Bulat

And what to do with the difference in the indications of the flight path vectors on the MFD and HUD, you did not say. Will it stay or will you fix it? 206583514_FLIGHTPATHVECTOR.mp4 611123679_Er-rSIDSTAR.docx

Thanks for the good piloting tips! There should be no difference in the Flight path vector readings, as there can be no difference in the length of the landing gear, half-wing, etc. The onboard processor on a live aircraft calculates the value of the Flight path vector and provides all consumers. You know that very well. But your CL650 obviously has two sources of calculations and the Flight path vector display, and from here there is a difference (I may be wrong). In my subjective opinion, HUD has more plausible data. Do you think I have correctly justified the need for amendments, or will we continue the debate on how to pilot an airplane correctly?

Thanks for the quick response and I now know that it is impossible to pilot by the Flight path vector pointer . But you did not specify where it is written in the Flight Crew Operations Manual about the possible (permissible) difference in the Flight path vector readings on HUD and MFD?

I saw a big difference in the Flightpath vector readings on HUD and MFD. In the video, you realized that exposure to MFD Flightpath vector led to a landing to RWY. I understand that this is a minor flaw inherent in the Challenger 650 aircraft, and you are forced to repeat it. And until he is eliminated on the plane itself, will he stay on the flight simulator? 206583514_FLIGHTPATHVECTOR.mp4 611123679_Er-rSIDSTAR.docx

Hi amyinorbit! Let's clarify, in this topic we are discussing ProLine 21, which is modeled on the Hot start flight simulator SL650 ? If you called the display program "ProLine 21", this is absolutely not an argument in favor of its excellent work. Do you understand what I'm writing about? The SID and STAR display system has shortcomings and they need to be eliminated! In the next topic I will describe in detail one of the errors.

ОК. Here again there was an incident with the display of the SID "ABLO27" scheme in LGAV: after crossing the altitude (1100), the plane did not reach the specified line 2nm begins to turn. Should the plane turn around? Where to? For what course? How will the "NAV" mode work? LGAV SID ABLO2J er.docx

An interesting error at the EDDL airfield has been discovered. How to fix it? Apr EDDL RWY 05.docx

LFPG данные ВПП.docxLFPG данные ВПП.docxLFPG данные ВПП.docxLFPG данные ВПП.docxLet's look at the drawings. The lower figure of the LFPG airfield diagram shows that the RWY26R threshold has been moved to 1969 (ARINC data section "PG"). What did it affect? TORA TODA ASDA (You can google the abbreviation) since RWY 08L and RWY26R have not changed and are gladly used by pilots to calculate before each takeoff. And only one thing has changed: for RW26R -LDA, it decreased for landing on 1969f. Thus, the entire surface of the concrete strip is used for take-off from both directions and for landing from one direction 08L and only one direction 26 R uses a shortened length for landing. If I were a leading programmer, I would display on MFD all airfields within a radius of 10-15 miles in flight below 5000-3000f. The ARINC database has all this; and the computer needs one time to calculate and display for one airfield or for 5 airfields. Just imagine, after takeoff you have a fire in the plane and you need to urgently land at the nearest airfield until the cabin is filled with smoke. This is where a competent program for displaying airfields will help. I wish you success. You will succeed and you will be praised! I apologize for the mechanical translation. But I think you understand me.

RW .mp4 Good afternoon Graeme_77! It's nice to chat with you. The previous opponent uses aggressive rhetoric, constantly tries to divert the topic of conversation to the side, blurts out the essence of the issue, misleads, throws terminology and concepts that a simple person does not know. It's all read by people all over the world! There was a corresponding RW video on YouTube fo Challenger 650! Please look at it. You will have to solve the problem with the RW projection in MFD!

RW CL650 PHEN 2.mp4 332263571_RWMFD.docx

Без названия 2.avi

RW CL650 PHEN300.avi I have the right to make mistakes, I am not an expert. But when you mislead naive buyers, is this also called a mistake? Do you have problems with displaying RW on MFD and can't solve them? I was asked and I upload a clip of how RW is displayed on MFD in PHENOM and CL650. In the first case, RW fills the entire MFD space, and in CL650 it remains a narrow ribbon, as at a flight altitude of 40-50f.

You interpret the given position of the document on the SVC in a peculiar way and this is incorrect! There are a lot of airfields in the world with shifted thresholds., especially in mountainous and urban areas. But, no aviation document reduces the length of the concrete part of the airfield by the amount of the displaced threshold. There are a number of important reasons for this! You were the first to come up with the idea to finalize the world aviation order. Your flight simulator is no longer professional, as it contains a number of gross errors and simplifications compared to the existing large aviation. Obviously, the CL650 flight simulator should go into the category of an interesting toy for boys 10-12 years old who dream of aviation? Or will you eliminate errors? I will not enter into a debate on this issue until you consult with experts!

The RW26R is displayed correctly in X-Plane 11. You have an incorrect display on the CL650 and you will need to fix it! You have a big mistake in 1969. I am posting for you an extract from the ARINC 424 database for the LFPG airfield. Please read it and show it to the lead programmer. They send you errors and help you test your software product for free. CL650 you poorly tested before selling. ARINC LFPG RW26R.docx

ОК!