7 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Meaning they don't bleed airspeed as expected or rich critical angle of attack as expected.

I'm flying the DA20 IRL and I noticed that with the DV20 as well. Not just with critical angle, but I'm having trouble decelerating them even with flaps out. They glide well, but there should still be more drag.

21 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

The number format chosen for the x.x is wonky.. It goes 7.1NM, 7NM, 6.9NM

Should be 7.1NM, 7.0NM, 6.9NM

I'm working on fixing this this weekend, Bert.   Would that be expected to be the case for distances >= 10, too?   eg, should it be 10.0NM?

1 minute ago, kaosfere said:

I'm working on fixing this this weekend, Bert.   Would that be expected to be the case for distances >= 10, too?   eg, should it be 10.0NM?

Yes, what happens currently, is that the displayed value moves around, because 10.0NM is one digit more than 10NM.. which is visually distracting.

7 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Yes, what happens currently, is that the displayed value moves around, because 10.0NM is one digit more than 10NM.. which is visually distracting.

Got it, thanks.

I know you'd also asked about having a version that doesn't break the control of brightness via the avionics knob on the lighting panel.   I have a fix for that already, and it will be going out in my next release.  It's slightly less than optimal, as the number that represents that particular knob in the sim variables can be changed by the plane designer, and even in the stock planes it has varying values.   I've tried to figure out a way do determine within the code just what the correct value to look for would be automatically but have so far been unable.  From what I can see there's no way to reflect upon the model behavior definition from within the instrument code, but if someone knows a way I'd love to hear it.

So, until then, folks who want that knob to work but have a plane that doesn't use the default value for it, which includes the C172, will have to add one line to their panel.xml to tell the PFD what knob to look for.  It's not ideal, but it's not too terrible.  I'll be distributing modified versions of the panel configurations for the planes that are affected so folks who want to fix that don't have to do any hand editing of their files. 

Not perfect, but it's a solution.  🙂

Edited September 5, 20205 yr by kaosfere

20 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

OK, try my local airport CYCD in the C172 G1000.

Flightplan CYCD to CYCD

Load Approach RNAV R16 Y via HADER

Once over the water, autopilot NAV and ALT at 1400 feet

Activate approach, and watch the GS indicator come live, it should be roughly centered on the scale (this is not real world behavior)

Edit... I just tried it without activating the approach and it worked the same.. 🙃

After PESGU (on final) press the APR button on the autopilot

At ULDAT, the GS indicator will make a small jump and then it will guide your airplane down the glidepath..

Issues:

- The GS indicator lights up way too early

- If you are flying above 1400 feet, the GS indicator is low and you cannot intercept the glidepath

- The CDI stays on ENR the entire time..

 

OK.  So DA62.  Today I loaded up and flew this with the DA62.  When over the water I activated the approach just like last night in the 172.  This time, int the DA62, it turned me back toward the airport.   Had no other previous waypoint.  Just like what happened at Minneapolis. 

Restarted the flight and this time inserted EPNOD as a waypoint off the airport.  Cleared EPNOD enroute to HADER.  Activated approach.  Turned me back to EPNOD.  Halfway back I looked at the flight plan screen and no segment was active.  Humm.  So I went into the procedures screen and once again activated the flight plan.  Bingo!  This time it turned me to HADER and the GS enunciated on the bar.  It then flew the approach just fine.

Looks like some anomaly in the DA62's G1000. 

Thanks again for the help last night.