Peter Clark

Interesting. I just flew KLAS to EGKK and was dead-on the magenta line the entire way including the TRALR RNAV SID and the oceanic segments from 4130N to 4120N etc, with ActiveSky X running. It'll be interesting to see if someone can diagnose a common denominator for those who are reporting this behaviour.

So the distance between waypoints in the FMS was only 90NM in your original report? That's why a screenshot of the aircraft, not the FS map, is much more useful when reporting things. It gives the developers that kind of information.I'll have to fly a NAT tomorrow and see if I can experiment and in a controlled test reproduce this with long legs, since I can't with short ones (that being 250NM or less) at all. I vuagely recall this issue with (something? I forget which addon) in FS9 and it turned out to be the long distance legs and the difference between great-circle and flat-earth modelling on the NDs magenta line. It wasn't homing, it was flying perfectly the great-circle route between the two long-away waypoints but the ND line was flat-earth so it looked like it was off-track when it wasn't.

Your picture was a zoomed stretch of a 500NM leg. It would be intersting to see if it does it when your waypoints are only, say, 100NM apart.

Interesting, I've never see that behaviour and have had over 100 knot winds (ASX near that tropical depression which blew through BOS yesterday).I mis-read your message, I thought you had said they acknoweldged the issue not that they said it didn't home. Apologies. I really should have more coffee before posting. Still, I've had some good jet streams through my flights and haven't been off the magenta line at all. Hopefully with a screenshot of the aircraft actually doing it some additional minds can jump in now.One thought - your leg is over 500NM. Is it homing or is it doing great-circle with the magenta line drawn incorrectly? Does it do it over shorter legs?

Can you post a link to the original thread, including the panel screenshots showing the LNAV/VNAV MCP status, ND with wind correction, and the aircraft being offset from the magenta line?

OK, so you have a 90 knot crosswind and the aircraft isn't applying enough of a crosswind correction, they've acknoweldged this issue (which your original message said had no replies to), so might I ask what more do you expect at this point? I'm not trying to be an #### here, but I'm not quite sure what the problem is.

The only thread I see is one where you post a picture of the FS map, not a panel shot, while complaining about the entire sim and claiming that the problem can't be user error. I don't know about the developers, but in general I find it hard to troubleshoot a problem when the user reports a problem that few, if any, have reported, and doesn't really give the information needed to work on it, and immediately discounts the possibility that they'd possibly be doing anything wrong.

#2: Click on the top of the yoke and it retracts down, just like the FS9 version, which will uncover the displays.

The clickspot is still that upper-left screw in the 2D cockpit, they moved it in the VC down to the throttle quadrant, where it is on the real throttles.

I disagree, leave your altimeter at 30.92 or 28.92 and climb into a flight level, MSFS ATC will give you altitude warnings until you reset your altimeter to 29.92 and climb or descend appropritately. Unless you're saying that even though you're set to 29.92 MSFS ATC is actively looking for the corrected altitude, which would make some sense in how they code the ATC system, but it would be just as easy to have an "if then elseif then " loop. Either way, MSFS ATC will yell at you about your altitude if you don't have 29.92 above 18,000 feet.

RW transponders always send back to ATC pressure altitude, but I don't think we're talking about RW transponders here....

Not setting the barometer to 29.92 above transition alt does matter though. I would suspect the OPs problem is that they didn't select STD crossing through transition, so though their altimeter was reading FL350 (say), they were really at 35,300 because of a mis-set Kollsman window, thus triggering the "Hey, check your altitude" call from ATC.

Accio RAM? ;)

I went into settings/controls, reset the joystick buttons/axis to default and this went away for me.

AFAIK the plan is that the "wasted" space will eventually be turned into a terrain projection a-la http://www.cheltonflightsystems.com/Prod_cert_symbology.html

I'm assuming by gyro drift you mean that the directional gyro in the panel drifts off the heading shown by the magnetic compass? That's correct. In RW flying you check and adjust the DG to match the magnetic compass approximately every 15min or so during level unaccellerated flight. Depending on the health of the gyro and vaccum system you might find little change, or if it's getting really old and weak and ready for overhaul it might be off by quite a lot. Since everything I fly has glass or HSIs I don't recall the acceptable drift/15min off the top of my head.As for the aircraft not maintaining heading when you release the yoke, the 172 has a fixed trim tab attached to the rudder. These are generally adjusted (bent) so that the aircraft flys coordinated, straight and level at cruise speeds. Sometimes they may need a little tweaking, but generally the aircraft isn't going to drift much for short periods of hands-off flying. If you let go and it just goes into a large bank or turn, then the tab (or in this case perhaps the p-factor slider?) needs to be adjusted accordingly.

Ya know, I just got Vista, and opted for the 32 bit version because Microsoft doesn't have a migration system to move from 32 bit (OS) to 64 bit (os) as an upgrade, and reformatting and reinstalling (with the repeated reactivations and calls to the vendors to get another activation permitted because I've changed my OS again) is really quite the pain in the but.I still don't quite understand why the 64 bit Vista upgrade engine can't import the user space from a 32 bit OS and overwrite the underlying hardware and OS. It would make the upgrade much more seamless and attractive for users to opt for when making their choices.

(dup - can be deleted)

Or you could go right to the source, http://www.utem.com and pick any of the set! :)Take care

When it starts having issues, what's the TAT?

IIRC, Radar Contact will generally give vectors to final. I'm racking my head to recall if there's an arrival option, but don't have my FS PC here right now.

And even with Vista and DX10 installed until the DX10 version of FS comes out it won't matter since the software will still be calling the DX9 compatible routines, right?I wouldn't expect any great improvements just from upgrading to Vista....

300W per card? Doesn't that mean 750+ watt supplies to run 2 SLI cards and the rest of the system? Looks like I'm going to get an 800W unit when I build my new machine.....

Well, there are always SPECI reports which can be transmitted at any time when the weather changes significantly (the parameters defining 'significant' WRT a SPECI observation escape me at the moment)......

OK, so attempting to get to Flight1's websites this morning came up with site unreachable, so I looked into it a little more and it's provided with (minimally) DNS from a place called globalcompass. It appears that globalcompass didn't pay for their domain, so the DNS servers for Flight1 are offline - ok, annoying but happens. But looking into it further, globalcompass's information changed from "registrar-lock" to "clientRenewProhibited" this morning. Renew prohibited? I've not heard of that status flag before, and was curious if anyone knew the story here, and when the affected customers would get their sites back online?update1, ok, looks like the servers have become reachable again.. nevermind...