arrowspace90
-
Posts
27 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Latest X-Plane & Community News
Events
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by arrowspace90
-
-
18 minutes ago, Vaux said:
Thank you for your help, screens back online!
Strange, it didn't fix mine...
Oops, yes it did, I didn't restart X-Plane as instructed to effect changes.
-
I found the Zink Plugin Bridge and unchecked the box. Still no avionics whatsoever. So the problem is elsewhere. Strange that I never had this issue previously, only after I upgraded to 12.1.0 (or whatever this latest update is numbered.
EDIT! Duh, it said to re-start X-Plane! That DID fix it, and I appreciate the help guys.
-
1 hour ago, Cameron said:
It's not a plugin. It's a setting in the X-Plane rendering settings.
Thanks, I finally found it. I didn't know that setting existed, much less what it does, prior to looking into this glitch.
-
15 hours ago, Pils said:
A bit rude, but ok.
I can't confirm without the Log.txt from X-Plane, but 12.1.0 made the Zink plugin bridge the default, and V1.7 of the Challenger does not support this option. If you disable it then you'll be back to 12.0 behaviour.
Ok, I wasn't trying to be rude, but I wasn't sure how active is this site. I am surprised if, after the Beta period that I didn't participate in, no one noticed that the Challenger no longer worked? It makes me wonder if I made a mistake with the updating. However, my 737 still flies just fine. I am no software coder, I suppose I could go into the XPlane program files and look for the Zink Plugin and then, what, delete it?
I had heard that typically, XP is pretty good about letting developers know what is coming in a major update, in order to prevent exactly this kind of problem. I am just a pilot who likes to fly the airplanes, so when glitches occur, it's difficult for me to guess where they're coming from. Perhaps Mr Toto has moved on to new projects?
-
Is anybody home?
I updated yesterday, July 9, 2024 to the newest version of XP12. Now, when I turn on the Batt switch, and start the APU and put it on its bus, no avionics come on. All the screens stay black. Well, that's a flight cancellation. I really have zero idea how to troubleshoot this issue, so of course I wonder if the new update caused a conflict with the Challenger systems? I would think this is a known issue since the airplane is now unflyable. But it's always possible that I somehow caused it.
Oh, and I also fly my long time airplane IRL, the Zibo 737-800. It seems to work fine, no system problems evident. This makes me think that a conflict specific to the 650 is involved here.
-
I am certainly no experienced, type-rated Ace of the Base in the 650.
Can you guys tell me, for example, what are the principal causes of an ATS failure in the approach phase, established on the STAR? Yes, just happened to me trying to go into the RNAV RNP 21 approach to Scottsdale, KSDL. I really didn't know how to trouble shoot, and I just disconnected the ATs and managed to get a sort of ok landing. I like messing with this airplane and hope to slowly improve my limited skills. I sim several other airplanes so I am not in it every day.
Anecdote: In that "other sim" I upgraded my Garmin 750 GTXNi, wanting to fly this same approach. I was chagrined to learn that the 750 and even the G-1000 no can do it. RNPs require the "Special Authorization". In the CL 650, the Collins handled it no problem, except I lost the ATS, which I have found is a typical mistake among new comers. If you can't do the RNAV RNP, you mostly ain't getting into KSDL except via a visual approach. There's a couple of other RNAV app's there but they don't align you well enough to have a runway number designation.
-
Thanks, yes the 737 has the same feature. I will look for that runway extension box. I was going into Las Vegas Henderson (after I read that all the Super Bowl bound private jets are going to park there. They surprisingly have no approaches at all for their 2 south landing runways. Odd, since they have terrain on 3 sides.
-
1
-
-
I'm still not as smooth in hand flying the Challenger as I am with the Boeing.
But my question is: Can the FMC calculate/build a VNAV/LAV path to the runway as the airliners do for a runway with no published approaches? I would think the answer is yes? So, I select the runway from the box. Do I need to "build" a point on the visual approach path to the runway? And obviously I would need then to be in VNAV.
What is the procedure for doing this in the Challenger?
-
I have to apply for membership? I clicked on "download" and that's what comes up. Wrong?
-
How do I download Fly With LUA and then how do I plug in this script? I think I had FWLUA on XP-11 but I forgot how I got it on there, and I don't remember much knowing what to do with it?
-
Ok, well duh. When Pils typed "370" as if were three hundred and seventy feet, that jarred me. I went back to the perf menu and for cruise altitude, instead of typing in "370" as I did in the Boeing, I typed in FL370. Yep, that fixed the altitudes. I believe this one thing might solve VNAV in general.
I saw in Pils video that he knows how to use the all the little pedestal display knobs better than I do. I haven't used the Jepp plates on screen, and displaying some of the other stuff would be helpful.
Very happy to know why I couldn't see through the windshield. I will fix that right away. Yeah, once long ago I actually forgot the window heat at night. I discovered the error at the TOD and immediately turned it on because the whole windscreen was iced over. Nice move. The heat managed to melt a hole big enough to see through before the final approach. I never did that again, but unfortunately I still remember many of the mistakes I ever made while forgetting most of the things I did right.
-
30 minutes ago, Pils said:
If you're using X-Plane 12, Laminar broke the windscreen heating effect, you'll need to use a script to workaround it: https://github.com/pilsnerish/FlyWithLua-Scripts/blob/main/CL650_window_heat.lua
I couldn't really tell what you have done wrong from the description or a few poor quality, grainy photos of your monitor. A video, as requested, would have been much more useful. However, in lieu of that, I tried to recreate the flight as best I could, wherein everything worked flawlessly. I made my own video for you to reference: https://youtu.be/n1-LW4nuwN4
I hope that helps.
P.S. Why is your MACH TRIM off at 8,000 feet?
The Mach trim was an oversight. I should have seen the yellow alert. I will watch your video. Hopefully I will see you setting up something and think, "wow, I wasn't doing that". I realize this airplane ain't the one I'm accustomed to, but I can be trained if I see where the difference is. Thanks, would enjoy making this work.
-
1
-
-
Well, here's what's happening, though pics may not be perfect. The photo that only shows the fmc on the bottom right is before takeoff. I was flying KCLE to KTEB, Cleveland to Teterboro in the snow at both ends. The arrival into TEB, similar to Newark, KEWR, doesn't have the crossing altitude restrictions built in, the pilot has to look at the plate and plug those in. So it had LVZ at 18000 and "Mugzy" at 6000. When I put those in, the fmc inserted 370, the cruising altitude, back inbetween them! Why would it do that? It does that again and again. What can cause this? I knew as soon as I saw that that the VNAV arrival was not going to work. Since I don't know what altitude the box should have put in there, I just typed in 18000B and 6000B respectively. That didn't work.
In VNAV with the lower altitude in the window and no discontinuities to the runway, the airplane made the first restriction. But that's the only one it made, it did not even show my 6000 at Mugzi till I was past the FL180B fix. By then it would have been way too late to make that restriction. None of the lower altitudes on the ILS were made either, not by the FMC. I kept V/Sing them in there. Only on the final segment did the G/S arm.
Anecdotally, I kept looking for the windshield wipers and the bird doesn't have any. Though looking from "outside" the plane, the visibility at TEB appeared to be over a mile, from the cockpit I could see nothing at all. The windshield heat was on HIGH. Since it's "only" a sim, I continued the APP to about 50 feet and used the FD depiction to flare the airplane, which worked. Something I have never done IRL of course.
I've put some time into learning this little jet. Not like getting an actual type rating of course. Far from it. I don't have a procedures manual.
I keep thinking that on some flight the light in my brain is going to come on and I'm going to realize what I am doing wrong. So far, not.
-
On 1/17/2024 at 7:00 AM, RonMont said:
No to both questions.
I use VS only in situations where PATH is lost, either because I missed the TOD and need to catch up with the glide path, or if I execute a DIRECT TO that puts me above the glide path.
Ok, thank you, that is good to know. I feel like I give VNAV every chance, but especially when flying a STAR that has multiple step-down crossing restrictions, I have had issues with the airplane not starting down for the next restriction. This is with the lower altitude in the window and VNAV engaged. This is also when all that has been done prior to the TOD. I fly these same approaches in the Zibo 737 with no issues at all, and from what you say they work the same way. All the step down altitudes are in the FMC and there are no discontinuities.
-
The cruise altitude frequently populates into a descent profile between step downs. I realize, this is wrong, but I have no idea what the software is doing, or what I could be doing, to cause this?? I definitely did climb to the cruising altitude of 370 and was there for most of the flight.
I went to V/S on the STAR when the rate of descent suggested went to more than 2500 FPM with the aircraft not starting down. I'm still not clear on whether or not this should be necessary. I am a 737 pilot so I only know to put in the lowest cleared altitude in the window and arm VNAV. I know that there cannot be any discontinuities on the route. I know that it can't have, inexplicably, the Cruise Alt repopulating the fix crossing altitudes.
Do you typically have to use V/S on a VNAV descent with this airplane, or should that be necessary? Often I see PATH go to white instead of green. Then when I V/S down at the suggested rate, sometimes PATH turns green again and at times it appears to be adjusting to the PATH. Then not. Since I don't really know what the airplane in VNAV is "supposed" to do, I don't really know when it is functioning correctly. Ha.
Your comments are appreciated. What does a 737 "LNAV/VNAV" guy need to realize about VNAV descents in this airplane? Beyond that it is "different"?
-
Ok, so please explain, anyone, how this is supposed to work. I tried to arrive KDCA and the FRDMM5 arrival to connect to the RNAV to runway 19. There were no discontinuities.
First problem was that, between published crossing restrictions on the Arrival and the APP, the FMC would repopulate the in-between fixes with the crusing ALT! So, FL 370 would be in between 2 crossing restrictions much lower! Why would it do that? 370 obviously not the altitude that the fMC would "expect" to cross those fixes.
So I took out the 370s and just put in the previous fix crossing alt with a "B" after it, since I cant calculate what it actually is. I got a reasonable TOD depicted and I put in zero in the altitude window and armed VNAV. Aircraft did start down and it made the first of the many crossing restrictions. That was about the only one it made. The software would show the next expected, lower altitude and it would show a required rate of descent, but it would not start down for any of them on its own with the AP engaged. I tried to V/S them all, still in VNAV and using the depicted rate of descent. I probably slightly missed several of them.
Once I was close in and armed APP, that came on in green. But again, the aircraft wasn't coming down for me, and I ended up too high to land.
Yes, I know the real airplane cannot possibly be set up this way. So, putting in the bottom altitude and being in VNAV and eventually arming APP is not correct? What is the proper procedure please? Perhaps in the displays here you can spot an annunciation that suggests what error I am making?
-
12 hours ago, Pils said:
APPR/VNAV is the correct way to fly an RNAV approach with Pro Line 21, yes.
Well I tried this yesterday, and I thought it was going to work. The airplane responded with additional annunciations that I am admittedly not familiar with. The approach was a twisting RNAV arrival to KSDL. The 650 correctly descended in VNAV all the way to the FAF. Then it actually started down from there in the approach (with the A/P engaged). But then it descended steeply off the PATH into adjacent terrain.
I know a jet of this sophistication is surely doing all of the non-precision approaches, but VNAV is very difficult to fathom in this airplane. I had the runway elevation in the window and both APP and VNAV engaged. What else am I supposed to have?
I do not own a "Normal Procedures" manual for this airplane, so thank you for your response.
-
On 3/21/2022 at 7:12 PM, Pils said:
Unlike other aircraft types in the Collins auto flight system VNAV is a modifier on the standard vertical modes (VS, FLC, etc.). It basically instructs the system to respect altitude constraints in the flight plan, and if enabled, use speed targets from the FMS. When descending in VPATH on an arrival and initial approach, similar to an ILS, once the plane is flying towards the final approach point for the RNAV/RNP then one can push the APPR button and VGP will arm/capture. Once active the plane will descend on the final glide path below the preselected altitude. Hope that helps.
I see that you are the guy to go to on the 650. Yes, I had the same experience as the poster on an attempted RNAV app to KSDL. In the 737, we didn't ARM APP for a VNAV approach. It was simply flown in LNAV/VNAV. The altitude of 100 feet above the RWY had to be dialed in and "all the dots connected" (no discos). I wondered if in this airplane it might be also necessary to ARM APP.
-
Well just to embarrass me, the 650 flew a perfect VNAV descent and then a low overcast ILS. Ha, I was going to send it to the scrap yard!
I appreciate the comments which were obviously trying to help!
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Pils said:
Is it possible to provide screenshots or a video from prior to and during the descent, please? That'd help us figure out what's happening.
Just a clarifying note on some differences between the 737 and Challenger:
1. VNAV isn't a descent mode unto itself, rather it's a modifier on the other modes, e.g. FLC, V/S, PATH, and PTCH. Enabling VNAV will allow the FMS to control altitude preselection to meet flight plan restrictions, and also speeds if separately enabled.
2. The descent path calculated by the FMS is not an idle power descent as is often used in airliners. The Challenger will fly a geometric path, based on the default descent angle set, a per-leg override, or what's required to meet a restriction.
Ok, so does that mean that I need to arm a descent mode In Addition to VNAV for the descent? What additionally is required if the aircraft levels off when it shouldn't?
Yes, this airplane is really strange compared to other aircraft I have flown. What can cause the VNAV path to be interrupted after making only 2 of the approximately 10 altitude crossing restrictions??
Yes I am taking some phone photos trying this again today as, after tying this route twice, it has leveled at the same spot on the VNAV descent. If I have to have more than one descent mode selected however, this would explain my problems. Ha, why would they do that? The 737 does all this for you in VNAV, why complicate it?
-
I know how to fly in LNAV and VNAV, and did it for many years in the 737.
I thought I would try out the Hotstart 650 for something new to fly. I found it way more tedious to set up, but after a couple of weeks and learning some strange tricks and things about the very different ATS system, I am able to get it off the ground and up on the route.
But getting it to fly a VNAV path? Not so easy. It starts down in VNAV ok at the TOD with the lowest altitude on the STAR set in the window. And all the crossing restrictions are in the box with no discos. On an arrival to KSJC with multiple, closely spaced step downs, the 650 made about the first 2 or 3 altitudes. Then, still at FL200, it leveled out and attempted no more. Twice I have tried it with that result. I'm unable to figure out what's limiting it? All the lower stuff clearly shows on the legs page.
Chagrined, I flew the exact same route in the Zibo 737. No problems, it made EVERY restriction to G/S intercept and an easy approach. What feature on the 650 doesn't allow this? When it stops the descent (which shouldn't be interrupted) I am scrambling to use V/S or FLC to keep it coming down. Surely this isn't how the real airplane works?
-
On 1/11/2022 at 6:42 PM, Rastuasi said:
When I hear the gong for TOD, usually 1 minute out, I simply activate VNAV, FLC, and set the Altitude to the base of the descent (where the approach alt starts). Once you do that, then if ATS is on and profile is setup for approach, it will throttle back to M.72 (default) and start the descent.
It shouldn't be necessary to arm both VNAV AND FLC. FLC will not calculate crossing restrictions.
-
1
-
-
Im getting no pitch trim with the default settings on my Boeing Yoke, which has split rocker switches.
I went to the specific pitch trim for CL-650 and tried assigning one of the rocker switches to "Electric Pitch Trim". But I see no changes in settings on the screen. It's tough that no trim wheel is available to see. Is this the right way? Does any bus or system beyond the APU generator have to be turned on? How do you assign it?
After XP update, no avionics
in Technical Support
Posted
I would! I really enjoy learning the Challenger. Since I was never "trained" on it, I am still a rank amateur, but hey, it's a lot of fun and learning.
Actually after seeing that there is a check-box I didn't know about, I see that it is not a terrible problem. I just wasn't in the loop, so thank you.
As you may have seen, no I failed to read that though it was right in front of my face. I did go back when it didn't work and see that it clearly stated, "restart"!