Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jcomm

Autoland performance....

Recommended Posts

A video speeaks better than a thounsand words...

OFC autoland @ EGLC is not allowed AFAIK... yet the tests under gusting winds, withing the operational limits, also look strange :-/

PMDG 737 & Fenix A320 Autoland Testing | MSFS - YouTube

Edited by jcomm

Main Simulation Rig:

Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti, 1 TB & 500 GB M.2 nvme disks, Win11.

Glider pilot since October 1980...

Avid simmer since 1992...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

terrible videoquality. I saw a stuttering mess.

But yeah, the Fenix A320 autoland plowed the field on the upwind side. Little unexpected it was soundly "beaten" by FBW A320 autoland. The author mentions it is due to poor ProSim autoflight, not sure if that is the whole reason?

 


EASA PPL SEPL ( NQ , EFIS, Variable Pitch, SLPC, Retractable undercarriage)
B23 / PA32R / PA28 / DA40 / C172S 

MSFS | X-Plane 12 |

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

The author mentions it is due to poor ProSim autoflight, not sure if that is the whole reason?

 

That's a way of framing what he said in a completely different light. He said no such thing about "poor ProSim autoflight".

He says: "Does this mean that FBW created a better Autoland System than Prosim? Or does it just mean that the FBW's flightdynamics are less realistic than the Fenix?"

To come to the conclusion that he mentioned that Prosim's Autoflight System is poor, is quite a stretch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Farlis said:

That's a way of framing what he said in a completely different light. He said no such thing about "poor ProSim autoflight".

He says: "Does this mean that FBW created a better Autoland System than Prosim? Or does it just mean that the FBW's flightdynamics are less realistic than the Fenix?"

To come to the conclusion that he mentioned that Prosim's Autoflight System is poor, is quite a stretch.

You are correct. Poor choice of words from me.

But the Fenix did not impress in this scenario, nonetheless. 


EASA PPL SEPL ( NQ , EFIS, Variable Pitch, SLPC, Retractable undercarriage)
B23 / PA32R / PA28 / DA40 / C172S 

MSFS | X-Plane 12 |

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not enough information to make a full comparison here.

The PMDG 737 ND was displaying windspeed of mostly between 34 and 45 kts, the Fenix A320 was mostly between 41 and 52 knots. Is that an issue with the Fenix's windspeed gauge on the ND reading higher, or was the crosswind not equal across both tests?
The PC was a stutterfest for the A320 compared to the 737. Does PC lag create an issue with the A320 being unable to maintain the ILS?

"The FBW 320 landed perfectly", yet no video of it doing so.

Per this video, the 737 looked good until it departed the runway tarmac. The A320 never looked comfortable.

Too many questions, not enough answers to judge fairly.


AMD Ryzen 5800X3D; MSI RTX 3080 Ti VENTUS 3X; 32GB Corsair 3200 MHz; ASUS VG35VQ 35" (3440 x 1440)
Fulcrum One yoke; Thrustmaster TCA Captain Pack Airbus edition; MFG Crosswind rudder pedals; CPFlight MCP 737; Logitech FIP x3; TrackIR

MSFS; Fenix A320; PMDG 737-600; FFX HJ; AIG & FSLTL; RealTraffic; PSXTraffic; FSiPanel; REX AccuSeason Adv; FSDT GSX Pro; FS2Crew RAAS Pro; FS-ATC Chatter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to emphasize (sorry, I just have to) that the reason for the FBW A32NX performing these autolands way better, is not an unrealistic flightmodel, but the contrary. Our flightmodel and autoland just works as it should (in real life). Hence it does its job.

  • Like 8
  • Upvote 5

FlyByWire Simulations
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FBW's A320 and Fenix A320 autolands worked perfectly for me, even with a whole lot of crosswinds.


Kind regards,
Hans van WIjhe

 

Acer Predator P03-640 2.10 Ghz Intel 12th Gen Core 17-12700F 32GB memory, 1.02 TB SSD HD, 1.02 TB HD,  NVidia Geforce RTX 3070 16GB Memory, Windows 11 (x64)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hvw said:

FBW's A320 and Fenix A320 autolands worked perfectly for me, even with a whole lot of crosswinds.

I assume the bad performance of that individual setup is what throws the flightdynamics off. Many FBW aircraft of the past stop functioning as designed below 18FPS. Maybe that is still the case here.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jcomm said:

A video speeaks better than a thounsand words...

OFC autoland @ EGLC is not allowed AFAIK... yet the tests under gusting winds, withing the operational limits, also look strange 😕

PMDG 737 & Fenix A320 Autoland Testing | MSFS - YouTube

 

Exactly right on.
I wished these guys educate themselves and understand the aircraft's limitations and requirements before making statements like that.
I don't understand why he would one expect any good performance in a scenario like that from PMDG or Fenix when x-win autoland limitations or even normal x-wind recommended are exceeded or maximum/minimum G/S angle is out of limits.

 

Edited by LRBS
  • Like 7

I9- 13900K- CPU @ 5.0GHz, 64 GB RAM @ 6200MHz, NVIDIA RTX 4090

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Watsi said:

I would like to emphasize (sorry, I just have to) that the reason for the FBW A32NX performing these autolands way better, is not an unrealistic flightmodel, but the contrary. Our flightmodel and autoland just works as it should (in real life). Hence it does its job.

I love the FBW A320 experimental, never failed an autoland, for this reason I was asking myself if it is realistic, but your message is clear.

Regarding the PMDG 737 I can get good and full autolands with Fail Operational and not with Fail Passive, also che crosswind landings have their limits, it shouldn't be above 25/30kts. Is it correct?

Edited by Claudius_

Missing the PMDG DC6 in MSFS 2020 (she's here, but...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed the video linked in the OP is misleading in that the tests are done under extreme or unplausible / unrealistic scenarios, namely:

- not supposed to take place at EGLC IRL for the first two tests;

- winds above max certified during the autoland tests under gusting winds;

This being said:

.) I did run a few tests with the PMDG 737, within certified wind limits, and it performed acceptably.

.) I do not have the Fenix A320.

.) All of the "stress" tests I ran with the FBW A32N had excellent performance, even near the higher x-wind limits and with variable / gusting winds.

Edited by jcomm
  • Like 2

Main Simulation Rig:

Ryzen 5600x, 32GB RAM, Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti, 1 TB & 500 GB M.2 nvme disks, Win11.

Glider pilot since October 1980...

Avid simmer since 1992...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LRBS said:

 

Exactly right on.
I wished these guys educate themselves and understand the aircraft's limitations and requirements before making statements like that.
I don't understand why he would one expect any good performance in a scenario like that from PMDG or Fenix when x-win autoland limitations or even normal x-wind recommended are exceeded or maximum/minimum G/S angle is out of limits.

 

Exactly, you cannot fly an autoland with wind conditions like that in a real aircraft and then claim that one aircraft is better in handling these unrealistic conditions than an other. The whole thing is a waste of time. 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

 

BOBSK8             MSFS 2020 ,   PMDG DC6 ,PMDG 737-600-800 , Fenix A320, A2A Comanche,   Milviz C 310 ,  FSLTL  

TrackIR   Avliasoft EFB2    FSI Panel ,  ATC  by PF3  , A Pilots LIfe V2 ,  CLX PC ,  Kodiak

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely do not care about the autoland capability, it takes away all the fun.

  • Like 1

Windows 11 | Asus Z690-P D4 | i7 12700KF 5.2GHz | 32GB G.Skill (XMP II) | EVGA 3060Ti FTW Ultra | TrackIr v5 | Honeycomb Alfa + Bravo

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CarlosF said:

I sincerely do not care about the autoland capability, it takes away all the fun.

Everyone find his own fun, but regarding the autoland in the real world it seems that a pilot has to be certified to do it.


Missing the PMDG DC6 in MSFS 2020 (she's here, but...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you find yourself unable to look past 50 feet infront of you to barely meet minimums ask yourself again if you don't care about autoland. (That is .. if you cared about meeting landing requirements in the first place).

I presume one uses the sim how they please but considering i actively search for inclement wx to fly in these features and the reliability of them are important. Over time I will be able to test the 737 and the Fenix but i can attest that the FBW is rock solid in my experience using it for these type of conditions. 

Edited by Maxis

AMD Ryzen 5900X / Asus Strix B550 F Gaming Wifi / Powercolor AMD 6800XT Red Devil / 32GB Gskill Trident Neo DDR4 3600 / 2x ADATA XPG 8200pro NVME / Arctic Liquid Freezer II 280 / EVGA Supernova 750 GT PSU / Lian Li Lancool II Mesh Performance /

Viotek 3440x1440p Freesync / Schiit Bifrost DAC+ Schiit Asgard AMP /  Sennheiser HD 558 / Thrustmaster T.16000M + TFRP Rudders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...