4 minutes ago, Coldbear said:

Not that i have the exact distance from the waypoint before it switches to the next,

I have a separate computer running a moving map so it’s easy to see the distance at which the next waypoint is activated. Check the waypoint distances on the generated document and watch the distance to the next waypoint count down.

My guess is it’s always 42nm irrespective of the turn involved. That’s not using trig. They’re just using distance.

2 hours ago, Coldbear said:

I'm also still waiting for supersonic over land

Supersonic over land was added a little back, you can modify the acceleration and decelration points in the HPLX when loading a custom route.

15 minutes ago, SimeonWilbury said:

Supersonic over land was added a little back, you can modify the acceleration and decelration points in the HPLX when loading a custom route.

Unless it’s different for supersonic over land the software has a bug. The Mach 1 point cannot be moved closer to the destination airport. It needs to because the formula for deciding that point is not 100% correct.

Even if you move the accel point there another bug that shows two accel points on the documentation produced.

It’s a known problem but we’ve been waiting months for a fix. MSFS has higher priority apparently.

I'll need to do a few more custom routes to have a look (so far just Bahrain to Hong Kong via Bangkok), though I haven't had too much problem resetting the accel/ decel points, the VCS seems to follow it more or less ok. The documentation does definitely still show the 'original' points, which I ignore.

 

Interesting NOTAMs for Lanarca, Cyprus on this afternoon's flight. We don't have a hooligan setting in P3D. Pity! 🤣

 

At least the GPS spoofing would be no problem for Concorde, given it doesn't have one 😆

Hey Ray, 

 

has FSL dropped any hints about this thing coming to MSFS soon?  I only have access to the lounge and that place is dead… 😕

2 hours ago, ATRguy said:

Hey Ray, 

has FSL dropped any hints about this thing coming to MSFS soon?  I only have access to the lounge and that place is dead… 😕

Absolutely nothing which is standard for them.

Well, they intend to make a MSFS version and their dev effort seems to be primarily going into MSFS ports, I think I can gather that much, though they are unclear as to whether the bulk of the effort is going into Concorde or the A32x.

With FSL time-frames I wouldn't expect anything soon in the conventional sense; I imagine they will maybe try to push the airbusses out first before concorde but there is already a very saturated market for Airbusses on MSFS so I don't know how well that will turn out.

Edited March 13, 20242 yr by SimeonWilbury
clarification

7 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Absolutely nothing which is standard for them.

Super frustrating, but thanks!

Those of you interested in Concorde might find this report interesting. I posted it on the FSL Concorde forum this morning but unless you own it the forum isn’t visible.

START OF REPORT.

P3Dv5.3HF2. FSL Concorde experimental build 227.

Flight is EGLL-GCLP. Plan attached. Approaching waypoint 4905N the INS switches to the next waypoint when 38nm from the active. The turn to TURDO is just 26 degrees.

As a result it misses 4905N by nearly 8nm meaning Aivlasoft's EFB doesn't credit me for passing that waypoint.

On another test of this route and at 38nm from 4905N I engaged HDG HOLD and re-engaged INS when 15nm distant. The waypoint was passed within 2nm and was soon on track to the next one some 150nm distant.

The attached screenshot shows the missed waypoint. I have also made a video available below.

And a second video but this time I engaged HDG HOLD when the active waypoint was changed 38nm out. I switched back to INS 15nm from 4905N and passed it within 3nm. See screenshots.

I believe the turn is being initiated too soon. When INS is engaged it's a very shallow bank. When INS is re-engaged after HDG HOLD the bank angle is greater but still no more than 22 degrees.

END OF REPORT.

There hasn’t been a response from FSL yet. I’ll let you know when there is.

What you may notice is how shallow the turn is when INS is engaged on the first video. Concorde is capable of a greater bank which is why it was able to fly a 180° left turn on the “Round The Bay” charter flights. Mach 2, FL500 or higher and 20-30° bank for the duration of the turn.

When I delay the turn by engaging HDG HOLD when I re-engage INS note how the bank angle increases to 22°. Less than RTB flights proving that rate of bank is entirely normal.

A few thoughts on my end

• Iirc the shallower bank-rate was(?)/ is to maintain climb performance on the LHR-BAH routings? Or at least that was the intention. There doesn't seem to be much impact on climb performance with HDG-hold method in your case, but I'd be interested to see this on a heavier-loaded aircraft in case it makes any difference
• I think you might also be able to do the equivalent to the HDG-hold without engaging the Heading hold by setting the INS to 'manual' so it doesn't change waypoints as early. Same effect I think but no changing modes on the AFCS.
• I don't use an EFB (beyond navigraph charts) or anything that makes me worry about whether I get registered as 'hitting' waypoints or not so it doesn't bother me (and the curves look nice on the ground-track to me lol), so not much of an issue to me personally, but if they can get some fine-tuning into the next update that makes things more accurate I'm all for it. I've no idea how things were calibrated in the actual aircraft so I'm speaking from a certain level of ignorance.

Edited March 19, 20242 yr by SimeonWilbury

@SimeonWilbury, by the time it got to the special curve enroute to Bahrain I would imagine fuel was down to something close to half full. Not dissimilar to my flight today 1/4 the way to GCLP. And with the track so heavily restricted ensuring you passed close enough to each waypoint was especially important.

Yes, turning off the INS mode was an alternative.

You may not use software like Aivlasoft’s EFB or Radar Contact but there are plenty who do and if you don’t get close enough to a waypoint EFB or RC4 won’t credit you. Fly what you file if you miss any!

My post has been acknowledged and will be assessed whenever. No indication of when any new build might be coming.

If left unchanged many using Concorde in MSFS will be similarly affected.

Hi Ray, 

I appreciate you have your reservations around the waypoint switching logic within our Carousel IV-AC INS. I've stated before that this logic has been refined using real world data gathered from routes where psudo waypoints were designed and utilised by INS to steer a supersonic turn. We have then used these to define our algorithms. 

I'm not suggesting our model wouldn't benefit from further refinement, particularly where a more shallow turn is required. When time permits, we will carry out further tests and refinements and I will then, of course, update you and our customer base on our findings. 

@MachTwo, hi Andrew. I fully understand the difficulty in programming the INS / AFCS to ensure accurate heading changes for all of Concorde’s flights including the difficult Bahrain routing over a land mass. Unlike you I have no access to the data you used to determine the programming logic.

But on a relatively straight Mach 2 routing determining when to initiate the turn to the next waypoint should be easier. 38-40nm from the current seems to be the trigger.

Watching the Course Deviation Indicator on the HSI perhaps the turn could be delayed until it’s between the outermost dot and the one to its left. That would result in a 15-20° turn and initiated much later so it’s likely my aircraft would pass close enough to the approaching waypoint to receive credit.

Watching that first video again note how the initial bank angle is around 20° but the CDI doesn’t move for a long time. The bank angle reduces over the next minute until it’s around 3° and only then does the CDI start to move. What that results in is a overlong very shallow turn.

I look forward to you revisiting this code in the hope that it can be further refined to reduce or eliminate the possibility of waypoints not being credited in third-party software.