32 minutes ago, Noel said:

Thank you Gary I've obviously been out of touch completely with this.  What do I need to do to participate?  

This post covers it (at the bottom) albeit for a previous beta. Is accurate for the STEAM version at least - I don't have the store version..

Beta Joining Info

 

G

Edited January 8, 20233 yr by Gazzareth
Tidied up the link..

With the 1.30.11.0 update the Longitude is now next level amazing, FLC works so much better and no longer stops the climb momentarily at 10000ft! Working Title deserve so much praise for making this brilliant aircraft a total joy to fly👌Taking off and landing have improved so much recently, I can now land without destroying the runway🤣

Maybe I’m missing something but my first go with the Longitude since the update and there’s no flight plan in the FMS. I’m semi-happy to manually enter it but when short on time I’d like to be able to just set my flight in World Map and go. Is there a specific step to import it into the FMS after the update?

Another question: I used the settings on the GTC (hope I'm using the correct term here?) to change the units for fuel quantity from pounds to kilograms. Other GTC menus, e.g. for landing performance, are now showing kilograms as expected, but the fuel display on the "big center screen" (sorry, don't know the correct Garmin terminology for this) still shows the fuel in pounds. Is this a bug or is it accurate to the behavior of the real unit, and if so, is there a different settings option where I can change the units used for the fuel display on the "big center screen"?

On a related note, I've changed my baro units from inHg to hPa to fly in Europe, but the integrated standby instrument still uses inHg. This makes sense, as I wouldn't expect it to be talking to the rest of the avionics, but is there any way that I can change the units used by the standby instrument? Or is it a limitation of the real aircraft that the standby instrument always uses inHg?

2 hours ago, martinboehme said:

Is this a bug or is it accurate to the behavior of the real unit

This is accurate to the airframe. There is no way to change the units display on the EIS, even by maintenance.

All airframes delivered worldwide will still display in these units on the EIS.

1 hour ago, MattNischan said:

This is accurate to the airframe. There is no way to change the units display on the EIS, even by maintenance.

All airframes delivered worldwide will still display in these units on the EIS.

Thanks -- that was quick and definitive!

I guess I'll file a bug report with Cessna then. 😉

On a more serious note, I can see how this inconsistency might come about given where I suspect the boundaries of the various software systems lie. I think in this case, I'll fly the Longitude in pounds -- seems less confusing than to work with a mixture of pounds and kilograms.

While you're here, can you comment also on the standby instrument -- is that inHg exclusively, or is there some way to switch it to hPa?

By the way, thank you for the quality of support you provide in these forums, which isn't even your official venue for support. I see you posting detailed replies on seemingly every WT-related question -- much appreciated!

On 1/4/2023 at 6:08 PM, David Mills said:

 But in my view, the Longitude, following today's AAU beta update, is just as study-level as any PMDG product.

 

I agreed with everything except this part. The Longitude has gotten orders of magnitude better and is definitely payware quality at this point, but it's more in line with the old QualityWings 787 - very good, but not a complete simulation. Some stuff still doesn't work (I'm guessing some more things will be enabled over the next AAU updates). For example, the hud, some of the switches, etc. 

On 1/5/2023 at 11:30 AM, DaviiB said:

I have no dog in this fight (not that it's a fight), and don't have MSFS yet, but this is completely unrealistic as-described. (Unless I'm mis-understanding)

Can't think of a jet that would behave like this IRL. It's not a C172.

At Vr, back pressure should always be required to raise the nose of a jet.

Cheers,
DB

Depends on trim setting. If you're trimmed too nose up, they'll take off "by themselves." And since few of us do the nitty-gritty math necessary to determine exact trim settings, we just trim it into the green range. If we guess wrong as to where in that range to trim it, it can either be too easy or overly slow to rotate.

 

On 1/6/2023 at 11:51 AM, Dillon said:

How's the night lighting (taxi, landing lights from the cockpit)?

Too good. 😄  I was descending last night and flipped the landing lights on at 10,000 feet, and they illuminated the ground for miles ahead of the aircraft. I'd hate to be the guy who accidentally looked into those lights!

 

36 minutes ago, eslader said:

I agreed with everything except this part. The Longitude has gotten orders of magnitude better and is definitely payware quality at this point, but it's more in line with the old QualityWings 787 - very good, but not a complete simulation. Some stuff still doesn't work (I'm guessing some more things will be enabled over the next AAU updates). For example, the hud, some of the switches, etc.  😄 

 

The HUD isn't widely available in real life at this moment in time (from what I have read - single digits in test aircraft).

As such I believe the details as to it's exact functionality are not available to WT.

G

I wish people would follow WT on Discord, where the HUD issue was already addressed. 

7 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I wish people would follow WT on Discord, where the HUD issue was already addressed. 

So what did they say about it?

I'm on the WT Discord, but there's more discussion there than I can keep up with on a regular basis. 

19 minutes ago, martinboehme said:

So what did they say about it?

I'm on the WT Discord, but there's more discussion there than I can keep up with on a regular basis. 

Exactly what I said, 2 posts above...

😂

 

G

26 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

46 minutes ago, martinboehme said:

So what did they say about it?

I'm on the WT Discord, but there's more discussion there than I can keep up with on a regular basis. 

Exactly what I said, 2 posts above..

Thanks. Didn't realize that information came from WT - it sounded as if it was just a conclusion you had drawn from your own knowledge of the aircraft. 

1 minute ago, martinboehme said:

Thanks. Didn't realize that information came from WT - it sounded as if it was just a conclusion you had drawn from your own knowledge of the aircraft. 

No, that was from a discussion on their Discord when I asked the same question. It wasn't ruled out, but wouldn't be done unless they can get functional details and be able to replicate it in the sim - but it's somewhat more complex than the likes of the 737 HUD...

G

16 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

No, that was from a discussion on their Discord when I asked the same question. It wasn't ruled out, but wouldn't be done unless they can get functional details and be able to replicate it in the sim - but it's somewhat more complex than the likes of the 737 HUD...

G

Thanks for that info - makes sense! 

On 1/5/2023 at 6:49 AM, hs118 said:

A bit OT but several parameters were added to the flight model configs in SU9/SU10 that allow tuning of this behavior. I discovered them while working on a flight modeling project. 

Some developers such as SWS are using them too. They make a world of difference.

Could you share the variable names and what file they're located in? I usually don't bother messing with .cfg files etc. but if there's a way to dial down some of the crazy turbulence I'd give it a shot.