Does anyone know where to find the real time RNP required/deviation status?

Is it here?

@Cpt_Piett It looks to be that page

The RNP requirement you have highlighted with the red boundary is the Requirement for whatever phase of flight you are in. Its a range so it changes.

Right below it i would assume is the EPU (Estimated Position Uncertainty) and that number should not be higher than the RNP number at any time. Especially during an approach where the positioning of the aircraft is super critical.

 

I found some documentation from Airbus on it but i cant copy paste the image. But Yeah. looks like you found it .. I wonder if that part works as it should though ? lol

On the 737 the information is provided within the FMC and on the ND for easy reference with the numbers displayed on the bottom RNP and ANP.

 

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Maxis

Well, I did the RNP (AR) 08 approach to LOWI. I pushed the APPR button before the IAF of ELMEM. 

Inbound WI751 and the aircraft is in DES and NAV on the FMA:

A little later and the mode is APP-DES:

Not being an authority on RNP approaches in the A350, it seemed like the aircraft was able to fly this particular approach without any major hiccups. Sorry for my ignorance - maybe some experts can chime in 😀

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Cpt_Piett

6 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Well, I did the RNP (AR) 08 approach to LOWI. I pushed the APPR button before the IAF of ELMEM. 

Inbound WI751 and the aircraft is in DES and NAV on the FMA:

A little later and the mode is APP-DES:

Not being an authority on RNP approaches in the A350, it seemed like the aircraft was able to fly this particular approach without any major hiccups. Sorry for my ignorance - maybe some experts can chime in 😀

A so big A350 can land at LOWI without killing itself and the passengers, maybe it's the parking the real problem there. 😅

20 minutes ago, Claudius_ said:

A so big A350 can land at LOWI without killing itself and the passengers, maybe it's the parking the real problem there. 😅

Hey, that's actually not a bad point. Not sure if you're joking or being serious - or both. But from one of my screenshots from that approach, the GW was 160.4 tonnes. So technically I would not have been able to do a safe landing there. 

As it turned out - I was able to come to a complete stop with auto brake medium well before the end of the runway. 

Ah yes - parking could be a problem! 😅

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Cpt_Piett

Btw, not sure if this is reliable or not - but I did two consecutive flights EDDM-LOWI doing the same RNP 08 approach. First one in the A350-900, then the Fenix A319. Performance in the A350 was absolutely appalling. I don't know why - but it was almost like someone hacked into my computer and started rendering an 8K video while editing something in Blender while I was simming. Even with a TLOD of 40, I could barely maintain my FPS target of 62 (with native frame generation). PG off - and this was using iniBuilds LOWI (default LOWI disabled). I was using live weather which didn't seem to change much between these two flights. 

I tried to reduce graphics settings to somehow be able to increase performance - I reduced cloud, trees, building and tree detail, went from DLSS DLAA to DLSS performance - to no avail. 

If we consider my hardware specs, and the fact that Innsbruck is not a huge urban area - plus the fact that I was not running any ATC addon or injecting AI traffic - these numbers are not good. 

With the Fenix the performance upon final approach was fine without the need to reduce settings. Granted - the TLOD upon touchdown was not awesome - but then again I suspect there's something fishy about iniBuilds LOWI. 

 

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Cpt_Piett

5 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Btw, not sure if this is reliable or not - but I did two consecutive flights EDDM-LOWI doing the same RNP 08 approach. First one in the A350-900, then the Fenix A319. Performance in the A350 was absolutely appalling. I don't know why - but it was almost like someone hacked into my computer and started rendering an 8K video while editing something in Blender while I was on approach into LOWI in the A350. Even with a TLOD of 40, I could barely maintain my FPS target of 62 (with native frame generation). PG off - and this was using iniBuilds LOWI (default LOWI disabled). 

I tried to reduce graphics settings to somehow be able to increase performance - I reduced cloud, trees, building and tree detail, went from DLSS DLAA to DLSS performance - to no avail. 

With the Fenix the performance upon final approach was fine without the need to reduce settings. Granted - the TLOD upon touchdown was not awesome - but then again I suspect there's something fishy about iniBuilds LOWI. 

 

Exactly also at my end....IniBuilds OMSB a350...approach .. MSFS 2024...Stutters way more then Fenix or PMDG 777. 

I don't know why....but it must be a a350 issue

20 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Hey, that's actually not a bad point. Not sure if you're joking or being serious - or both. But from one of my screenshots from that approach, the GW was 160.4 tonnes. So technically I would not have been able to do a safe landing there. 

As it turned out - I was able to come to a complete stop with auto brake medium well before the end of the runway. 

Ah yes - parking could be a problem! 😅

I was slightly skeptical on the realism of this A350, and you tested how it can be unrealistic. LOWI is one of the most challenging airports for light and medium liners, Inibuilds miracles there.

Well the problem is not that the runway is too short, the problem is that is not build to support the weight of the A350. So of course you can land then and come to a stop within the limits of the runway, but you will likely have damaged the Runway in the process.

https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/26418-inibuilds-a350-airliner-for-microsoft-flight-simulator-2024-2020-v104-released/

 

Another patch

Edited March 14, 20251 yr by Tuskin38

iniBuilds A350 v1.0.4 Out Now!

https://discord.com/channels/535246634448191499/536366292861452288/1350254845864706089

The v1.0.4 update brings significant improvements in system depth and simulation fidelity, addressing multiple key areas. Along with some key work done in art such as a major update to the long-winglet model for the A350-900. DISCLAIMER: All liveries will need to be re-downloaded/updated via iniManager to work with v1.0.4 for FS20 and FS24 editions of the A350.

It seems that the link to the changelog is invalid at this stage. 

also take note that folder before installing you need to delete your wasm folder before installing

2 hours ago, Maxis said:

Right below it i would assume is the EPU (Estimated Position Uncertainty) and that number should not be higher than the RNP number at any time. Especially during an approach where the positioning of the aircraft is super critical.

 

The EPU (or Nav System error, NSE) is just a one part that makes up for the aggregated TSE (total system error).

The other major part is how accurate the FD and autopilot is following the route (that is displayed on the CDI scale), this is the FTE (Flight technical error).

FTE + NSE= TSE* which can not be > RNP. So you are correct, but you are then assuming FTE is zero.

When conducting RNP procedures you must monitor both the EPU and the FTE ( the  CDI, keep it inside 1/2 scale deflection is a good rule of thumb)

In short: you need to keep tabs of nav accuracy and  route tracking performance. EPU is no indication of how well the plane is flying the actual flight plan segments.

*Deliberately omitted Path definition Error (PDE) since that is marginal at best.

And all the liveries need to be replaced? I have a few from flightsim.to....

4 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

And all the liveries need to be replaced? I have a few from flightsim.to....

dont think so otherwise  there would be a note same as  the wasn folder on the update page, nothing is mention on the faqs as well