Feedback on Aviaworx Flight Monitor

[cdhutch 0]

Hello,

I've flow a few flights with Flight Monitor and really enjoy it. I like that it's always running and saves each landing to a new file so that I may compare them later. I'd like to suggest things to consider in future versions:

- Increase the vertical speed limit in the last 500' of the approach from 600 fpm. Using the rule of thumb that a 3 degree glide slope has a rate of descent of half of your ground speed, the 600 fpm constraint limits the ability to fly a "safe approach" to a ground speed of 120 knots. While this works for light aircraft, a commercial aircraft with approach speeds on the order of 140-150 knots will bust this rule.

- Capture missed approaches: I flew an approach last night when I got behind the aircraft and needed a significant rate of descent to come down onto the glidepath. Approaching 1000' AGL when I knew I could't make a stable approach, I executed a go around. It would have been nice to have an approach report to show my how unstable I was and to validate my decision to go around.

For the rest of the Aviaworx server, I hope that there are plans in work to incorporate the new Fly the MaddogX EFB.

Thanks for the great flight sim tool/

Craig

Edited August 29, 2020 by cdhutch
Mispelling in title

[disco79stu 15]

Beside Craig's correct comment above about the vertical speed (I even did get a penalty on autoland in a A320 with a Vapp of 136kt, so that's quite never gonna work), I'd like to add that the penalty for engine's N1 and the airspeed deviation is also a little to strict imo.

Also, it would be cool/nice to have the first part of the analysis also represented in some sort of graph or diagram, not just as plain text.

But all in all a really great tool!

Stu

 

[marcom 139]

14 hours ago, disco79stu said:

Beside Craig's correct comment above about the vertical speed (I even did get a penalty on autoland in a A320 with a Vapp of 136kt, so that's quite never gonna work), I'd like to add that the penalty for engine's N1 and the airspeed deviation is also a little to strict imo.

Also, it would be cool/nice to have the first part of the analysis also represented in some sort of graph or diagram, not just as plain text.

But all in all a really great tool!

Stu

 

Gentlemen,

thanks a lot for your comments.

I have prepared an interim version that addresses these issues:

http://www.aviaworx.com/files/not_released/aviaserver_25-aug-20-160722.zip

It's not fully tested yet, so I haven't released it but it would be great to get your feedback on this version.

- Vertical Speed limits have been changed.

- Airspeed limits are more generous

- Minimum N1 has been reduced for Turbojet aircraft

[disco79stu 15]

9 hours ago, marcom said:

Gentlemen,

thanks a lot for your comments.

I have prepared an interim version that addresses these issues:

http://www.aviaworx.com/files/not_released/aviaserver_25-aug-20-160722.zip

It's not fully tested yet, so I haven't released it but it would be great to get your feedback on this version.

- Vertical Speed limits have been changed.

- Airspeed limits are more generous

- Minimum N1 has been reduced for Turbojet aircraft

Thanks a lot, this version worked very well. I just had a reasonable good report on an approach I felt to be very stable. The measurements are spot on (touchdown point, touchdown rate etc. are perfectly in line with other systems like STKP and smartCARS).
One little request for a future update: It would be nice to have a more detailed evaluation on the touchdown itself (was it good? too long? off CL?), or maybe increase the size of the runway graphic a bit. I'd like to see where I hit it 🙂

But so far I really like the simplicity and reliability of this system, very nice that it saves every recording automatically.

Keep it up!

Cheers,
Stu

[cdhutch 0]

10 hours ago, marcom said:

Gentlemen,

thanks a lot for your comments.

I have prepared an interim version that addresses these issues:

http://www.aviaworx.com/files/not_released/aviaserver_25-aug-20-160722.zip

It's not fully tested yet, so I haven't released it but it would be great to get your feedback on this version.

- Vertical Speed limits have been changed.

- Airspeed limits are more generous

- Minimum N1 has been reduced for Turbojet aircraft

 

Hi Mark,

I won't have a chance to check out your new build until Friday night, but look forward to doing so.

Thanks for the great development work,

Craig

[disco79stu 15]

Just a quick note, my distance from centerline is always "0 ft" with the latest version. Maybe it's something to check for you guys OR I'm simply that good. 😁😄 Could be either. 🙂

Oh, and does the glide path always show 3 degrees or is it somehow taking that info from a database or something? Because IRL, it's not always 3° ... (for example at LDDU's 29 it should be 3.10°).

Stu

Edited September 1, 2020 by disco79stu

[cdhutch 0]

Hi Mark,

I did a couple of approaches last night, and I'm finding the grading to be much for realistic.

Hi Stu,

I can verify that you're simply that good. Flight Monitor points out when my centerline control needs work.

Thank you,

Craig

[disco79stu 15]

I agree and meanwhile I got some deviations from the centerline on landings. Seem to be working properly.

The only thing I noticed is that the landing distances or t/d zones sometimes doesn‘t „fit“ 100% on to the airport in the sim. I guess that‘s understandable, als scenery developers may not put their scenery 100% in the correct place. Also, some airports have slightly altered touchdown areas in real life and the sim (such as LIPZ). You may end up hitting the perfect spot in the sim and still get a penalty for a long landing.

As futue suggestion I‘d love to see the exact touchdown point on some sort of runway graphic or satelite image and maybe an extended track recording of the whole approach.

[cdhutch 0]

I have another feature to consider forfuture development.

Given that the app is already creating a folder for each of the approach reports, it would be helpful if there were an output file with the raw data being captured, If in a format that could be interpreted by humans, such as a comma-separated variable file, users could identify precisely in the approach where the approach report indicates deviations.

Thank you.

[disco79stu 15]

Or even cooler: a simple, reduced 3D replay like in those FDR animations. 🙂 

[disco79stu 15]

Another small thing: I get flagged for missing the touchdown zone if I land 1000ft away from the aiming point.

I was told the touchdown zone can be much larger than that, especially on long runways. Maybe you could loosen up this rule a bit too... 

[marcom 139]

Hi folks,

happy to see you guys are enjoying aviaFlightMonitor!

Let me respond to some of the topics mentioned here:

Quote

One little request for a future update: It would be nice to have a more detailed evaluation on the touchdown itself (was it good? too long? off CL?), or maybe increase the size of the runway graphic a bit. I'd like to see where I hit it

Yes, I think having a bigger runway graphic could help. It's already accurate in that it shows the point directly on the surface but it's fairly small.

Quote

Oh, and does the glide path always show 3 degrees or is it somehow taking that info from a database or something? Because IRL, it's not always 3° ... (for example at LDDU's 29 it should be 3.10°).

That's a tricky one - especially since the same runway could have multiple approaches to it with different glide path angles.

Anyway, you won't be graded on the actual flight path - as long as your vertical speed is within limits (yes, landing a heavy 747 into La Paz with a slight tail wind will result in a high RoD even on a 3° glide path - but maybe that's unsafe after all? 😉 )

The glide path visualization is just a reference - and you see the full range between 2 and 4 degrees. I would say most commercial aircraft operations will fall into that range.

Quote

The only thing I noticed is that the landing distances or t/d zones sometimes doesn‘t „fit“ 100% on to the airport in the sim. I guess that‘s understandable, als scenery developers may not put their scenery 100% in the correct place. Also, some airports have slightly altered touchdown areas in real life and the sim (such as LIPZ). You may end up hitting the perfect spot in the sim and still get a penalty for a long landing.

Can you check what the satellite view looks like at the bottom? If the scenery designer didn't match the coordinates to the real world airport, that's unfortunate. aviaFlightMonitor uses real world nav data. The data available in the sim (e.g. r4.csv / makerunways) doesn't deliver the needed data and as such I can't use it.

Quote

Given that the app is already creating a folder for each of the approach reports, it would be helpful if there were an output file with the raw data being captured, If in a format that could be interpreted by humans, such as a comma-separated variable file, users could identify precisely in the approach where the approach report indicates deviations.

Hmm maybe at some point - truth be told, not the highest priority for now.

Quote

Or even cooler: a simple, reduced 3D replay like in those FDR animations. 🙂

You already have that - it's called Instant Replay 😉

Quote

Another small thing: I get flagged for missing the touchdown zone if I land 1000ft away from the aiming point.

I was told the touchdown zone can be much larger than that, especially on long runways. Maybe you could loosen up this rule a bit too...

Hmm I haven't heard that... Do you have an example?

[disco79stu 15]

58 minutes ago, marcom said:

Hmm I haven't heard that... Do you have an example?

I asked in another forum about that and everybody agreed that it is as long as the 500ft marks go on, so it might be longer than 1000ft from the aiming point.

(don’t know if you can access the link below)

https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/topic/26870-where-exactly-is-the-touchdown-zone/&tab=comments#comment-209914

 

 

[disco79stu 15]

1 hour ago, marcom said:

You already have that - it's called Instant Replay 😉

Haha, yeah, okay. Except the replay in P3D is word not allowed. 😉
 

1 hour ago, marcom said:

Yes, I think having a bigger runway graphic could help. It's already accurate in that it shows the point directly on the surface but it's fairly small.

Or maybe implement it into the map.... 
(similar to what Simtoolkitpro does...?) 🙂 

 

 

[disco79stu 15]

7 hours ago, marcom said:

Can you check what the satellite view looks like at the bottom? If the scenery designer didn't match the coordinates to the real world airport, that's unfortunate. aviaFlightMonitor uses real world nav data. The data available in the sim (e.g. r4.csv / makerunways) doesn't deliver the needed data and as such I can't use it.

To add this to the touchdown zone discussion: I just landed at LOWW, where the markings (I really use them to aim etc) are also not "standard", which is confirmed when I measure the distances in google earth. I touched down at 2500ft from the threshold, which is a correctly measured by flight monitor (and stkp). Only thing is, the aiming point is not 1000ft but 1300ft from the threshold at LOWW. And the following markings are aprox. 700ft apart, not 500ft as on most airports. 

I guess it just can be different at different airports, which makes is hard to evaluate, unless you can actually compare the touchdown point to a satellite image of the runway.