RNAV +V approaches WT, are you watching?

[fppilot 4,371]

1 minute ago, Ricardo41 said:

If I'm not mistaken

Ricardo.  My discussion is about the initial-to-current core simulator itself.  And the actual simulator developers. And the refusal to this point in time to open up to previous and proven GPS developers.  Period!

[MattNischan 3,778]

43 minutes ago, fppilot said:

What is the hangup there?

The hangup is that we've been working on the sim for just over a month, and have no code in the sim at all presently.

Avsim is not an appropriate forum to publicly litigate (through WT) the decisions made prior by other development teams, with whom we have no contractual relationship (our contract is with Microsoft).

43 minutes ago, fppilot said:

It is not a navigation issue. 

By "navigation" I mean "all the things that cause your FMS/GPS/AP/Flight planning system to be unable to do what you ask vertically and/or laterally, whether due to faulty behavior or missing features".

Thanks for your feedback.

-Matt

Edited May 4, 2021 by MattNischan

[fppilot 4,371]

19 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

The hangup is that we've been working on the sim for just over a month, and have no code in the sim at all presently.

Matt. Honestly I was not aware that you at WT were still working as a 3rd party and not involved in the sim code itself.  I apologize for that misunderstanding.

[MattNischan 3,778]

1 minute ago, fppilot said:

Honestly I was not aware that you at WT were still working as a 3rd party and not involved in the sim code itself.

Sorry, my apologies, I could have been clearer there.

We are a first party and we are working on some core sim code (although that isn't strictly our focus), but we've only been working on the sim for a short time, and no WT code is currently present in the simulator today that anyone is flying. People can start yelling at us a little when SU4 comes out. 😉

-Matt

[fppilot 4,371]

Just now, MattNischan said:

People can start yelling at us a little when SU4 comes out.

Matt. The yelling is not directed at you at all.  You have been our saviors to an extent.  To the extent that you ccould. Fully understood.  Many of us are just so frustrated that simulation technologies that have been around for years have been ignored or set aside.  And that is not exclusive to avionics.  I am aware of noone who does not greatly value your contributions.

[Gilandred 690]

17 minutes ago, fppilot said:

Many of us are just so frustrated that simulation technologies that have been around for years have been ignored or set aside.  And that is not exclusive to avionics.  I am aware of noone who does not greatly value your contributions.

Asobo did not understand certain fundamentals when they developed the sim, most easily seen in they way they incorrectly interpreted flight plan management (ie. inserting usr waypoints, doing 180 turns on approach selection, etc).  I think they realize it now, and appear to be taking action in the right direction.  Hiring WT is a good step forward and I bet you anything the main focus will be bringing flight plan management up to snuff in the default sim.  X Plane did the same thing with their default garmins.

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Gilandred

[harrry 322]

5 minutes ago, Gilandred said:

Asobo did not understand certain fundamentals when they developed the sim, most easily seen in they way they incorrectly interpreted flight plan management (ie. inserting usr waypoints, doing 180 turns on approach selection, etc).  I think they realize it now, and appear to be taking action in the right direction.  Hiring WT is a good step forward and I bet you anything the main focus will be bringing flight plan management up to snuff in the default sim.  X Plane did the same thing with their default garmins.

 

I think this summed it up.  They did not realise that simulation did not allow near enoughs for sim users. They (and Microsoft ) woke op very qauickly though after they released too early and got a lot of I think deserved criticism.They have redemed themself sinc e then when they woke up and I respect that  They have a long way to go but I think we will have a fantastic sim in a couple of years.......but even then they have to keep up with changes both in the sim hardware and the aviation environment.

[nirgal76 100]

6 hours ago, MattNischan said:

We are a first party and we are working on some core sim code (although that isn't strictly our focus),

 

Ohh, you have some rights on modifing the "Holy Grail", the c++ sim core. it must be huge and impressive, and so complex ! 

[manageablebits 11]

I'm not entirely sure if this is the same thing but I've just done a test to confirm my belief that RNAV GPS is refusing to catch glide at FAF if there is another fix/point in the approach after that.

Example. Sarasota/Bradenton INTL (SRQ).  RWY 14.

The FAF is FRUGAL.  There is another point at ETIGY.

I'd expect glide to lock in approach mode at FRUGAL FAF.  In MSFS if you plan an RNAV GPS approach ETIGY is in the plan and glide won't work until then.  If you choose ILS 14 ETIGY isn't in the plan and glide locks as it should at FRUGAL which is the FAF.