I use it with Accufeel, and EZDoc, both work fine

 

Really? I'm not getting any head movement or turbulence. For me the basic functions of those addons don't work.Should I set something specific for Q400?

Sorry, I should have been more specific about EZDoc. I only use the camera views, not movements. There are some movement, as I created a new view yesterday, and I like to fly with the PFD "popped out" as my eyesight isn't brilliant. But I found the cockpit movement against the steady PFD annoying, so disabled the 3 red movement buttons in EZDoc. So something is happening, but not exactly sure it meets your requirements.

Eugene

 

 

Great aircraft, I love it and I now fly for Alaska Virtual, Intercity Virtual and FlyBe Virtual! So there is plenty to keep you going. Also does anyone have an EZKA profile with DHM available? I would be grateful forever..;-)

 

 

 

DWC stands for Direct Weather Control, not to quibble. Because it is injecting weather globally, is this going to be a problem for the Q400 Weather Radar? The question was asked by somebody even prior to the Q400's release, but it has yet to be answered satisfactorily. I think the issue about which weather program is better or more advanced, Opus or Active Sky, is probably best left to another forum, but it is not at all clear to me that Opus is clearly superior or wouldn't come with it's own set of compromises and peculiarities. I am an Active Sky user, with no current plans to switch, so for now, my question is whether or not the Q400 radar will work effectively with Active Sky DWC.

 

Also, and I know there is another topic about it on this forum, is the issue of 3rd party Dynamic and Random Head Movement be it from either Opus or Ezdok. From my perspective, having a dynamic head has become a critical piece of immersion, and I would severely miss it if an airplane were not compatible with it, so I'm trying to get a picture of the limitations I will have to face before I purchase the Q400.

I use Opus Weather (not the cams, I use ezdok) and as far as I know Opus injects the weather globally and works amazingly well, here is a short vid I made when the Dash first came out....

 

 

When I say the weather is crap I mean as in Stormy and Icy conditions..;-) Opus is really fantastic. And I know all the procedures are wrong. I had only just bought the thing, and it was my first flight!

So something is happening, but not exactly sure it meets your requirements.

If you look at SH's video, min 4.30, it shows a good view of the weather radar in operation. You can also see the pop out is static, whilst there is some movement in the virtual cockpit. I'm pretty sure this movement is being generated by EZDoc.

 

Nice video SH, thanks,

Eugene

No, OPUS don't injects globally like ActiveSky is doing. As far as I know Opus set's station weather. The advantage of this is that you can fly through the weather and see that bad one coming 100miles away.

 

Also weather radar should be much more real when using station weather as the majestics reads station weather. So in paris for example you'll maybe see bad weather over de gaulle and better weather over the other ones (not in opus though as there's only 1 wx station).

 

As said: FSGlobalRealWeather uses much more weather informations so the WX-radar should work perfectly with this. You have real weather over atlantic, you even get real upper wind values and also if there are clouds >5000ft opus and as2013 don't draw cloud's as the metar is saying nsc; with FSGRW you have real clouds. Can't mention the advantages of this weather addon enough And there's a demo version to try out without time or function limitation.

If you look at SH's video

 

Where can I find this video?

Where can I find this video?

It's gone, was in post 33, SH even makes a reference to it:

 

"And I know all the procedures are wrong. I had only just bought the thing, and it was my first flight!"

 

I'm sure I didn't dream it!

Eugene

Hi all

Does this plane have autoland? ie can you press an app button to capture the ILS and follow it down to do a CAT autoland?

Cheers

Jay

AFAIK this plane is certified for CATIII approaches and have the capability of dual ap. I don't know if the AP is certified to land the airplane but it would make sense to me. No meaning whether it is modelled though.

Hi all

Does this plane have autoland? ie can you press an app button to capture the ILS and follow it down to do a CAT autoland?

Cheers

Jay

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/408023-how-do-to-a-full-autoland/

The Q400 is CAT III certified (in the USA with Horizon anyway) when equipped with HGS (HUD). Otherwise it's CAT II. There's no autothrottle and I don't believe there is autoland capability in either case. For CAT III IIRC you pull the AP out at DH (I recall one airline's SOP being 80 ft RA) and do the flare and rollout based on guidance from the HGS.

The Q400 is CAT III certified (in the USA with Horizon anyway) when equipped with HGS (HUD). Otherwise it's CAT II. There's no autothrottle and I don't believe there is autoland capability in either case. For CAT III IIRC you pull the AP out at DH (I recall one airline's SOP being 80 ft RA) and do the flare and rollout based on guidance from the HGS.

 

Hi there

Thanks for that info.

Does that mean you hand fly the last stage of the landing?

I am a bit anxious about that as I use the PMDG NGX a lot and enjoy it's fidelity in automatically capturing and following the glideslope

down to the final touchdown especially on tricky approaches and runways.(I am not very good at handflying approaches :mad: )

I have the QW BAE 146 and this is a bit less reliable than the NGX on this front.

Is anyone able to compare the Dash 800 to these two aircraft ON THIS MATTER alone?

Just wondering what is modelled and what isn't.

Cheers

Jay

Yes; there is no autoland on the Q400 in reality, the autopilot cannot flare, touchdown or to do the rollout so the pilot must do so by hand The Q400 can automatically capture the localiser and glideslope and follow those, providing the systems are set correctly and the aircraft appropriately configured (gear, flaps, power) throughout.

 

The level of automation and sophistication of the avionics on the Q400 is less than Avro RJ and even less than the Boeing 737NG.

I plan to buy this excellent product.  I own the Dash-300 by Majestic, so I was a little hesitant and wanted to see reviews when it first came out.

 

Turbo props are not modelled well in FSX.  In the real world with a King Air or Beech 1900, for instance, when you move the power levers to flight idle with props set at 1700 RPM, the props help slow the aircraft because they create a tremendous amount of drag. 

 

When taxing a King Air or Beech 1900 in the real world, the power levers actually control the prop pitch and can move the plane slowly forward and slow/stop the aircraft without the use of brakes.  Every FSX turoboprop taxis like a racecar.  It seems you have to use jet aircraft techniques for taxi and approaches. In a real King Air or Beech 1900, the primary prop governer keeps the prop RPM down when the power levers are at ground or flight idle (the props are still on the low pitch stops), and RPMs only spin up to max (1700) when the power levers are moved a great deal forward.  Taxiing a real King Air is accomplished by use of the power levers in ground idle which sets a constant 1000 RPM and causes adjustments in the prop pitch forward and a small amount of reverse pitch.  You can stop and barely touch the brakes.  I just purchased the Carenado C90B, and am disappointed these issues were not addressed (it's a nice plane, and these issues probably couldn't be addressed due to FSX limitations) since it does not handle like the real AC.

 

I know that Majestic used a proprietary flight dynamics engine in this aircraft, so I am assuming that the turbo prop is accurately modelled (condition levers and power levers).  Can someone tell me if this is correct--I do not see any discussion of this specific topic anywhere?

 

Thanks.

As you said, thanks to the external flight dynamcis engine it behaves properly, there's even a video on YouTube of a single engine taxi. The Propeller Electronic Control (PEC) takes care of Prop RPMs, unless you are on the ground they are usually spinning at commanded RPM (the condition lever has a range between 850 and 1020 rpm, plus feather and cuttoff). On the ground they sit on the underspeed governor at 660 rpm and you use the power lever's beta range to taxi (between disc and flight idle), unless you feather them in which case they sit at about 210 rpm and don't provide any thrust. During rollout, the braking effect of DISC is very noticeable, to the extent where it's not really worth bothering going in to reverse pitch. Even during taxying you needn't bother the brakes much, DISC does most of it.

 

You can't compare Majestic to Carenado, totally different league of systems modelling.