SAS443

Looking so much forward to the A310. It gave me plenty of good memories in XP11. 👍

LAND 3 announced for CATIIB / Fail-operational "Rollout" as armed mode underneath active VOR/LOC, then subsequently as an active mode and AFAIK need some kind of rudder servo-magic aswell ISFD as third attitude source, complimenting the dual Inertial systems.

@Murmur, this community isn't really helping themselves with patronizing a whole userbase such as below. Wouldn't you agree? Nobody likes that kind of attitude, regardless walk of life.

During autoland: throttles retard at 27ft RA AutoThrottle disconnect 2 seconds after touchdown.

It's correct if you fly a C172. With a completely iced Pitot the ram pressure (dynamic+ static) is trapped in the piping. C172S static system are separate ports on side of the fuselage. Meaning VSI and Alt will continue to work. If we are in level flight and change power setting, ASI needle wont move from position where it froze. The ASI needle will however indicate a change should we climb or descend since now, the membrane in the air tight canister is only reacting to change in static pressure from the working static port. Pressure from Pitot is what it is, due to being sealed shut.

METAR indicates the snow is dry and light, it's drifting (DRSN), only dry snow has that ability. And it's rather cold aswell. In general, dry, light and cold snowflakes on a cold airframe wont contribute to icing. Just stay out of the actual clouds (which has supercooled droplets just waiting to stick to your cold wings) A big hazard in your scenario is if you taxi/takeoff with a plane that has been stored in a warm hangar. Now that's much more problematic.

I asked my CFII when logging IR time in clouds last winter in a C172S about static port clogging. (The C172S NAV III has dual static ports, one for G1000 and one for KAP140 AP, alt static is drawn from inside cabin). Anyway, He never experienced it. Icing on windshield, wings and pitot happened, but never the static ports. They are flush on the sides of fuselage, not facing the precipitation head on, like the pitot does. Not saying it cant happen ofc, but you'd basicly have to be an icicle for it to occur in the Cessna, at least.

Pitot tube usually has an opening for ram air, and a drainage hole. If ram air intake is frozen and drain is not = you'd just have static pressure and ASI will read ZERO. Like when insects decides to build a nest in the tube. This type of freezing pitot error has happened in flightsims for more than 20 years now. If both intake and drain are blocked, you'd trap the pressure which will freeze the ASI read-out to whatever it was when blockage occured. So if you climb, your ASI would actually start to indicate a higher airspeed since pressure is decreasing.

Not sure I agree with this... . . 🤡

Different generations of A300 though. JF is modelling the 3-crew A300B4 analogue flightdeck w. Dual INS installations, while ini is the more advanced 2-crew A300B6 w. Semi glass-cockpit and FMS, plus a plethora of other upgrades such as more powerful engines, increased range, increased MTOW etc. The last B6 was delivered as late as 2008(?). I can actually see a successful market for both, since they are very different to operate, especially in flightsim because you are a one-man crew.

Which color was the D? FMGS enters approach phase automatically only if it's in magenta. A white D requires manual activation afaik.

Nexrad works both via ads-b (ground) or SiriusXM (satellite feed from nexrad ground stations). The drawback of Nexrad up linking is that your "radar returns" can be several minutes old. Which in itself can pose a real threat if you try to escape cells through a gap which may no longer be there.

Too dark and dull. Looks like a photo from a underwhelming camera. In fact my cheap chinese smartphone produces nearly identical results when I fly RW. If that effect is something you want, then by all means you should be satisfied.

Perhaps. But that's how we do it on all of our planes on the flying schools/clubs. Circular motions are frowned upon. And I dont intend to upset management too much 🙂

I always wipe my windshields in straight strokes after a flight (Front to rear). But every plane I have flown has those circular scratches. 😅 100hr canopy-airframe above, 8000hr piper airframe below.

I was not trying to be ironic. Just trying to say you seem to not understand the concept of warm fronts from a pilot's POV and how they can be distinguished from random cloud layers.

Warm fronts are way more extended azimuth wise. astute pilots can tell an incoming warm front the day before it arrives. It's not as "condensed" in layering of clouds as in your image since the slope is very shallow. Maybe a tad bit of confirmation bias?

Steam is becoming rapidly obscure around here. Especially with the insane avgas prizes we see (some aerodromes charge 4 dollars/litre, almost 16usd/gal.). Very motivating dragging along in old Lycoming O-320s and their 10gal/hr burn.

For the glass cockpit simmers: What you are seeing here is basicly the PFD speed tape and its dynamic envelopes (low energy / overspeed) incl maneuvering speeds. Pull back hard on the PMDG 737 and watch the stall speed limit skyrocket upwards on the speed tape as you increase wing loading. I think I have career in flight instructing. 😁

@ryanbatc again, I'm not arguing over low vis ops /RVR conditions. If you have high intensity lights turned on, you will be blinded due to the light pollution. But it seems like XP is doing the opposite of MSFS - where the runway-lighting system is bad mind you, and always turned on at insane intensity. Lighting system is just as incomplete in XP12 but reversed, because we can't see runway contour in 3-5km visbility at dusk/dawn, which any ATC at approved CAT1-III airport can fascilitate by cranking up the HIRL-system. At least give the user an option to request brighter or dim the PAPI, HIRL as in the real world when conducting an approach. For any reader that is wondering what I'm rambling about, check out Stefan Drury's (worth a sub regardless) video. I believe this is not what XP12 can do at the moment, despite it's FAA compliance? The approach lighting ground splash is way exaggerated as well.

There are isocandela diagrams for every type of lights found on approved CAT II/III runways Not sure it works correctly then, since their High intensity lights seems to be stuck at stage 1 or 2 out of 6? (Meaning very little intensity at all).

Adverse yaw is different depending on which turn and phase of flight. During climb out and immediate left turn (to a crosswind leg) little left rudder is needed in the C172SP due to p-factor, in fact in certain conditions you might even need to nudge right rudder (!) since the adverse yaw from ailerons is weaker than p-factor/slipstream causing nose to skid into the turn. Likewise you will need good amount of right rudder during a right turn to crosswind leg because all forces applied will slip the nose (nose pointing outwards from turn) substantially unless corrected by right rudder. In level flight you apply rudder only as you roll into the turn. When desired bank is achieved you hold it and rudder can be neutral. No adverse yaw while you maintain bank angle. Exit turn you again need rudder input to neutral adverse yaw. But effects are rather subtle, especially if you are shooting ifr procedures and fly rate one-turns Disclaimer: not an expert pilot, just an above average. 😆

Steam is generally not the major distribution channel of XP. Any Steam- stats you see after just a couple of days should be taken with grain of salt.

Thanks ryan for good insight and I agree with all of them. But let's discuss apples to apples and not high intensity light settings in CAT III (those lights are like you said directional and toned down in lov vis operations. However, in OPs post I am expecting a similar light-system as below since visibility is >2000m. In his image the lights are VFR day intensity and you can barely make them out which I hope LR can provide in a future "feature". I should be seeing way more of the runway contour lined up like that despite being slightly low. When high intensity lights are ON, it should be quite hard to mix them with regular street lights.

Then I am even more confused why Murmur is posting shots of a "faulty" environment to re-affirm the argument that runway lights/visibility are FAA compliance? You would barely be allowed to land a trike with lights like in his image. (I've seen vfr grass strips with better lights). Looking forward to RTM version. It can only get better 🙂