Jump to content

skiselkov

Members
  • Posts

    453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

skiselkov last won the day on July 2

skiselkov had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

5,019 profile views

skiselkov's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • Well Followed Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare

Recent Badges

306

Reputation

  1. We probably don't exhibit this exact quirk/bug. I've got the system coded so it smoothly transitions to geometric vertical guidance only when the approach is an SBAS approach and is being flown in SBAS mode vertical guidance (selected using the mode switch on the ARR DATA page). If geometric vertical guidance is enabled, then from 5NM inbound to the FAF, I start blending the baro-VNAV with geometric guidance, until at the FAF it becomes purely geometric. As usual, Collins doesn't detail the exact bugs of their code in their user manuals, and so in absence of information to the contrary, I made it do the "smart" thing. Perhaps I should "fix" this and make it do the dumb thing? I'll give the docs you linked a read and think about it.
  2. Thank you for the report, filed under issue #3211. Bug root-caused & fixed for v1.7.
  3. Having had a look at your video, there doesn't seem to be anything obviously wrong you're doing and I cannot reproduce the behavior you've got there. It might be a bug in v1.5 that I've since fixed. Retest with v1.6 when it's out.
  4. Uhm, not seeing any videos. Try uploading them to Youtube.
  5. Please record a video of your test flight so we can see what you're doing. Your broad description doesn't seem to suggest you're doing anything wrong, so seeing the exact steps might help narrow the cause down.
  6. Hey there, I think you're fighting another issue here. If you're using yoke-linked steering, that's X-Plane only giving you some very limited steering authority. I'd recommend using one of your axes on the throttle quad as a rudder. With a rudder axis bound, you will get the full +-20° steering authority on the nose wheel, which combined with the TBM's short wheelbase will give you plenty of steering authority even around very tight spaces. For brakes, just using the regular 'B' key (brake effort regular) will provide sufficient braking during a landing or speed control. In absence of a brake axis, the system simulates gradual application of the brakes on a 'B' keypress, so you can "pulse" the key to get partial braking. It won't be as smooth as a true axis, but it won't slam on the brakes with full force right away.
  7. Please attach the saved FMS flight plan file. You'll find it under Output/CL650/airframes/<airframe-UUID>/avionics/nvram/FMC_pilot_routes. Otherwise I cannot reproduce this.
  8. Ok, this is the thing that explains it. Outdated magvar measurement. As you can see below, the IGRF magnetic model agrees that in 1980 the magnetic variation at the VOR was indeed 4 degrees east:
  9. Interesting. I wonder how they're measuring it. Wonder if it's some local magnetic disturbance that's not captured in the world magnetic model database.
  10. Just for completeness, here's the magnetic variation computed for the exact location of the VOR/DME (not that a mile or two would make difference, but just in case there are questions):
  11. I had a look at this and it doesn't appear to be a bug or badly implemented track indicator. What you are seeing is the accurate magnetic ground track donut. The problem appears to be that the database-provided magnetic variation for the Pine Bluff VOR/DME is incorrect. You are quite correct that the databases say it's 4°E. However, and here's a funny one: the Pine Bluff airport near to the VOR/DME is is declared as 2°E: Now, as to how the airplane knows its magnetic heading - the IRSes contain a magnetic variation database, which is valid from 2020 through to 2025. The IRS feeds the current date + position and this database computes the actual magnetic variation expected at that position and that's what you're seeing on your avionics. And here's the kicker: the magnetic variation database says the actual magnetic variation should be around 0.3°WEST: Similar results using the IGRF magnetic model: You can run the computations for select positions yourself here: https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/calculators/magcalc.shtml Investigating enroute charts, there's a 3 degree declination change over the span of a mere 65 miles. This seem to suggest that the Pine Bluff VOR/DME is misaligned and needs to be realigned IRL: To summarize: doesn't look like a bug to me. Seems more like either the navaid is misaligned IRL, or the navigational database needs to be updated.
  12. To edit the appearance, you need to load into the airframe. You are currently in non-persistent mode, so the airframe you have showing there isn't currently loaded. Simply select the "FLY" button and then once the airframe is loaded, you will be able to edit the appearance.
×
×
  • Create New...