Fuel panel (OH) and spoilers

[Guest Erups]

I notice a strange behaviour of the fuel annunciators on the OH:annunciators for center fuel tank light up when-tank is empty and pumps are on-pumps are off while tank is not emptyare off otherwise.annunciators for wing tanks light up when-tank is empty no matter the pumps are on of off-tank is not empty and fuel pumps are offare off otherwise.So now what is the correct behaviour?A test i did:emptied left and center, closed xfeed, and both engines died.Why?Eng 2 should have stayed on.And to add to this, fuel is not transfered from right to left.I believe there is something strange going on in the fuel dept. :(Then on the spoilers:to my great sadness, i discovered that it is not possible to use an axle for spoliers.Just now that i was building a throttle quad!That's real bad news.I hope you can correct these problems in a future update.BRClaudioEdit: forgot my name :(

[Guest boxjockey99]

The logic on the lights should be as follows:Main tanks (wings) lights come on if:1) the tank is empty and low pumps are still on 2) the pumps are switched offCentre tank lights come on Only when tank is empty and the pumps are onTurning the centre pumps off extinguishes the lights and the master cautionin your experiment if you did what you did in the real thing yes the number 2 should keep runningFuel is not able to be transferred between the main tanks thanks to non-return valves. You can do this on the ground but this involves much switch flicking and so is left to the engineers if it is ever needed. The problem with the spoilers has been covered ad-infinitum in other posts and is due to a problem with the coding within MS FS and the PMDG coding for their more accurate spoilersHope that helpsKris

[Guest Erups]

>Main tanks (wings) lights come on if:>>1) the tank is empty and low pumps are still on >2) the pumps are switched offWith fuel tank empty and pumps off, lights stay on.>in your experiment if you did what you did in the real thing>yes the number 2 should keep runningSo there is a problem.>Fuel is not able to be transferred between the main tanks>thanks to non-return valves. You can do this on the ground but>this involves much switch flicking and so is left to the>engineers if it is ever needed. Understood thanks.>The problem with the spoilers has been covered ad-infinitum in>other posts and is due to a problem with the coding within MS>FS and the PMDG coding for their more accurate spoilersI did some research on the subject.I can say that being PMDG a very good bunch of programmers, everything could be done.So one proposal could be this:first an option in the PMDG styles menu to choose between spoliers operationthen it is possible to base the logic on fs spoiler axle value.For example to accept following values0 = stowed spoilers1000 = armed spoilers15000 = flight detent16383 = full up spoilersOr for the sake of it, any other spoiler axle mix of numbers.But just give us control of it!and put a mark in the options wheter to use such setup, or the standard.This way everyone can choose, and the system maintains its operation.Claudio

[crvm 0]

When would anyone ever use fuel in such a way in real flight? There are a lot of things the real one can do that make absolutly no sense in a computer based sim. This is not a CBT trainer but a microsoft add-on and in that department it does a very good job. Spoilers are not as simple as you suggest, this IS an issue with MS programming and PMDG trying to program around such limitations. Hopefully many more hours of hair pulling and coffee drinking well help solve this issue.[h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

[Guest Erups]

>> When would anyone ever use fuel in such a way in real flight?>There are a lot of things the real one can do that make>absolutly no sense in a computer based sim. This is not a CBT>trainer but a microsoft add-on and in that department it does>a very good job.Hem, this is not an answer i would have expected:the lights are there, and do light up.Then make them light up the correct way.There is no use nor sense in haveing something and not makeing it work the way it is intended.Better not do it, or make it fictional.Sorry but i do not understand your answer in this case.>Spoilers are not as simple as you suggest, this IS an issue>with MS programming and PMDG trying to program around such>limitations. Hopefully many more hours of hair pulling and>coffee drinking well help solve this issue.I'm not saying it is simple, i sayed that PMDG are a good bunch of programmers, and that they can surely find a solution.And i had a proposal of mine for this matter in particular, which seemed pratical to me.I understand that MS did not put logic for Being's 737NG in its FS, so you have to do something to make it appear as a 737NG.I was only proposing a way of makeing us control-freaks a little happier.BRClaudio

[Guest Erups]

Randy i'm sorry, but please have a look here:http://utenti.lycos.it/erupter/pmdg-fuel-manual-page-1.gifhttp://utenti.lycos.it/erupter/pmdg-fuel-manual-page-2.gifThese are screenshots of PMDG Systems section manual.These (i'm sure you can look for yourself) clearly state how the fuel system should work.So again this is a contradiction:the fuel system is declared as working and does not work;and instead of seeing where is the fault, you tell me this has not to be a CBT trainer.That's sad :(BRClaudio

[crvm 0]

A test i did:emptied left and center, closed xfeed, and both engines died.Why?Eng 2 should have stayed on. This is what I replyed to. This is something no one would ever do. WHen would one try this? That is my point. In fact a pilot does have nothing to do with the actual fuel loading other than stating what he wants against the dispatch etc. The logic is not CBT style, in other words it is not 100% nor should it need to be in this case. If one has more fuel in one tank he can crossfeed correctly etc etc but you are arguing from a point that makes no sense because you would never ever be in the situation you described above. See my point? I know many items that do not work 100% here but I say so what. It is better than any other as of right now and frankly modelling every single item to Boeing standards would cost many thousands of dollars not to mention thousands of more hours of testing-implementing.[h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

[Guest Erups]

I have different thoughts in such a case:there are things that do exist in the real plane and are not depicted in the PMDG.That's fine by me: you chose not to reproduce it and omitted putting it in the product. Fine.But if you put something in this panel, and show it works, then please make it work.You couldn't make the IRS work, and you took it out.Fine.Your FMC had some problems, you fixed them. Fine.You reproduced the fuel panel, said it works, and now you tell me "it doesn't have to work 100%".In my opinion that's not fine anymore.But i see i'm hitting a real wall here, so say i surrender to it also because i have to admit it is not of much real use.But please you ankowledge that there is something wrong in the fuel pressure annunciators.ThanksClaudio

[Orlaam 306]

Sherlock Holmes again :-roll I see what your saying, however, why is this necessary? The manual tells you a lot of things the NG does, however, a lot of it is general information about the NG as it pertains to real life. Most, if not all, add-ons include information that may not pertain to the simulated version. I find it strange that so many problems are elucidated from these add-ons. Do you intentionally look for things no one would use in a game to point out mistakes? Seriously, just load the fuel properly and it works fine. This isn't part of their failure system, so why is it important? I understand finding "bugs" in an add-on, especially when someone doesn't know what they're doing, but sometimes it goes a little too far.Chris

[Guest Erups]

Hey i'm not sinking the hard work of the PMDG team under tons of "bio fertilizer"!I love the ng.I just happen to find some glitches.Why are you all jumping the guns at me?Ok i can withdraw the x-feed since it has no use, but the annunciators, you should convene with me, are something different:one pair (central) work ok, the other two pairs do not.Ok nobody is gonna die for this, i thought of pointing it out.Thank you for your consideration of me.Claudio

[Orlaam 306]

I'm not sure what's wrong with the lights. They work fine on my end. I also don't let them run dry either. No pilot in his right mind would allow this. I'm not trying to be rude, just pointing out what seems like a strange find. I guess I can't imagine too many people doing what you did. No biggie, just use it as it's intended in the game and have fun!

[crvm 0]

Well there certainly is nothing wrong with asking if it's possible but I would wonder if it's needed? First of all the real plane uses the center tank IF he has fuel there then wing tanks. When would anyone use it the way you suggested? Never ever and you seem not to get that point? It was headache enough to get the system not to fail when the center tank ran dry. If you have an imbalnce then crossfeed works 100%. The fuel system works pretty well but there are things that it does not do correctly. One other example is having ANY REMAINING fuel left in the center tank. On the real bird it simply does not leave a certain amount. Is this a big thing? Sure it would be nice to have everything work 100% but it aint going to happen in our life time Claudio. Just think about some things that are 1] Worth the effort and someone would even care2] like SPD only wpts where it does make a difference is a thing to ask for IMO. [h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |