I know weather or radio wouldn't matter much but thought I'd mention it. F1 has said it is too difficult and expensive to program. I say hockey bollocks. It's not difficult math to calculate ground speed and descent rates to hit restrictions. If they can code the G1000 to the level they have for $50 and $60 then they can code vnav too. They have a commercial side of their business and I think they want to keep separate the advanced technologies. I believe it is an option. The G1000 entry in wikipedia lists an autopilot option with vnav. Nice G1000 vnav vid. He says you have to watch when vnav levels out at idle or low power because there's no autothrottle! G1000 ie doctor killer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4AUfkEcwIg

 

Here's a video from Garmin on the G1000 B200 retrofit. 23 min but good stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9_Wo7e0XOM#at=572

VNAV is cool but there's nothing as satisfying as a little brain math on the go.  Do I wish this KA had VNAV?  Yes.  Am I upset it doesn't?  Not really...  I guess if I came from flying tube liners like an armchair aviator master I'd whine about it.  But since all I ever do is GA (maybe with a little PMDG NGX), VNAV isn't something I concern myself with.

 

Those videos are interesting.  But look how much work there if it had VNAV especially since this plane doesn't have auto throttle.  You still have to manage power and watch off for level offs.  I think people assume this simulated version would have VNV and some form of speed hold...  which it doesnt in real life either.

 

If anyone cares... for simple VNAV math use -1000 fpm in this king air.  If you're 10 min from the waypoint you need to be at, descend at 1000 fpm and it will take 10 minutes to drop 10,000 ft.  I sometimes use 1500 fpm for descent.  In that case just add 50% more to your altitude dropped.  IE you'd drop 15,000 ft in 10 min @ 1500 fpm descent rate.

 

I use this equation all the time, and if my rate varies from 1000 I just start quick interpolation and it's usually really close.  The G1000 makes this math simple because of the ETE displayed on the MFD.

 

 

F1 has said it is too difficult and expensive to program. I say hockey bollocks. It's not difficult math to calculate ground speed and descent rates to hit restrictions.

 

From what I understand, it's not that it would be impossible to add a version of VNAV; rather they refer to the amount of work to add it in and make it conform to the real deal.  They seem to be pretty picky about that, and I'm sure they feel that it would be better to leave it out than to do a poor job of resembling the real thing.

 

As Ryan said, it's really not too hard to manage the plane without it.

 

All I know is that this plane is one of my favorite addons of the year so far... ^_^

And some more advanced vnav

 

Let's say you're cruising in your KA 200 at FL240 and you want to get down to 3000 for the beginning of your approach.

21000 to lose, 21 x 3.  Start your descent at 63 miles out from your fix.  Let's say groundspeed of 270 knots. 270 / 2 = 135.  Add a zero, descend at 1350 fpm.

As you get closer you can recalculate and adjust.  Like ryan said the simple 1000fpm works well with ETA.  And the F1 B200 can descend at a specified airspeed with FLC which is very nice.  Not many addons model FLC.

So only to clarify, there are rw Blackhawk upgrade/G1000 King Airs out there that do not have the VNAV option, correct? 

Maybe.  I don't know.  They talked about vnav in the Garmin video.  Why does it matter?  Are you trying to hold it against them because they didn't model it accurately?  Buy it or don't buy it; vnav shouldn't be your deciding factor.  Or maybe buy the King Air that has a G1000 with vnav.  Oh wait...  Or for that matter any GA aircraft that has vnav.....

Maybe.  I don't know.  They talked about vnav in the Garmin video.  Why does it matter?  Are you trying to hold it against them because they didn't model it accurately?  Buy it or don't buy it; vnav shouldn't be your deciding factor.  Or maybe buy the King Air that has a G1000 with vnav.  Oh wait...  Or for that matter any GA aircraft that has vnav.....

 

It was just a question about whether something was an unrealistic ommison or whether it was realistic to not have it.  Seemed like a reasonable question, because I think the more realism the better, no?

 

 

Let's say you're cruising in your KA 200 at FL240 and you want to get down to 3000 for the beginning of your approach.

21000 to lose, 21 x 3. Start your descent at 63 miles out from your fix. Let's say groundspeed of 270 knots. 270 / 2 = 135. Add a zero, descend at 1350 fpm.

As you get closer you can recalculate and adjust. Like ryan said the simple 1000fpm works well with ETA. And the F1 B200 can descend at a specified airspeed with FLC which is very nice. Not many addons model FLC.

 

I saw a discussion on a RW pilot forum where they talked about the fact that some pilots can't do this (implying that they should know how).  3 x altitude_change = distance, 5 x airspeed=rate_of_descent.  I know it side-steps the vnav discussion but it's a good skill to know.  I do use it whenever I fly and you get pretty quick at it.  I also like the one I saw RyanB mention the other day airspeed / 10 + 5 = standard_rate_turn.

Airspeed / 2 is the same as Airspeed x 5.  But yep good stuff.

Was putzing around looking for G1000 stuff and found this site. Has calculators, comparisons of different approximation methods, and flash based nav simulators.

 

http://www.luizmonteiro.com/Index.aspx

 

Forgive me if old news to anyone else.

Just a quick note about std rate rule of thumb. That equation appears to be the accepted one from various RW forums. However it is pretty rough. F1 called me out on it with my complaint and my calculation was a few degrees off. A more accurate conversion is TAS times 15%. (I think they said adding 7 to my original rule of thumb). 15% is easy too because you know 10% , then use 5% and add them together.

 

Example: 200 KTAS, 10% is 20. 5% of 200 is half that 10. 30 degrees would be standard rate. The actual math puts it in around 31.5 degrees if I remember.

 

Bank Angle = 57.296 · atan (0.0027467 · TAS)

Well, it's their call.  It makes it tougher for folks.  *Shrugs*

 

If we're on the subject of only receiving support only at the F1 forum, then yes I agree. I have enough forums to keep up, I don't really want to register at another one.

 

I 

Just got  it yesterday still reading up the manuals on it, had  a quick look at it  to check it out  so far very impressed on it,  now to shelve my  duke to the hangar  for  repairs  for  don't know  how  long though.

I'm getting this regardless of vnav, Flight 1 is far and away the best FS addon company for several reasons which I won't mention here, but I don't see why they can't entertain the idea of possibly adding more functionality in future patches.  Quality aircraft addons are hard to come by and I think that these top tier companies should continue to develop their products beyond release.

  Is the Vnav feature something that real G1000/King Air pilots use often?  Do all G1000's come with Vnav, standard, or is it an expensive option that some don't have?

 

The expense of Vnav, or any Autopilot system, is the maintenance of the hardware outside of the electronics and software of the G1000.

 

So much so, that some King Air Operators,  disable/remove the Vnav & Lnav  to reduce maintenance costs, especially if the plane is only used for short duration flights.     Tough on the pilots,  but good for the bottom line !