1 hour ago, wthomas33065 said:

Another option which I haven't really tested to much, is to use the GPS to enter a "Direct To"  the IAF after you you get the information.  This, I believe will wipe out your previous flight plan and anchor your start from your position.  Then you may be able to load the approach.

This is what I've been doing and it usually works fine.

39 minutes ago, Tom_L said:

It states on it's front page: THIS INFORMATION MANUAL IS A NON-OFFICIAL COPY OF THE PILOT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK. It's non official for legal reasons as it is not amended. In don't think you'll find anything much different as it has everything one would expect from a POH.

You’re probably correct. 

11 hours ago, scotchegg said:

I think he's being a bit tongue in cheek:)

May have to set the clock to April 1.

15 hours ago, himmelhorse said:

I am compelled to put the naysayers view across here...

😄 I had to re-read it as I was really confused at first, but I get it.  Ultimate sarcasm, funny, and well put! 

You made some good points there actually.  👍

Has the PFD been fixed and now includes the Flight Path Vector? I don't have MSFS2020 but as real world pilot flying a G1000 Cirrus this was the first glaring omission that I could see from some videos and/or pics.

Also are the missed approaches programmed in (part of the database)? Can you fly them as with the real unit? If a leg calls for fixed HDG is it going to hold this heading? If a leg calls for certain altitude to be reached before a turn, does it work?

Edited October 26, 20205 yr by michal

9 hours ago, SierraHotel said:

Thank goodness it's your owner that opens your catfood, otherwise you would starve! And do you lay down to eat? I always find that helps.................🤪😜🙃

Its a 4 million dollar airplane...for that price it ought to be able to keep tanks balanced on its own, if its smart enough to detect i and warn me about it then just fix it automatically and leave me alone.

Edited October 26, 20205 yr by AmeliaCat

6 hours ago, AmeliaCat said:

Its a 4 million dollar airplane...for that price it ought to be able to keep tanks balanced on its own, if its smart enough to detect i and warn me about it then just fix it automatically and leave me alone.

The reason for there being a manual mode is to cater for a fuel system malfunction. If you owned the real thing you can probably leave the switch on auto.

15 hours ago, AmeliaCat said:

Its a 4 million dollar airplane...for that price it ought to be able to keep tanks balanced on its own, if its smart enough to detect i and warn me about it then just fix it automatically and leave me alone.

There is an automatic fuel setting. 

Had my second flight in this yesterday and it has changed my opinion of this sim 180 degrees overnight. Absolutely amazing! And being able to select your route and approach and have it load into the FMS. It’s amazing. The weather is still a mess, you don’t get what you had set up preflight. But flying this airplane in the sim is just awesome. 

6 minutes ago, mtr75 said:

Had my second flight in this yesterday and it has changed my opinion of this sim 180 degrees overnight. 

Does this refer to the "naked" plane or to a modded one?

Thanks and kind regards, Michael

19 minutes ago, pmb said:

Does this refer to the "naked" plane or to a modded one?

Thanks and kind regards, Michael

The stock plane that came with the sim. I'm actually quite leery of community mods at this stage. I tend to trust the efforts of the people who know the underlying mechanics of the sim. The need to modify a plane presupposes that the people flying it are doing so perfectly, like test pilots essentially. Just because, for example, you reduce the fuel consumption to what you expect it to be doesn't mean you've necessarily fixed a problem. And I just worry about creating new ones, or that mods will cause the planes not to work properly with future updates. 

So for now it's stock airplanes for me. 

22 hours ago, mtr75 said:

The problem is that I’ve heard the direct-to key doesn’t work in the sim.

Direct-to usually works fine for me. But anything in the procedures menu is 50/50 whether it will work or not.  At best.

 

2 hours ago, mtr75 said:

Had my second flight in this yesterday and it has changed my opinion of this sim 180 degrees overnight. Absolutely amazing! And being able to select your route and approach and have it load into the FMS. It’s amazing. The weather is still a mess, you don’t get what you had set up preflight. But flying this airplane in the sim is just awesome. 

 What's more you can create a route outside of the main screen's flight planner, so within the MFD and it will communicate w/ ATC retrogradely, and correctly, more often than not, which is new I love it.  This means I can start out using a plan created in the planner, land at my arrival airport, park and shut down, then go into the airport cafe for lunch, then come back into the aircraft and create a new plan directly via the MFD's flight planner, provided you know the route, and we get that off of LittleNavMap.  Live weather has been largely ok for me w/ the exception of more lightening in certain areas and a few other oddities, but I am not really familiar with how much lightening activity is realistic on high.  Mostly what bothers me about cloud formations is allegedly being addressed by the DX-12 port, and that is the pixilated grid you can see from different angles and lighting.  It's better using NVCP's Negative LOD Bias set to CLAMP.

9 hours ago, mtr75 said:

The stock plane that came with the sim. I'm actually quite leery of community mods at this stage.

mtr75,

Whilst I can fully understand this approach under normal circumstances, I do believe that the team working on this aircraft have introduced absolutely no negative aspects in its modding. Well, at least, that is my finding.  

A lovely aircraft made so much more functional and therefore quantifiably better than stock,  

Apart from that, if you save (back up) the default aircraft it is very easy to remove the mods if you have a problem with it.

No harm whatsoever in trying it and I heartily recommend all the A320 mods (FlyByWire), G1000 and G3000 mods, (Working Title) and Robert Youngs Bonanza G36

Have at it mate

Tony

46 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

mtr75,

Whilst I can fully understand this approach under normal circumstances, I do believe that the team working on this aircraft have introduced absolutely no negative aspects in its modding. Well, at least, that is my finding.  

A lovely aircraft made so much more functional and therefore quantifiably better than stock,  

Apart from that, if you save (back up) the default aircraft it is very easy to remove the mods if you have a problem with it.

No harm whatsoever in trying it and I heartily recommend all the A320 mods (FlyByWire), G1000 and G3000 mods, (Working Title) and Robert Youngs Bonanza G36

Have at it mate

Tony

Yeah, I don't mean to say anything negative about anyone, please don't take it that way. I'm just kind in a wait-and-see mode right now. I do appreciate the feedback though!