Bert Pieke

Vertx DA62 has launched!

Recommended Posts

On 7/28/2019 at 2:38 PM, Skywolf said:

I am quite positive that there will be update soon.  Hang in there everyone. 

Reliable info? or optimism?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

onebob

No interior sounds

thanks for the suggestions. I've checked all you suggested and I'm good.

I've also tried changing the default installation location from ".... add-on" to the P3D root, with no joy.

I also agree with Bazza744  and Skywolf about hoping for a update soon.

but first hoping Sean's real world issue is not too bad and resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, rwilson881 said:

I've also tried changing the default installation location from ".... add-on" to the P3D root, with no joy.

It will only work if you select the 'default location' ( addon folder) at the install, I load the Air commander 114 first because I have a problem with engine graphics, so you could try that.

bob

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Bob,

Just uninstalled and reinstalled back into the "..add-on" folder. still get the alert, no sound and reinstalling the sound package does not fix it.

I've checked all my drivers are up to date.

This is only happening with the 62.

I'm sure once I can get some support from Vertx, It'll be resolved.

thanks for the suggestion.

Ron

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/19/2019 at 9:52 PM, Bazza744 said:

Well, I do so respect there are personal issues - but if there is no further development on a basically brilliant idea, it is such a shame when such a magnificent project stagnates. Flight envelope works really well, is v close to the real thing, but if you offer the G1000 manual on the website and the software can only perform 30% of the real system, that's a bit off. Nice eye candy, but it would be great if AIRAC and navigational behavior would be more accurate. I'd be happy to pay PMDG rates like $120++ if it were equipped with more system accuracy. Kudos, Sean, but that would be wonderful. Otherwise, it's a castrated version of something that has so much potential, I am flying DAs all the time, and we agree it could even be a great training tool - not a video game. (by the way, your rendering of the flight deck is wonderful, just a bit lacking in system depth when you fly the real thing all the time) Just my 2 cents. And that differentiates your rendering from a company starting with C.  

Hi, out of curiosity when you say the G1000 shows only 30% of what it can do in real life, what do you mean exactly? When you download airac data through Fsaerodata you get a pretty much complete navigation base. 

I do agree that we miss airport charts (but this is the kind of stuff you are better looking on your tablet or computer), weather or safetaxi, but what else you see that is missing that makes it not enough good for training? I’m not a real life pilot so I am curious. 

Also I see a lot of complaints about this G1000 but is there a better P3D G1000 out there?

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Karelpatch said:

Hi, out of curiosity when you say the G1000 shows only 30% of what it can do in real life, what do you mean exactly?

There are many basic G1000 functions which simply aren't included at this point, and as soon as you start to do any real nav, you come across these limitations. Even basic things are missing, like you can't pan the map, which is a hell of a limitation when you need to scan around the map to check anything out. I also see overshoots of corners especially at higher speeds under GPS autopilot control, so the plane fails to preempt corner turn points to give smooth progressive navigation. And there are just lots of functions which you get used to using on a daily basis on an G1000 which as plain missing at this early point in the development of the Vertx DA62.

The plane itself is lovely, great to fly and handle, great flight model, a real joy, but at least for me, a lot of the joy of flying a plane like this comes from doing IFR nav in low vis in mountainous/difficult areas in bad weather and being able to use full IFR techniques and glass cockpit facilities, and that isn't fully possible yet due to omissions in the implementation at this stage of it's development.

Over the years I've got used  to flying RealAir stuff with the Flight1 Garmin GTN suite, which is a full implementation apart from weather radars, and I look forward to a similar implementation in the DA62.

However, I'm not sure we will ever get that. It may just be too much work for one man. The Flight1GTN GPS in RealAir planes is not programmed by Flight1 or Sean. They just provide a shell inside which the real Garmin GTN Trainer code runs, so all the real computation donkey-work, accuracy and elegant navigation is done by the original Garmin code.

I'm not sure that is the case with the Vertx DA62. I did not have to install a Garmin G1000 trainer to get the DA62 G1000 working as it stands today. It seems to me that Sean is having to rewrite the actual G1000 code as an emulation in it's entirety within the Vertx DA62 model, which it would seem is a big ask - such code takes years for a team of specialist developers to write.

So I expect as Sean's real life allows, we will see updates and improvements to the DA62 G1000, but I doubt we will ever see a full study level G1000 implementation, not unless he can move to incorporating the Garmin Trainer code in a shell again.

But having said that, Sean has a habit of exceeding our dreams and expectations, so I would be very happy to be proved entirely wrong. 🙂

Edited by SledDriver

Share this post


Link to post

Question is where is Rudi? I know he was beta testing the product and hasn't posted since March.  Hope all is well on your end @rudi0310

Love watching his DA-62 Videos

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/14/2019 at 3:22 AM, SledDriver said:

There are many basic G1000 functions which simply aren't included at this point, and as soon as you start to do any real nav, you come across these limitations. Even basic things are missing, like you can't pan the map, which is a hell of a limitation when you need to scan around the map to check anything out. I also see overshoots of corners especially at higher speeds under GPS autopilot control, so the plane fails to preempt corner turn points to give smooth progressive navigation. And there are just lots of functions which you get used to using on a daily basis on an G1000 which as plain missing at this early point in the development of the Vertx DA62.

The plane itself is lovely, great to fly and handle, great flight model, a real joy, but at least for me, a lot of the joy of flying a plane like this comes from doing IFR nav in low vis in mountainous/difficult areas in bad weather and being able to use full IFR techniques and glass cockpit facilities, and that isn't fully possible yet due to omissions in the implementation at this stage of it's development.

Over the years I've got used  to flying RealAir stuff with the Flight1 Garmin GTN suite, which is a full implementation apart from weather radars, and I look forward to a similar implementation in the DA62.

However, I'm not sure we will ever get that. It may just be too much work for one man. The Flight1GTN GPS in RealAir planes is not programmed by Flight1 or Sean. They just provide a shell inside which the real Garmin GTN Trainer code runs, so all the real computation donkey-work, accuracy and elegant navigation is done by the original Garmin code.

I'm not sure that is the case with the Vertx DA62. I did not have to install a Garmin G1000 trainer to get the DA62 G1000 working as it stands today. It seems to me that Sean is having to rewrite the actual G1000 code as an emulation in it's entirety within the Vertx DA62 model, which it would seem is a big ask - such code takes years for a team of specialist developers to write.

So I expect as Sean's real life allows, we will see updates and improvements to the DA62 G1000, but I doubt we will ever see a full study level G1000 implementation, not unless he can move to incorporating the Garmin Trainer code in a shell again.

But having said that, Sean has a habit of exceeding our dreams and expectations, so I would be very happy to be proved entirely wrong. 🙂

Thanks for your detailed answer. Yes I heard that the Vertx G1000 has been written from scratch whereas the Rxp and F1 GTN are based on the Garmin trainer. 

I also find the lack of pan ability frustrating but I got used to it since I don’t know if it’s even possible to develop this from scratch. I also noticed the turn overshoots, definitely an issue that could be fixed. 

In the last months I have been using the Vertx DA62 almost exclusively, doing a trip around the world with real weather and almost always in real time. I do small legs and touch and go in various airports, taking my time and having fun. I departed from Paris, France and currently exploring Alaska. I am trying to be as realistic as possible and learning a lot about IFR and VFR charts and rules and I only use VOXATC. I must say that I’ve be been learning a lot during this time. 

This is where I have trouble to understand exactly how the current DA62 G1000 prevents us from doing realistic IFR: I plan my routes using IFR charts, enter coordinates in Littlenavmap or some other planning softwares and then load my flightplans in P3D and everything appears as it should be in the G1000. I updated all AIRAC data with Navigraph and Fsaerodata, so when i am given an arrival procedure I can load it normally with the G1000.

For SIDS I have to use workarounds, that is true, because they don’t appear in the procedure tab.

Vnav works very well as long as it’s not a direct-to route. 

No weather support on the G1000 but I use a radar module and/or my tablet and it’s perfect for me. I’d like to have the airports METAR and TAF at least. Shouldn’t be hard to add.

No charts inside the G1000. That’s too bad but I understand they would need some sort of subscription. This would definitely be something I would pay for. I use AirMate or Aerovie instead + Skyvector. 

No safetaxi. That’s a luxury I’d be happy to have. 

 

But these things that are missing are not a deal breaker in my opinion. I don’t see why you can’t fly realistic IFR if you have to load the charts and the weather on your iPad? Everything else is there for a safe flight, don’t you think? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

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