Hello All,Firstable, thanks for the Level-D Sim group to have done such a beautiful aircraft. I can't wait to see how good it is. I'll be one of the first to buyit, that's for sure. Anyway, here is my question :On the PIC V1.0, no load manager was available, which obliged us to put a false value for things like ZFW on the FMC.Is there a load manager available in this release ? It would be really great. Are there any other programs, like panel configuration utilities, or flight planning utilities, like a windows-based FMC for example ?Thank you very much for the great work. I won't ask you when it's released but I really wish it won't take too long anymore, cos' I REALLY wanna fly this bird.Jean-Pierre.

Yes a load manager is included. Additionally you will have to enter your CG in the FMC to get the required trim setting for takeoff.Wade

Great news ! Thank you very much...God how I have to fly this bird...Hope it's released soon, cos' I can't wait to buy it... I really can'tThanks for the great work !

The fact that we will have to insert the C of G into the FMC is a really nice feature ! Quick question : will this simulated feature have a direct influence on the fuel burn ? (I.e an aft CG will be better for the fuel consumption). Just curious...Have a nice week-end

That depends entirely on FS flight modelling. Does CG affect drag in FS?Wade

I guess it does : that is why you have the CG scheme when you load fuel on the default FS menu.Well, I guess so ! Not sure though...JPC

Hi Wade,That's a great news!!All the best for finishing LDS!!Francois

Actually I've always assumed that it does...therefore...!!!But I will admit to my ignorance in this matter. I'll try to figure it out once on a flight with an EET of more than 4 hours and with a very nose heavy CG and one with a more ideal CG (in exactly the same conditions of course); and check how the fuel figures compare.Thanks for the question Wade ;-)

I just tried it. Not exactly scientific, but at GW about 300klbs, FL330, with CG 1% MAC, fuel flow was 5.0klbs/hr per side with trim about 6.0. At 43% MAC, fuel flow was 4.9klbs/hr per side with trim at 0.1. Those must be way outside the allowed CG envelope. Wow, pitch was very unstable at 43%, and until I got it all stabilized, I needed to use elevator due to running out of down trim.Of course, I'm now wishing I had noted the N1 values since would have been more sensitive than the fuel flow values. Ugh.Thus, I believe FS does show some drag effects due to CG.Lee Hetherington, PP-ASEL (KBED)

That's pretty far aft, we'll beyond the aircraft flight limits. On the ground you will tip over at 56%.Wade

thanks for the insight Lee,Tho MAC settings did indeed seem pretty extreme I can well imagine the pitch control difficulties you had...Regards to all