Sign in to follow this  
Guest davymax

New autopilot?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,this panel is great and always improving. I'd like to ask a simple question for the future:Is that possible to have in the next future a modified autopilot with Vertical speed, Altitude capture and autothrottle (note, on the 727 panel by Richard Probs there the last one)? Today, almost all the 737-200 flying in the world has this upgrade (together with a simple GPS and INS to meet the RNAV requirements). However, I did't find a GPS having its own database in order to not use the default obsolete FS database and having the freedom to program it before each flight without using the default FS9 flight planner.I saw a 737 Tinmouse panel modified for a VA ("Sky" i guess, or something similar) but the quality of the change is not good.So, at the end, is there any project to meet this missing? :1) Upgraded autopilot (autothrottle, vertical speed and altitude capture)2) RNAV (yes, the CIVA INS is good but it's quite long-time to manage on a pc and aboveall on a flight simulation for short flight and in terminal areas; it's better a good GPS own-database)thanks a lot,cheersDavide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>So, at the end, is there any project to meet this missing? :>>1) Upgraded autopilot (autothrottle, vertical speed and>altitude capture)A Sperry 177 AFCS is planned for the future.>2) RNAV (yes, the CIVA INS is good but it's quite long-time to>manage on a pc and aboveall on a flight simulation for short>flight and in terminal areas; it's better a good GPS>own-database)This is a big project that isn't really consistent with the B732's place as a steam-driven first-generation jet airliner without all the modern bells and whistles. Those that want to fly an FMS-equipped round-dial 737 with full automation would be better served to look at one of the 737-300/400 add-ons that are out there. I don't anticipate writing an RNAV system for the TinMouse II, but the possibility exists to integrate a third-party gauge at some point.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but is it true that you and all the simmers want to have a flight simulator that meet the real life aviation? If the answer is YES, the 737-200 flies with GPS in cruise, reversing on raw-data for approach and landing procedures. The RNAV is compulsory in the real life, and all the 737-200 has INS and GPS Rnav systems to fly the aircraft with the precision required along the ATS routes and the Terminal routes if required.CIVA INS is a fantastic gauge and system, very realistic. But flying on a PC simulator is not simple and that INS require time and geografical coordinates not always available to all and, if available, it's not easy to manage these in this home-simulation environment, above all flying online.I don't want to fly an airbus 380 or an Enterprise spaceship, I love classic airplanes (in real life, I'm going to start a Type Rating course on the 737 Classic next week).I just ask for a low workload / high realistic upgrade of the 737-200. Try to fly a "direct to...." clearence online on a conjested day in middle europe only with Vor/dme and INS.It could be also very useful for VAs.Thanks for the patience,CheersDavide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Sorry, but is it true that you and all the simmers want to>have a flight simulator that meet the real life aviation? So if it doesn't meet your requirements, it's not realistic?? Sorry, no sale on that point.>If the answer is YES, the 737-200 flies with GPS in cruise,>reversing on raw-data for approach and landing procedures. The>RNAV is compulsory in the real life, and all the 737-200 has>INS and GPS Rnav systems to fly the aircraft with the>precision required along the ATS routes and the Terminal>routes if required.The RNAV is only compulsory in certain airspace...today, and certainly wasn't when these birds first filled the skies. An INS unit like the CIVA/Delco still meets the requirements for RNP-5 and 10 airspace (in a dual or triple config, which one can do if they *really* want to with the CIVA).>>CIVA INS is a fantastic gauge and system, very realistic. But>flying on a PC simulator is not simple and that INS require>time and geografical coordinates not always available to all>and, if available, it's not easy to manage these in this>home-simulation environment, above all flying online.Anyone can get an account on www.fltplan.com and run flight plans that include geo coordinates. FSBuild also generates flt plans that include geo-coords. The flight plans forums on several flight sim sites have tons of others. And lots of folks are using the CIVA successfully with this and other panels now. Regarding simplicity...it's not especially simple to use a first-generation INS CDU in real life, either...I have logged several thousand r/w hours navigating through the most congested airspace in the world with a Litton 91 very similar to the CIVA unit.>I don't want to fly an airbus 380 or an Enterprise spaceship,>I love classic airplanes (in real life, I'm going to start a>Type Rating course on the 737 Classic next week).Understand...but as I mentioned before, there is at least one decent B733/734 add-on with a fully operational FMS if that's the type of flying you want. This panel accurately replicates a first-generation jetliner...there was never an intent to include all the modern-day upgrades that can now be found on those still flying. If a third-party gauge exists that can be retrofitted (like the CIVA, or Lee Heatherington's VVI/TCAS gauge for example)...that's doable. But an investment of hundreds of hours of programming on a custom FMS for this panel isn't on my to-do list. The panel is a realistic representation of this aircraft in its original configuration, which was the design goal.>I just ask for a low workload / high realistic upgrade of the>737-200. Noted. But that exceeds the design scope of this project. Sorry.>Try to fly a "direct to...." clearence online on a>conjested day in middle europe only with Vor/dme and INS.Well, I've done it many times in real life. That's the challenge of flying one of these old birds. The direct fix-to-fix without a GPS as a crutch is still a required basic pilot skill. Simmers without that skill still have the pause button while they sort it out. BTW, if you peruse the cockpit photos on airliners.net, you'll see plenty of the original Sperry 77s with no RNAV at all still flying around.If some talented gauge programmer out there wants to write an RNAV, I'll be happy to collaborate on its integration into this panel.CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did have an interesting thought on this topic last night. I've used the Project Magenta CDU with the Dreamfleet 727, which worked well as an RNAV unit. It seems that the TinMouse main panel with the PM CDU and autopilot/autothrottles and the PMSystems overhead might be a good way to add both modern automation and an interface for cockpit builders who want to build a modernized B732ADV that has the proper interfacing to all the aircraft systems.This won't be for the average simmer, but the way I did the FSUIPC integration into the TinMouse II should make this a fairly straightforward proposition. Hmmmmm...CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spend last saturday flying the tinmouse for about 2 1/2 hours. I can say that it was one of the most enjoyable experineces I have ever had in FS. I stopped friday night at the local pilot shop picked up some high alt Charts and flew from PHX to DFW got rocked by T-storms that I flew around with my Reality XP radar, dodged trafic into DFW with Lee's TCAS, and had a great time navigating with the INS. You speak of Realism David, and as someone who is going for his Type Rating you of all people should understand this is as real as it gets. You actually have to plan, plot and plan agian your flight. The correct answer to your Direct To QUesiton is "Unable" if you cannot fly direct with VOR and NDB, and INS then you simply tell ATC you cannot do it. I enjoy flying with all the automation just as much as the next guy. As a commercially licenced pilot in the US I haven't been challenged like that in some time. I enjoyed every minute of it, Thanks tinmouse. WIth this aircraft you will find that you must do as the real aviators do and show up 45 minutes prior to departure, Plan your route, look at the weather, program your flight in the INS, it only takes a few minutes. Then once in the air you have to navigate with your personal autopilot, Your brain.Much more exciting then turning on the sim loading a preset saved route into an FMS, taking off, setting FRED and watching the cubs game until it's time to shut off the autopilot 200 feet off the deck in enought time to pull the throttles back and yank on the yoke. I flew FS for a long time that way with the high end addons that are out there. After that flight with Tinmouse I may never go back. Action all the way up and down. Sorry for my rant. This aircraft is great don't change a thing...Thanks, Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys if you understood that I would a different aircraft. My questions were just related to meet the upgraded 737-200 flying in airspace where RNAV is cumpulsory. In real life, if that ATS route is RNAV you can't fly on it using the point-to-point tecnique with the finger and the VOR indicator.I love flying VOR/ADF to VOR/ADF without FMS, but in European airspace, above certain FL (aboveall where all the line traffic is concetrated) the RNAV capability is compulsory. My questions were also related to those guys without a CPL and ATPL licence, and to who hasn't 45 min to prepare a flight.I felt a non-friendly feeling in your answers, I don't think I've said bad things on this product. It is GREAT! I've just put here a couple of questions and kindly explained a situation. I've not said that it's impossible to fly without RNAV, in real life I've never tried even a simple basic RNAV and I flew point-to-point routes for training; I've only said that in real life it's compulsory, that's it. Then, If someone doesn't want to use that he is free to navigate in the old and more beautiful style. Some people prefere to fly in a 60's years environment, others would like to fly like the 737-200 fly at this time.Just to clarify the situation. Nobody is trying to find bad things or failures in this product, it's the opposite......trying always to improve that.CheersDavide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, And I in no way meant any disrespect to you, I agree that it may be necessary to have RNAV capability for Europe, My understanding of European regulaiton is limited. So I appologize forthwith. So with that said, if they were to update it to work with GPS or some form of RNAV then that would be nice, You could always integrate the Reality-XP, Garmin 430 into your panel, something along the lines of this... http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0808353/L/As you can see some carriers do have GPS installed into their aircraft instead of INS. This is something I might even do now that you think about it. Dual install maybe. But you have options for RNAV, Let me know if I can help.. Bob, how hard would it be to integrate the Garmin into the panel for updated RNAV solution?THanks, Don Harrison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob;I didn't want to open another topic for an almost same subject.Thank you and other developer guys for completing TM732 Project, I'm enjoying from MSFS once again.I love flying with Sperry 77, especially with CWS mode. I had enough Sperry 177 type experience with some payware models and Sperry 77 is more than enough for me now. And with integration with CIVA INS unit, I'm able to fly that famous RNAV arrivals, oceanic sectors or any kind of airspace which doesn't covered by a ground radio facility.But I've two issues with our virtual Sperry Autopilot.First, initial right banking issue at lateral mode selections. I know this is a known issue with default MSFS autopilot BUT I saw some payware products which relying on default MSFS Autopilot overcome this issue. I think DF 727 with V2 patch is one of them. They might have an intresting trick which is worth to explore i think..Second, VOR/LOC capture&tracking is terrible. I tried to change the parameters in aircraft cfg for smooth capture and hold operation with a few shortcomings ( e.g. bad loc holding vs. good vor holding at far distance ). Is there any way to improve this issue, like Richard Probst' solution to GS Capture and holding?If we can overcome this two issues, ok may be just the first one then we don't need a custom Sperry 77 autopilot anymore, I think. And good luck with that Sperry 177!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Sperry 177, I asked for that not because I hate the Sperry 77, but because for RVSM capability in most of the world, above all the most trafficated airspaces, there's the need of automatic Altitude capture mode and, the same as the topic above, to improve the present equipment regarding the real-life 737-200.It could be so easy to have the 2 choice in the FS aircraft menu: 1 with Sperry 77 and no RNAV or at least INS, and one upgraded to sperry 177 and INS and/or (if possible) GPS.Concerning the GPS, I found many GPS payware but no one with a own database. They revert to FS default (obsolete) database of airways, intersection and navaids.Finally, I confirm my preference to much possible hand flying, especially during approach, if weather is above the minimums for a visual, that is my request in 90% of the times! :DCheersDAvideP.S.: not already said before= sorry for my english

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, please make no appologies for your English, It is excellent. Secondly, I do understand about the nav database issue. Unfortunately noone that I know of has developed an GPS that has an updateable Nav database. We may be limited there. Thanks, Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with or without PMS and SP-77 AP, the altitude capture is made by the pilot. the pilot must level off and activate they ALT HOLD in the ap.for RVSM, you just need just a few details, but you do not need change in the 737-200 Autopilot just because of this.SP-77 has a precision flight near 1 dot (20ft).RVSM requires at least 50ft of precision in alt hold mode and x-check altimeter each hour of flight.for RNAV navigation with the CIVA, the best is to keep you waypoints in a paper and go updating the position after each fix crossing.when the controller request to you fly direct to, you will be able to do.Bozhan, the trick in the DF727 and others is to have a custom autopilot.the loc tracking is fair enought 'til 10 degrees of crosswind. after that, is required just to aply a small rudder or even disengage AP and follow FD.Bob, since the real 732 do not have auto throttle for GA, when the command is aplly, the FD changes from VOR LOC/Auto APP/MAN GS to GA.this feature would be great. IMO.regardsgustavo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see this version of the SP autopilot (only difference is the ALT SEL):1px8.jpgthis is taken from the 732 operations manual found in ELAL's archives :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some variantessome have the ALT SEL at the right side of OFF.PMS/PMI (A/T on) aircrafts can operate the PMS mode, wich one is left of turb.all those system are primary FL Change, but if you can be able to put the altitude and speed constrictions in your PMS, you have a primary VNAV.the best way, IMO, is to keep the airspeed, adjusting your climb EPR as required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I felt a non-friendly feeling in your answers, I don't think>I've said bad things on this product. OK, no intent to be unfriendly here, but I do find myself at times perhaps a bit defensive. I interpreted your second post as telling me that unless I implemented an RNAV, the project wasn't realistic. I get a lot of those sorts of comments..."if it doesn't have --VC, wing views, coffee maker gurgle, IRS align etc etc-- then it just isn't realistic." That sorta makes me grumpy. So sorry if I drew my six-gun a little too fast. But I didn't shoot, honest. :DCheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>But I've two issues with our virtual Sperry Autopilot.>>First, initial right banking issue at lateral mode selections.>I know this is a known issue with default MSFS autopilot BUT I>saw some payware products which relying on default MSFS>Autopilot overcome this issue. I think DF 727 with V2 patch is>one of them. They might have an intresting trick which is>worth to explore i think..If somebody knows how to stop this right-bank head fake when first engaging any lat mode in FS, I'm all ears. The only way I know is to custom-program a separate set of lateral modes that directly control bank. A giant time-suck that I'm not to fired-up about taking on right now.>>Second, VOR/LOC capture&tracking is terrible. I tried to>change the parameters in aircraft cfg for smooth capture and>hold operation with a few shortcomings ( e.g. bad loc holding>vs. good vor holding at far distance ). Is there any way to>improve this issue, like Richard Probst' solution to GS>Capture and holding?Noted, and I will have a good look at this. Suspect the solution is as simple as the right set of aircraft.cfg parameters for the MSFS' autopilot PID control loop.CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>First, please make no appologies for your English, It is>excellent. Secondly, I do understand about the nav database>issue. Unfortunately noone that I know of has developed an>GPS that has an updateable Nav database. We may be limited>there. >>>Thanks, >>DonProject Tupolev developed a KLN-90B which uses the FSNavigator database, which is updatable. It can also be coupled to the default AP. Might be worth a try for those wanting a GPS in the 737. EDIT: Here's the link: http://www.protu-154.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5071

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this