richjb

2560 x 1440 I sharpened my pencils a bit, and I might be able to do a RTX 3070: GIGABYTE Gaming OC GeForce RTX 3070 8GB GDDR6 PCI Express 4.0 ATX Video Card GV-N3070GAMING OC-8GD (rev. 2.0) (LHR) - Newegg.com That card is at the very upper end of what I can afford, but there is some "future proofing" in getting this card. I'm still concerned that 8GB of VRAM might not be enough. Thanks Rich

Thanks FYG001! That’s good information! I’m getting about 20 FPS with the settings above, but backed down to the first notch from the right. I am concerned that the 3060Ti’s 8 GB of VRAM will leave me still with blurry textures, especially if I reinstall HS CL650 with the 8GB VRAM option, which I would really like to do. Newegg does not have 3070, 3070Ti, or 3080 cards with more than 8GB of VRAM. The rest of the cards at too expensive. Is 8GB of VRAM enough for XP12? Thanks! Rich

Hi Pils, I have an i9 9900K with 32 GB of RAM. It’s not the fastest, but it’s not a slouch. I did NOT win the CPU lottery. I have been mostly unable to OC the CPU. I can only run stable at 4.7. I have a good Corsair cooling system and a ASUS ROB MB. I believe the MB let me down a bit. I do not want to replace the computer at this point. My upgrade plans usually involve a mid-life upgrade in graphic cards, which is where I’m at now. is the i9 9900K not good enough any more? XP11 was not bad with HS CL650. What are your thoughts? Thanks! Rich

Hi Cameron and Pils….or anyone else, I am looking at purchasing either a RTX 3060 or a RTX 3060Ti. The 3060 has 12GB of VRAM. The 3060Ti is considerably faster, but limited to 8GB of VRAM. Supposedly, the 3060 is only about 20-25% faster than my current RTX 2060, not a huge increase. However, it has more VRAM which appears to be what XP12 wants…er…needs???? The 3060Ti is much faster, but limited in VRAM for could effect texture quality in the future. For XP12, which is the better option? Is it the speed of the Ti or the VRAM? I’m not willing to shell out $800 plus for a 4000 series card or even 3090. Im just not willing to go there. I can get the 3060 for $360 and Ti for $100 more. Which is the best way to go? I fly both XP12 and MSFS 2020 Thanks for your help!!! Rich Boll

Having flown the PL4 and PL21 since 2006 and noticing that sometimes the magenta V-speeds will drop inexplicably, we set V2 with the cyan speed bug. That way, there is a always at least V2 speed set on the airspeed display. If an engine fails at V1, V2 is the initial target climb out speed at the predicted takeoff pitch. The speed bug set at V2 gives you have visual target to shoot for as you adjust your pitch after takeoff. The initial target pitch attitude us just that, a "target" and not an absolute. And, it is only valid if the engine fails exactly 1 second prior to V1 speed (known as VEF, or engine failure speed). After takeoff if the engine doesn't quit, you can either call for "FLC, set 200 KIAS" or just call for FLC and pitch sync the speed but to your desired speed. When you press FLC, the speed bug syncs to the current speed. If you set it to 200 KIAS before takeoff, you need to be right at/close to 200 KIAS when you press FLC or it will reset to the current speed Several ways to skin this cat. There's no standard "SOP" way of doing it. Rich Boll

Hi Pils, After I started the engines and saved the state in Airframe Manager, the button switched from "Enter FBO" to "Fly". I guess the engines have to be started before you can bypass the FBO. That make sense. Been flying the XP12 version. I like it a lot. Still checking it out. Have some ???? and ##!!?? about XP12, but that's another story! Nice to be back in HS CL650! Thanks again! Rich

Hi Pils, Please see the screen shot below. I have three saved states. I saved them as I worked through the preflight. I'm still "at the FBO", so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. It didn't seem to be that way in XP11. I'm going to try to get to the runway this evening. I'll save a state there and see what it does. Thanks! Rich

Happy New Year everyone! In XP12, I started saving some saved states. However, unlike XP11 in the XP12 version when select a saved state, the only option is to enter through the FBO. In XP11, when selected a saved state, I could go directly into the airplane in that saved state. In XP12, I need to work through the FBO, back up the stairs. I am missing something in XP12? Thanks, Rich Boll

Thanks Cameron & Pils! I was not aware of the XP12's new processes. I will back the sliders down. I though any issues would show up as loss of frame rates, etc. Since the rates were good. I'm trying to hold off on buying a new video card in hopes that the prices continue to drop. I'll make these changes and see how things work! Thanks for the feedback! Rich

Hi everyone, I'm starting to use HS CL650 in XP12 with ver 1.71. I have noticed that the texture quality is not as good as in XP11. I understand that this still may be work-in-progress. However, sometimes the texture quality is so bad as to render the instrument panel that I'm viewing as unusable. An example is attached, which is from the start of the Power Up - First Flight checklist. I have an RTX 2060 graphics card. I'm using driver version 527.56, which I recently upgraded to. XP11 is not affected. I have v 1.71 running in XP11 and the textures are normal, which is to say unchanged from previous versions. The XP12 exterior scenery looks normal, although to be honest, I do not play with XP12 that much. I have only been flying the Shenshee B720 in XP12. For comparison purposes, I have included a screen shot of the Citation X default aircraft from XP12. First question: Do I have any incompatible graphic settings with HS CL650? If so, what needs to be changed? Second question: Is my graphics card too week to run HS CL650? Do I need to get the 8GB card instead of my current 6 GB card? Final question: Do I need to wait just a bit longer before using HS CL650 in XP12? I'm happy with the XP11 version. Would like to use the XP12 version, especially since it is winter!  However, that's not a deal breaker. Any thoughts, ideas, suggestions, etc. would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! Rich Boll Wichita KS

Thanks! Rich

Hi everyone, I have a particular repaint I use in XP11. Will that repaint work in XP12 with ver 1.7? Thanks! Rich Boll

Collin's Nav-to-Nav transfer has always been finnicky, whether it was the PL4, PL21, or PL21 Enhanced. There are many things that can trip it up. One is executing an FMS change on legs page right at the 30 NM distance from ARP. If that happens, the LOC may tune but the CDI will auto set to the inbound course. Found this out the hard on the LDA Rwy 25 into KEGE one day after ATC cleared direct to QNDRY just as we were passing the 30 NM from ARP point. The LOC tuned on both sides, and it auto set the inbound course on the right side (I was PM that leg) but on captain's side, it didn't set the inbound course correctly. When APPR was pressed passing AIGLE, which you must do on this approach because of the stepdown fixes in the intermediate segment are above the LDA GS, we found the CDI turned about 90 degrees from the inbound LDA course. Hold the DME at the wrong time, like on the ILS 6 at TEB is another trap for Nav-to-Nav transfer. Hold the DME after it has done the Nav-to-Nav transfer tuning inside the 30 NM from the ARP. Rich Boll

Lear 35 pilot....

I have not heard about using the WX radar, and it never occurred to me to de-pressurize the aircraft and use the cabin altitude for aircraft altitude. I'm going to keep that one in my bag of tricks to freak out the sim instructor at my next proficiency check! Thanks! Rich Boll

TEB: RUUDY SID: 1) If you're using climb via procedures and VNAV, make sure VNAV is armed prior to takeoff. If it's not, you're not going level at 1500' with the ASEL set to 2000' 2) If using DCL CPDLC to get your clearance, and ATC sends an amended route, make sure you reload your SID because it won't be in the revised route. Not sure if that's replicated with FANS, Hoppie's, VATSIM since I have not had time to explore that feature, but it has caught a few IRL pilots recently. 3) Want to know more about climb via/descend via, please see NBAA's briefing page and presentations: Climb/Descend Via and Speed Adjustment Clearances | NBAA - National Business Aviation Association ASE: LOC/DME E: 1) once comfortable in VMC, try flying it in IMC conditions. Most pilots/operators require visual with the airport at the FAF or they don't descend further. If you see the airport at the FAF, how do you get down. It's a steep 6.00 plus descent angle? VNAV is no help. 3) Balked landing? What if you have go around after you well below MDA and past the MAP? You're climbing into high terrain with no missed approach procedure? Can you stay visual and land? Can you rejoin the missed? If the engine fails, you better have an OEI escape procedure. Somewhere, I have copy of one for CL604 or CL605. Need to find it. Can't build one for my CL300. No performance data for an OEI escape procedure with 30 degree banked turn, which is what's required. Had it for our DA2000. ASE: LINDZ9: Hopefully you have OEI procedure if an engine fails. KSNA: Instead of the DSNEE5, fly the STAAY Four: 00377STAYY (faa.gov) 00377STAYY_C (faa.gov) New flight codes released this month will allow pilots to indicate "RF Leg" capable without being RNP AR APCH. Those that do, can expect the STAAY departure. This is one of the few procedures in the NAS that use RF legs that is not also RNP AR APCH required. You also get to practice climb via procedures and airspeed management through the FMS - Pink bug since airspeed control is critical to maintaining track on RF legs. Just a few thoughts. Rich Boll Wichita, KS

Hi HotStart, I often use the PFD popup window, even if it the same size as the 3-D cockpit window display because it's easier to read. It's not subject to the lighting of X-Plane. While using it, I noticed an anomaly with the airspeed tape. As the tape moves, the speed increments of the tape change, alternating from 10 increments to 5 knot increments as the tape moves up or down due to airspeed changes. If you observe the 3-D PFD display, it does not display this effect. It's annoying more than anything else. I'm running v1.6.1. I can't recall if this was seen on an earlier version. I'm not able to capture it in a video. I can try if this cannot be reproduced. Thanks, Rich Boll

Interesting.... This was a real issue in the Collins FMS for software prior to verion 4.x and the J42 database. It infamously resulted in the "loss of 10,000 instrument approaches from the nav-database". This missed approach is coded as a VD leg or heading-to-DME fix leg. It's similar to a VA or heading-to-altitude leg which was the cause of the issue above. The FMS if it at or above the altitude published for the VA turn (e.g., "climb to 1000 feet then turn right..."), when the FMS saw that the altitude was satisfied, it sequenced the leg and with it, the coded turn direction (e.g, "...then turn right"). The FMS would look at the heading of the aircraft at the time of leg sequence, and if based on its current heading, it would turn in the shortest direction to go to the next waypoint. In the example, if a heading at the time of leg sequence resulted in a left turn being a shorter distance turn to the next leg, then airplane would turn left instead of right. The FAA issued and airworthiness directive removing approximately 10,000 approaches from the database until Collins fixed the problem. This circa 2017. It was not limited to approaches either. The Cathedral SID at Palm Springs CA (KPSP) - 00545CATHEDRAL (faa.gov) was removed from the nav-database for similar reason. When departing runway 31L, the procedure called for flying a 310 heading until crossing the PSP R-268, then a right turn direct to PSP. In some wind conditions, the FMS would calculate left turn as a shorter direction to get to the PSP VOR. When the radial crossing was satisfied, the FMS would drop the coded turn direction and turn in the shorter direction, i.e., left turn to PSP VOR. There was also an issue with TEMP COMP affecting turn direction, which is why TEMP COMP is not authorized in FMSs without software ver 4.x and J42 database. I am going to take a guess that this issue is similar. The FMS is sequencing legs and, in the process, dropping the coded turn direction. Rich Boll

A couple of quick comments... On an ILS approach, when "cleared for the approach", do not select APPR mindlessly. You need to look at what's ahead on the approach leading into the FAF. There's a very simple reason. If you capture the glideslope, following the glideslope will not guarantee compliance with intermediate segment stepdown fixes. A good example of this is the LD Rwy 25 approach into Eagle, CO (KEGE): 06403LDA25 (faa.gov) This approach has a glideslope. You're normally cleared for the approach around RLG or QNDRY. As you turn final, you may be above GS, maybe not especially on hot day. If you capture the glideslope, on hot day, you will descend below the stepdown fix altitudes at WEHAL and AIGLE. On a long ILS approach like you find at ORD, IAD, IAH, DFW, etc, with multiple intermediate segment stepdown fixes, on a hot day, the glideslope will take you below those altitudes. Those altitudes are required for the 1000 ft. separation at turn during parallel runway operations. Back in 2010, after the new runways at ORD opened, there were bunch of CRJ pilots flying Collins aircraft that got pilot deviations for following the training school mantra of "cleared for the approach - arm APPR". That works the sterile environment of the flight simulator. It does not work in real life. Even the Collins SBAS system can get you into trouble. There's a little known issue with the Collins SBAS FMS when an RNAV or RNP APCH approach is loaded. If the aircraft uses the Jeppesen database (the Lufthansa database option is not affected), passing the intermediate fix which is labeled (IF), the FMS will begin using SBAS vertical guidance in place of Baro-VNAV guidance. And it does not matter if VNAV or VGP is displaying. SBAS vertical guidance is not affected by temperature, just like the ILS glideslope. If the temperature is hot, like it is now in DFW, following the VNAV path on a RNAV/RNP approach like the ones on runways 17L/R will take you below the stepdown altitudes. Nothing can be done about it, except using VS mode. I've been curious as to whether this is simulated in HS 650??? If you would read more about, refer here: Hist 19-02-344 (faa.gov) Second, as for the obstacle protection below the DA on an ILS or RNAV or RNP APCH approach to LPV minima, the obstacle protection is exactly the same. The same is true for RNAV RNP APCH approach to LNAV/VNAV line of minima or an RNP AR APCH to any RNP line of minima. The TERPS PANS-OPS obstacle protection surfaces are the same once you're below DA. Now if you are flying an RNAV/RNP approach to LNAV only minima, then the answer is YES. There is NO obstacle protection once you descend below MDA. If you want to find out more about this subject, read this: Hist 12-01-301 (faa.gov) Best regards, Rich Boll

I have had the same issue, same flight DEN to ASE. I also had it on a DEN EGE run. It was always the memory error message, access violation as explained here: Access Violation C0000005 | Microsoft Docs Last night, I did a flight from MRY to STS. No issues. Each of these flights as started with a saved configuration file where all the items prior to taxi were completed and the TAXI checklist was ready to begin. I did have change the FMS location to the current location and re-do the flight plan, performance, etc. Not sure if this helps, but you were not alone... Rich Boll

Link to Aviation International News article about Hot Start's CL650 Desktop Sim Developer Addresses Bizjet Market | Business Aviation News: Aviation International News (ainonline.com) Desktop Sim Developer Addresses Bizjet Market _ Business Aviation News_ Aviation International News.pdf

I'm glad that I'm not the only one using dual cue flight directors.... Rich Boll

What speed limit was showing in the HOLDING page? Rich Boll

Thanks, ois650. I'm looking forward to it!

Thanks! Rich