Jump to content

PeteP

Members
  • Content Count

    415
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PeteP

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

3,357 profile views
  1. That looks fine - I'd say that was problem solved. :-)
  2. Fortunately, as well as being on the RC beta team, I was also on the FSBuild beta team so I'm sure we can solve your problem.First, as Ray has pointed out, RC4 uses the standard MS FS2000/02/04 .pln format - the Radar Contact format is simply for backward compatibility with RC version 2.The most likely reason you're getting the error message is that you've not correctly set and saved your FS path in FSbuild. Start Fsbuild and in the "Folder Items" window on the left hand side, select "Options". When the options window opens, click on the "Export Directories" tab and set your path to the FS root directory. Then, click on the "Settings" tab and click the "SAVE CONFIG OPTIONS" button. Finally, and this is important, close down and re-open FSBuild for the new options to take effect.Select FS2000/02/04 in the "Export to..." menu then build your plan. Load the resulting file to RC and all should be well.Pete http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  3. In the real world, would a command like that likely be given for traffic separation,"Yes, it's a method of achieving separation by using aircraft performance. It's a perfectly valid control method but it has to be used with great caution not least because there is no laid down definition of the climb/descent rate increase required. So, when told to expedite a climb, for example, the results are entirely in the hands of individual pilots and can vary between the aircraft going up like a f art in a bath to a barely perceptible increase in the climb rate. It's best used over a very short vertical range - say, 2-3000ft - and my advice to trainees was always if you need an expedited climb over more than 5000ft, forget it and use another method to achieve separation.Petehttp://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  4. Hi Norman,Yes, jd copied the email to me. Thanks very much for taking the time and trouble to produce a log and send it in. Petehttp://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  5. Bless you, Norman.All the best for Christmas and the New Year.Petehttp://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  6. "This is is a regular occurance in European skies.Great, then would someone PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE make one of these flights with de-bug ON and send the log to jd so that we can get this sorted.ThanksPetehttp://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  7. !Absolutely positive!"In that case would you please repeat this flight with the same weather (de-bug on) and send the log to jd.What's worrying me is that you also say that you were cleared to 9000ft which, with a TA of 4000ft at Leeds is a major error. To be honest, I have my doubts but if your recollection of this and being given the QNH at a flight level are correct, then you've discovered the first bug in the altimetry system that's come to light in the 2 years since RC4's release and it needs to be put right.Only the log will clear this up so I really would be grateful if you could repeat the flight under identical conditions to get one.ThanksPetehttp://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannerbeta.jpg
  8. "So what you are saying is that I must make note of the transition altitude."Well, it would certainly help to know the TA at the airfields you're operating to and from (RC will tell you what Transition Level it has calculated for them on start-up) but it's not essential in RC. The most important thing is to listen carefully to the clearances - the controller and your co-pilot tell you everything you need to know."...then and only then would I change the QNH regardless of when I was told what that QNH was/is?"The RC controller will normally only give you the QNH the first time you're cleared to an altitude from a flight level and then when there is a significant change in its value. Are you absolutely sure that the RC controller gave you the QNH when you were cleared to FL110 and FL90? If you're certain he did then perhaps you could try to reproduce this flight with de-bug on.Pete
  9. Hi Ken,The cause of your problem is very straightforward - you had your altimeter incorrectly set to QNH (1027mB) when you should have been on standard setting (1013.2mB). Doing this meant that you were approximately 400ft lower than you thought you were!The Transition Altitude at Leeds is 4000ft (unless you've modified the m4.csv file) so you would not have been cleared to 9000ft but to FL90. As I mention above, with that QNH, there is a 400ft vertical difference between these two positions which is why the controller was getting grumpy with you. Radar Contact gives you a lot of help in deciding which pressure setting you should be using but, as 'Michelle of the Resistance' would say, you must listen very carefully. :-) In simple terms, you are operating at and below the Transition Altitude, you should have the QNH set. The controller will always precede vertical clearances which need QNH set with the word "altitude" for example, "descend to altitude 6000ft" or "climb to altitude 3000ft". Whenever you here the word altitude before a vertical clearance make sure you have QNH set.When you're operating above the Transition Altitude, the controller will give vertical clearances as Flight Levels and these require the standard setting of 1013.2mB to be on your altimeter to be flown correctly. As with altitudes, the controller always precedes a vertical clearance to a flight level with the words "flight level" for example, "climb flight level 90", "descend flight level 330". If you listen very carefully, you'll also notice that the preposition "to" is used only with altitudes and not flight levels.Your co-pilot also helps. When you pass the Transition Altitude climbing, he'll say "altimeter check". This is not an instruction to change your setting but a reminder to check that you've already set 1013.2mB. The same happens on descent - the co-pilot will say "altimeter check as you pass below the Transition Level as a reminder that you should now have the QNH set.As to your question about logging, it's probably a good idea to do that while you're at the early learning stage. I know you get a warning about reduced performance but I've never seen that happen and de-bug is forced "on" on every flight in beta test versions. Each time you re-start RC, the old log is overwritten, unless you give it a new name so, if you want to save a log for jd it's probably best if you save it with a meaningful name.Pete
  10. Is the last VOR within 5nms of the destination and have you selected Holding "On" before you start RC?Pete
  11. "I did read that before"Then why ask the question? :-hmmm "what about the AI bumping in right in front of me?"I'll leave that to one of the ai experts on the team to answer.Pete
  12. "As advertised the ATC will put you on hold if there is traffic circling around at the airport. I however never get the HOLD instruction." This series of posts from 2 days ago may help to answer this question: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=27508&page=As will this FAQ: http://www.jdtllc.com/FAQ.htm#26Pete
  13. Rory,I'm afraid, because of the requirement for the last waypoint to be a VOR within 5nm of the airport, you'll never be given a hold inbound EGAC. The nearest VOR that I can think of is the BEL which must be about 12 miles away so of no use whatsoever in this case.If you're puzzled by such an unrealistic requirement in a program such as Radar Contact, you must understand that it goes back to the early years of RC when very few, if any, Flight Sim users flew aircraft with some form of RNAV. In those days, the only way for most sim pilots to fly the type of hold required by RC was to use a VOR/DME. Now, I don't think that I'm giving away any secrets if I tell you that there has recently been a considerable amount of discussion amongst the Beta Team about this very point. Only jd can say whether or not it will change in v5, or any future version for that matter, but be assured, it's been "flagged". ;-) There is a simple workaround for EGCC - just add the MCT as the last waypoint in any flight plans with that destination. Although unrealistic in real-world flight planning terms, it will work perfectly in RC and has the added advantage of giving you a better descent clearance level restriction - try it and see what the controller says.As far as Sydenham (it'll always be that or Belfast Harbour to me - is it true they're now calling it George Best Belfast (City) airport?) goes, the only option I can think of is to put a fake VOR on the airfield. There are a number of scenery programs - both freeware and payware - that will allow you to do this and it's a very straightforward process. I guess it just depends on how much you want to fly holds at EGAC. :)Please pass on my best wishes to "Yvette" at Le Candide.Pete
  14. I maintained the correct alt all through and had no probs at all.I'm afraid that could well have been just luck, William. A QNH of 1010hPa would give you a vertical difference of less than 100ft from the standard setting of 1013.2hPa. Unless you've changed it, that's well withing the permitted altitude deviation allowed by RC. Please, please do read the section in the manual on the European altimetry system used in RC and then, as jd suggests, fly the European tutorial. A little time invested doing this will save you a great deal of frustration and posts to the forum because you've been yelled at for "busting your altitude".Pete
  15. Just to add some numbers to jd's explanation of what went wrong, by pressing the 'B' key you would have caused FS to set the QNH of 999hPa on your altimeter. With that QNH set, when you levelled at 13000ft, you would actually have been at FL134. FL130 would have been located at 12,600ft above sea level with that QNH.Always make sure your altimeter is set to the correct pressure setting. ;-)Pete
×
×
  • Create New...