shuoxing

It would be great to have MindStar G1000 in MSFS2020. I have purchased and installed MSFS2020. Initially I thought that with so many G1000/G3000 airplanes in it, and many people praising it online, they must have created a good G1000 simulation as it is the soul of these glass cockpit airplanes. But the reality is shockingly disappointing, it lacks so many features, eg: waypoint names in procedures not correct, logic errors in GFC700, MFD not showing track vector, or basically showing nothing, cannot even change QNH to hPa! As an instrument-rated pilot, simulation is a way to keep good instrument proficiency and prepare for real flights by getting familiar with certain procedures. MindStar is really good at knowing what features are really needed, for example: SVS is nice but not many real G1000 had that 20K+$ update due to costs, so it's not that important; checking GPS status and computing RAIM availability is trivial but so important because if I don't check that prior to a GNSS/RNAV approach, the instructor would fail my check ride. For this reason, MSFS2020 is basically useless for me now... Avionics and aerodynamics are far more important than scenery. Really looking forward to MindStar G1000 in P3D v4/5 (early 2020 has passed unfortunately), and even better in MSFS2020 :)

Hi, I recently noticed that a new version of G1000 was released 3.06.0000, so I upgraded my installation from 2.11.0030 to this version. I found the new version fixed several problems I had in the old version and supported 8.33kHz spacing. Great job! While enjoying the new version, I found two remaining problems: - For Turbo 182T model, when BATT MASTER is on, even if AVIONICS switch is off, the MFD would still power up (although the COM2 and NAV2 are being crossed out when AVIONICS is off, which is correct). Other models don't have this problem. - For SR22T model, fuel gauge scale is still not correct. - In addition to that, I think your "Computer RAIM" function is way too fast compared to the real device. Of course, these small glitches do not impact its usability, but as I am excited to see that the product is still being actively developed, it would be nice if they could be investigated and potentially fixed in the next release. I've been using G1000 (and KAP140) for almost 2 year now, it really helped me a lot in my instrument flight training and maintaining instrument flight proficiency. Happy 2020, and really looking forward to p3d v4 support in the new year. And yes, when a new version is published, please inform us in the forum. Howie

Hello, For SR22T style G1000, the fuel quantity indicator (vertical bar) in MFD shows a total of only around 25 Gals for each tank (tick marks at 0,5,10,15,20,15,F) . That makes the total quantity only around 50 Gals (like a C172S for example). In SR22T G3, that total quantity should be around 94 Gals. So even when I carry 70% of fuel, the gauge would still be at the maximum position. Is there any way I can solve the issue? Thanks, Howie Wong

Hi, I purchased the RealNav database today. The second discrepancy in the problem 1 is solved (IAF is now shown correctly) and the problem 6 is solved (no more CTD for LFBD). All other discrepancies remain. Best regards,

Hi, I have just bought the MindStar G1000 Simulator and had it installed in Prepar3D v3.4. After playing it around for a short while, I have already found many problems. For your reference, I used the default navigation database and with MindStar C172 G1000 without GFC which should simulate Cessna NAVIII option. Problem 1: Repeated transition waypoint when loading an approach. How to reproduce (example): - Set airplane to LFBR - On MFD, push FPL, FMS, and rotate FMS to add waypoint AGN (VOR in France) after LFBR - With the cursor on the new line, push PROC, ENTER (SELECT APPROACH), and rotate FMS to choose LFBA (Agen), approach ILS29, AGN as the transition. Press ENT twice to load the approach and acknowledge the disclaimer. Discrepancies: - In your simulator, the waypoint AGN is duplicated but in the official trainer AGN is placed under the approach procedure. - In your "select approach page", the IAF waypoints such as “AGN” are not post-fixed by white “iaf”. Problem 2: Incorrect display for D-> Logic. - Continue with the example above - Push “D->” button, choose AGN, and direct to AGN. Discrepancy: in your simulator, the ACTIVE FLIGHT PLAN box shows “D-> AGN”, while in the official trainer, it remains “LFBR / LFBA” because this waypoint is a part of the flight plan. Problem 3: Cancel D-> Logic. - Continue with the example above - Push “D->”, “MENU” can choose cancel direct-to nav. Discrepancy: in your simulator, the entire enroute part containing the departure aerodrome LFBR is disappeared. But in the official trainer, it is still there and the active leg reverts to “LFBR to AGN” Problem 4: Delayed update of D-> ACTIVE FLIGHT PLAN BOX - Continue with the example above - Push “D->”, rotate FMS to enter “GAI” (VOR in France), and ENT Discrepancy: In the “ACTIVE FLIGHT PLAN” box, the “D-> GAI” is not updated immediately, although on PFD, it is updated. You have to push FPL to close the FPL window and push FPL to open the window again to have the correct “ACTIVE FLIGHT PLAN” shown. Problem 5: Incorrect input - Push PROC, select an approach, to choose "LFBA" you rotate FMS to choose letter “L”, followed by “F”, then in order to choose “B”, if you rotate FMS continuously clockwise it has to pass through digits “5,6,7,8,9” multiple times before finally get to letter “A”. Problem 6: CTD - Push PROC, select an approach, rotate FMS to select LFBD, and the Prepar3d will crash. In addition to functions not simulated such as airways, VNAV in FPL, etc. Having just sitting on the ground and played with your simulator for few minutes and I have found so many possible buggy behaviors… If this can be solved by database update, please let me know and I can purchase an update, but if your system is designed like this, to be honest I am very disappointed about the quality and I would really be looking for a solution. As an instrument rating pilot replying on your simulator to keep my skills sharp at home, these types of discrepancies can easily let me operate the G1000 in wrong ways. One day I may be confused in the air in hard IMC because of the wrong G1000 logic learnt from your simulator, this is potentially so dangerous ... Thanks for your attention,

Don't tell me that they didn't notify the ground personnels before APU fire test. I think that's not within his consideration.Being really serious, I noticed some "flaws":- Didn't notify ground personnel before APU fire test.- Didn't notify ground personnel before powering up hydraulics.- Didn't check hydraulic pressure after turning on the elec pumps. This would result in inefficient parking brake power after wheel chock removed if hydraulic system had malfunction.- Young pilot on F/O seat didn't perform checklist seriously. You can see him responded "Pass Sign On" without even raised his head and looked at it.- Young pilot on F/O seat responded "I believe taxi briefing is completed", however no briefing related to taxi had ever made before he said so.I have a question:Why he left Right Pack Off during preflight? Trim check is performed in Before Takeoff Check. But yes, they could set it after engine start together with flaps or anytime they wish. I think one of the reason that STAB Trim and Flaps are checked just before takeoff is that when de-icing, Stablizer is moved forward and flaps are retracted to prevent fluid from getting into them. In history, some pilots forgot to reset them after deicing.

I'm not interested in it at all since it needs flight engineer to fly it. Flying a 2-crew plane is already hard, can't imagine if anyone can fly a 3-crew airplane alone while following exact procedures.

Regarding performance calculation, there can be ONLY ONE correct solution. Whoever models the real data is correct. I don't have TOPCAT so I don't know what value it gives, however I did realize and get extremely FRUSTRATED with PMDG FMC output. I'm a serious simmer so I use only reliable source. I use AFM-DPI (from my friend) with exactly the same airframe and engine model to help me calculate performance data.To show how PMDG FMC differ from real value, I use standard weather in FSX (standard temperature + atomosphere) + ENG Bleed OnHere OAT is standard 15 CPMDG's full rate 98.0% Matches the output of AFM-DPI 98.0%. That's the ONLY thing it can get correctly!Let change Assumed Temperature!Assumed Temperature 20C, PMDG result 97.1%; AFM-DPI result 98.0% (Not changed!*)Assumed Temperature 30C, PMDG result 95.5%; AFM-DPI result 98.0% (Not changed!*)Assumed Temperature 40C, PMDG result 94.0%; AFM-DPI result 94.8%Assumed Temperature 50C, PMDG result 92.5%; AFM-DPI result 91.9%Assumed Temperature 60C, PMDG result 91.1%; AFM-DPI result 89.3%....* PMDG FMC simply doesn't understand there is something called "Takeoff Thrust Break Temperature", it's 30.0C!! Everyone knows that the engine outputs FLAT RATE unitl a OAT but PMDG FMC don't even know this simple thing!!And also PMDG FMC is always giving a significant higher value! Whatever, I'm not feeling too bad since at least higher thrust means I use shorter field and have larger obstacle clearance. Luckly VMCG calculation is not based on assumed temperature but only on derate, if not, higer rate can endanger my safety if the takeoff is VMCG limited! But you must know, high N1 means high EGT means high maintenance cost. No kidding, 11% derate can save 25% of MMC! Little by little, these higher values are going to waste a lot of money $$$What's more. PMDG's calculation of VREF for landing seems also 4 to 5 knots higher than that calculated by AFM-DPI!!! This invalides my Landing analysis if I use PMDG FMC speed.In all, I feel extremely frustrated about PMDG product now. It claims to be real but it cannot even do the math correctly :( :( :(Howie Wong

Try some other planes in your FSX and see if it happens to all of your planes. I used to have that problem before and I ended up by reinstall fSX

I'm not 100% sure but it seems that those screws in the picture are not modelled in 3D.

Airspeed tape on PFD jumped as well...

+1

Hey, please sign your name..

I think this has been discussed for at least 4 or 5 times! Please search the forum before post!!Actually, NOT All Radio Altimeter Failures will cause A/T to enter RETARD mode. Radio Altimeter failure is not very rare however A/T enters RETARD mode because of the failure is very rare. You can not even simulate this in real simulators by disabling Radio Altimeter at the captain's side.

Hey, don't move paging file. Paging file on SSD can give you a better performance.

You'd better try a complete reinstallation. That's the most promising solution.

Did you see that? PMDG members now become more active on this forum and answered a lot of questions. Thanks to PMDG.

And this one will be deleted soon, no wonder~

Yes, but would you please check why you always post the same post twice.

No, RSR said the rest of the team had moved onto the next project.

You'll feel more realistic when 747-8i comes out~ I think PMDG is likely to do that in the future.

:( I believe in everyone's heart, there are two thoughts: 1) HEY, Can't wait anymore, release it now! 2) I should wait patiently, I have no right to criticize PMDG...Well, I remember someone said when the product came to its end, videos would be released. So... It's good thing!Actually, from what I heard, there are only a couple of people still working on 737 project now, so that can't be fast anyway. :( So, let's just wait! But yes, I do wish PMDG could do more. It has been 4 weeks without any announcement.

You're right... I only noticed the problem related to conditional sentence and ignored everything else.I would SENDI had KNOWN

Hey,I'm not an American but from my point of view, you could either say,IF I KNEW RYAN'S POSTAL ADDRESS I WOULD HAVE SENT HIM A BUNCH OF LUXEMBOURGISH CHOCOLATES FOR EASTER. (Present Unreal Conditional Sentence)orIF I HAD KNEW RYAN'S POSTAL ADDRESS I WOULD HAVE SENT HIM A BUNCH OF LUXEMBOURGISH CHOCOLATES FOR EASTER. (Past Unreal Conditional Sentence)

I mean 10 FPS is generally tolerable, the only thing is running "Smoothingly" without blurr, stuck...