug or a feature? Any chance of being fixed? Thanks Philipp
flyingfudge Posted January 21, 2022 Author Report Posted January 21, 2022 (edited) @PhilippK Saw this on the Discord yesterday from Toto so looks like it's been fixed. Edited January 21, 2022 by flyingfudge
Graeme_77 Posted January 21, 2022 Report Posted January 21, 2022 (edited) Report 2395 Fixed in v1.1r1, January 22, 2022 Issue should be corrected now, related to how the FMS was using the elevation provided by the GPS systems. Please report any further occurrences in a new thread, and mention Report 2395. TVM. Edited January 21, 2022 by Graeme_77
Recommended Posts