BrianW

No, you need to use trim after takeoff so the aircraft climbs at the same pitch that the flight director indicates without any input from you. You should be able to take your hands off the controls and have no pitch change. At that point the AP should engage without issues.

Oops, yes 11.12, good catch 🙂

The FMC displayed in the PFD indicates the reference source for the lateral and vertical navigation scales (FMC,ILS, etc.). If there are different sources the format is lateral/vertical for example ILS/FMC.

You need to set the step size to 0 if you have no further step climbs planned. Refer to the QRH section 11.2.

I totally agree, in fact I’ve been spending most of my sim time in the FSL A319, and A3XX are four letter words in my neck of the woods :). Some recent Maddog time with the awesome SP1 too. Please continue to report to them what you find to help make it better. I’m not sure why they’d brush you off considering you have time in type, as long as the issue could be verified.

Interesting I didn’t think it was possible. So if you’re inflight and there’s a traffic conflict you’ll hear VoxATC give AI instructions and see them comply? Are there and videos you know of that show this AI control in action?

QW didn’t include this in their 787 either when I last tried it (prior to latest SP). The 787 isn’t a bad plane, but if you’re a detailed systems guy there’s a bunch of stuff that’s either missing or incorrect. What’s strange is they did model some obscure features like flap load relief, but missed some major details like proper hyd EMP operation. The PMDG 748 is closer in that respect, and there’s a greater chance things could get added in the 748. Something else to keep in mind is that the 748 falls under ICAO Airport code F since the wingspan is over 65M. This may limit the ability to visit certain airports and often means taxi route and parking restrictions if you plan to follow those rules in the sim.

Exactly this!! ATC isn’t a navigational aid, its purpose is to keep aircraft from hitting one another. Right now there isn’t any accurate software based ATC because none of them can control AI aircraft. If LM could introduce the ability to control AI I think it would be a game changer. Maybe as a start they could introduce AI that can perform basic VFR “see and avoid” functions with any player controlled vehicle. Eventually I’d like to see AI at the point where it can be controlled by a human controller on Pilotedge, Vatsim, etc. alongside real users.

Did you remember to turn of your emergency lights? 😎 Yet another nice little detail they've added.

They all seem to be making that assumption. Most simmers would call it flight simulator and not a video game. For all we know he could have been referring to GTA, after all doesn't that include stealing aircraft? He also could have just been paraphrasing this movie scene:

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46375241&nid=148&title=plane-crashes-into-house-in-payson-pilot-dies

It was a Horizon Air employee according to their COO, not sure if he was a mechanic or ramper. Sadly this probably means yet more regulation. Our local news folks are wondering why airliners don't require keys as if that would have prevented this 🙄.

This is one of the differences between the FAA charts and the Jeppesen charts. Navigraph are Jeppesen. Here are links to both the Jeppesen and FAA guides: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/aero_guide/#TPP_Symbols http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf Edit: SID and STAR legend starts on page 65 of the Jeppesen PDF.

I think Latinwings is working on a version but I haven't seen any update about it recently. Their LEVC, and LEAM are pretty nice, so I'm looking forward to their LEMD.

According to the QRH you should only expect FL390 in an A320 when below around 131000 LBS in < ISA +10 conditions. From the weight in your screenshot FL360 is about right. The OPT FL it’s giving you is sort of strange though.

I think you missed the main point Bertie was trying to tell you. ILS 10 is a radar vectored approach (that’s what “radar required” means on the chart) meaning you shouldn’t be linking any waypoints to COLUM. In the absence of ATC in the sim you need to manually navigate from your previous waypoint to COLUM. Just because it works via LNAV in some aircraft it doesn’t mean it’s the correct procedure. Secondly, you should try to get comfortable maneuvering without needing the magenta line. Your screenshot above shows your 747 in the perfect position, with the perfect weather to make a downwind turn for a visual approach to runway 10. There should be no reason you couldn’t complete that flight in that situation.

The APU autostart logic isn’t tied to the engine state, it’s tied to the power state of the AC transfer buses. If power is removed from the left and right transfer buses an APU autostart will be initiated. The RAT is also deployed as part of the process. As Dave mentions though if fuel starvation is the reason the generators dropped offline the APU isn’t going to help for very long. I’m pretty sure I’ve tried it on the PMDG version in the past and it works. You should be able to just turn your generators off to test it, no engine shutdown required.

Sounds like you’re maybe confusing the function of the trim air pressure regulating and shutoff valves (PRSOV) with the zone modulating valves. The primary function of the trim air PRSOV is to maintain pneumatic pressure to the trim air zone modulating valves. Its goal is to maintain cabin pressure + 5 psi. These are also the valves you’re controlling with the switches on the overhead panel as well as what you see on the synoptic display. The zone modulating valves are what control the amount of hot air that goes to each cabin zone, there is one valve per zone but only the flight deck valve is displayed on the synoptic.

Maybe it’s the “flight of the living dead”. Seriously though this is a welcome addition to GSX. I’m hoping aircraft developers start working more toward integration with GSX, especially with this version including the ability to provide power and air from the jetway.

I’m glad to see you’ve started developing again. What is your plan as far as updates for the Vega, are you intending to do small incremental updates, or larger less frequent ones? I’m anxious to see some of the engine simulation items added.

This looks impressive, thanks for pointing it out. I love the aircraft from this period, especially when the systems are faithfully reproduced. Judging from the UI look for the Vega, and the name Vitus, I assume you are the same developer that was working on the Electra. Does that mean once the Vega is complete you’ll resume work on the L10A? I was really looking forward to it, so if so that would be great news!

I remember that, and that was what I thought of when I saw the hint. I also vaguely remember D'Andre hinting that it was a major established developer, and people would probably be pleased when they heard who it was. Although what's Martin from Fly Tampa working on these days? He tends to keep his projects pretty quiet until close to release too. I suppose we'll find out on Saturday.

Maybe MMUN (Cancun), or NFFN (Nadi)?

I think the inability to change the GW on the approach page has been reported to them. As an alternative you should be able to use a reduced weight in the OPT in the EFB and send that output to the FMS. Speaking of VREF does anyone know how to prevent the ZFW and V speeds from automatically populating in the CDU? I confirmed the CduAutoCalcVspeeds and CduAutoCalcZfw aren’t present in qw787.cfg per the manual.

I agree, but using it as a positive comment is also misleading, when someone says “it’s almost PMDG quality” that carries weight for anyone familiar with PMDG and the depth they provide. I’m not a big fan of the price vs. feature argument either because it’s a “rabbit hole”. If you use that as an excuse then this 787 has a very similar feature set to the Aerosoft Airbus which is much cheaper. In this case it’s that they DID model a few nuances, but missed some major things when it comes to the synoptic displays. For example they simulate autodrag something that a casual simmer probably isn’t even aware of, but completely ignored the correct hydraulic demand pump operation. You can even hear the whine of the demand pumps in the soundset, coming on and going off at the appropriate times. Yet the synoptic never changes. Same thing with the electrics, they sort of simulate load shed, yet the some of symbology on the pages is incorrect or missing. Are these bugs, or intentional omissions because those come at the next price point? Don’t take this wrong I am enjoying this 787, but some of us probably have a higher plausibility threshold than most. This thread makes it very apparent that the community has a lot of interest in a 787 some of us are just wishing for the most detail and realism we can get.