JC75

Members
  • Content Count

    654
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Neutral

About JC75

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 11/17/1975

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

2,610 profile views
  1. JC75

    PMDG 747v3 CTD P3D v4.2

    I'll give that a go - of note I had already tried disabling Linda, running it without any addons running such as ASCA etc and same issue still occurred. The load the F22 first thing works, but I still get a CTD on exiting P3D rather than a clean shutdown. But will try the tips above(but feel I may not have them enabled already)
  2. JC75

    PMDG 747v3 CTD P3D v4.2

    Likewise for me - Ive just done a full refresh, so new Windows 10 Pro, New install of P3DV4.2 and install of scenery(orbx, uk2000, GSX, FSDT, FB), activesky, Linda, Chaseplane etc Selecting the 747 at start menu ,It loads up the sim and aircraft - and all looks like it fine,cockpit displays etc, then seconds later crashes to desktop, with no error. Ive tried not running ASCA, Chaseplane first, but same issue. All other aircraft, including the 737,777 and FSLABS A320 work fine.
  3. JC75

    GBAS in B748?

    Thank goodness I really don't get your hostility at all - Oh and not Australian, European where this is and is further becoming law, all European states have to comply with the European law, which will equally effect the carriers wishing to operating in that airspace, RNAV routes exist now, transatlantic requirements etc - quite simply if an airport because of law or an ANSP because of law, removes traditional nav aids, designs procedures requiring a specific RNP performance or capability - the carrier will be required to equip in order to operate in that airspace or airport, yes this will be phased - but depending upon what they are coming from in first place(cat3 ILS vs traditional VOR/NDB or CAT1 ILS) the impact will vary. Equally depending on fleet mix. This wasn't about GLS, as if you read my posts I simply stated that isn't the issue in sim world, its the NAV performance thats the issue, The 74-8 can utilise RF Legs...so perhaps that will be the catalyst for PMDG. I go back to my point, why are we arguing about something that would be good if the PMDG aircraft(that in real world) could do it? PMDG don't need defending about if/when or not they consider doing this, its an observation that they haven't considered the switch to this method now as part of their transition. That the changing real world will effect the capability of the sim world - at no point did I criticise the wonder of things PMDG have done - simply stating that shortly given the choice Id rather have ARINC424 data and processing over a funky weather radar. Im afraid I suggest you reread your own posts - at no point have I been hostile or attacking to you or Dan, yours is the only one that lowers to personal comments, and assumptions, backed up by your opinions rather than experience. I really think you took that who cares statement out of context totally.
  4. JC75

    GBAS in B748?

    Thanks for the Hint - Ill go however with the EASA NPA, the ICAO Roadmap, and the SESAR PCPS - which are hard cold regulation, requiring states, ASNPS, airlines and airport operators to comply. Yes there are phases, yes there are clauses,(all because the initial regulation got watered down because of cost etc) but half the regs are in place now for compliance to start, others are just being finalised through consultation - you quite correct $ are the issue - hence why Regulation steps in, the issue being most of this capability requires someone to pay for it who don't directly benefit first hand. The VOR rationalisation is also now a year into its work - with over 15 VORS already decommissioned - which has resulted funnily enough with airports and ANSPS requiring to make new SIDS/STARS, based on RNAV(admittedly in a rather naff way, due to the fact the other half of the regulation isn't up to speed, such as noise, airspace change regs, and equipage) hence the next batch of regulation to fix these holes so that its deployment actually results in benefits, but equally happens. Not sure why the need to argue - I raised an observation that PMDG should start to look at this more seriously due to the effects real world will have on the sim - Im not demanding it, quite happily can and do use their wonderful aircraft (with some limitations at some locations) and I also use other aircraft. Its merely feedback and awareness that one element that "could" start to let down the standard that PMDG set is this - something that till now wasn't of any concern to us. If we took the attitude "that who cares" - then PMDG could just rattle out pretty looking planes and not bother with replicating all the other systems they amazingly do. RNP performance in the NGX - why bother editing a figure that in the sim world technically nothing effects the ability of the aircraft to be always spot on, but they do go to these levels of realism.
  5. Thanks - yes that works. Was just expecting it to utilise the default pan, but set that now and panning is back! I think also I thought it would be an axis, but see its a button for each direction using the hat.
  6. JC75

    GBAS in B748?

    GLS yes - but in essence to put that in the sim isn't a challenge. The ARINC424 and RNP elements are what is the major restructuring for sim makers. The navdata is already out there in sim world, its the FMC and supporting logic to the auto systems that has to be changed to take advantage of it. GLS capability isn't technically anything the sim etc needs adding to, nor do any of the development, installation or other costs bother us in sim world, the actual logic and data isn't actually complex at all in sim world. Actually the RNP tech is old hat, its been about years, fitted and under utilised by aircraft because the associated procedures and regulation hasn't been in place. GLS meanwhile is the newer stuff - but GLS in sim world isn't the issue - no more so than ILS. Im not jumping up and down about anything - other than just stating that as much as sim world vs real world have differing drivers etc...they merge by nature of how we use our sims, charts, procedures, scenery etc. VORs, NDBs, and even regulation to remove ILS is happening in the real world - the navdata we use equally won't have those in them, the procedures will be built on RNAV, and fundamentally the sims we use won't be able to utilise that data correctly, the online ATC will struggle etc. So as much as the reason the sim world we love and enjoy continues to thrive because of its realism and capability to simulate real world - If the difference to real world is that much, then people will lose interest in it. Whats the point of APU start up sequence being spot on, when the aircraft can't actually take off fly the SID, star and transition and approach into the paid scenery. its merely an observation, that rather than another aircraft coming along, I think the time would be better invested in updating the nav capabilities of the existing fleet, as ultimately that work will pay off for all future aircraft released.
  7. Im sure its a setting somewhere I have got wrong - however when using chase plane and in the cockpit, my HatSwitch doesn't pan around the aircraft, Middlemouse for panning works, but I can't Pan using the Yoke. Equally outside views don't pan either with the Hatswitch - again fine if using the Middle mouse. In P3Dv4 in controls its set to pan. Can someone advise what should be turned on/ff in Chaseplane and/or P3DControls to ensure panning works using the hatswitch?
  8. JC75

    GBAS in B748?

    Nothing of the sorts - Im very grateful to PMDG for the aircraft they produce, the level of realism and the enjoyment they bring to the hobby, and equally agree they are fundamental in keeping the Flightsim hobby alive. However this crucial fundamental change in real world aviation(which is causing just as much angst in the real world) is something that needs addressing also in the Flightsim world, as for all the realism that is built into these planes, it will become almost pointless if as we try to simulate real world, following procedures and charts, and online ATC is equally utilising such, that the basic ability for the plane to fly up/down left and right in the correct manner to follow these routes and approaches will almost make the rest of the realism seem pointless . PMDGs dominance is equally why my comment, as if PMDG set the Bar they will equally ensure the progress of the supporting elements for it, scenery, navdata etc. While not for everyone, part of the enjoyment is online flying, and this is where we will start to see the biggest issues occurring where the mismatch in procedures vs capability of the sim occurs. Think back to levelD days, when they first had an FMC that could do proper entries and Holds - online ATC were cursing users of aircraft that couldn't do so(even though technically the aircraft type they were flying should) My challenge was simply was with the advent of this regulatory need and ever increasing number of procedures being published as a result of it - I would have thought PMDG would have held back producing more sims and instead developed this capability as its a major rewrite and functionality change that won't be simple to achieve .
  9. JC75

    GBAS in B748?

    The question still remains if PMDG are going to update the FMC coding and Navdata used, so that other elements of RNP performance, RF legs , in SIDS/STARS and Transitions and AR APCH etc can be flown correctly in the 737, 777, 747-8 all of which should be capable now(in varying formats) but the PMDG version doesn't. FSLABS are part of the way there, Ifly also. and of course aerowinx does - as people have pointed out, regulation is coming, and that the level of these types of approaches, sids and stars, that will exist soon, will mean that PMDG aircraft will have lost their edge of realism(and likely drive the online flying community nuts, when they see PMDG aircraft wandering all over the sky trying to follow the LNAV path but getting it horribly wrong) I don't know if its still on the cards but there was talk of a major update to the NGX - perhaps this could be the time for PMDG to step up this capability, and learn whats needed to then port across to the other aircraft. as ultimately even any 747 400 still flying in the next two years will find it needs upgrading to have this capability - a certain dual runway operation is pushing big time to have cat 3 GBAS curved approaches.
  10. Yes the naming especially across varying states, and the fact the regulation, for all of it is an ever evolving situation doesn't make it easy to understand. Although quite a bit of work is being done on this now to try and bring it aligned across the globe. There also quite a bit of regulation occurring on the requirements to make more aircraft and specifically airports to be equipped with SIDS/STARS/Transitions and Approaches to an RNAV standard. Ultimately the faster they can get this done and enforce the regulation the better for the industry, and equally some sense with the ability to fly GBAS to CAT3 will come. (which is why I have previously commented I'm surprised that PMDG are not doing more to update their FMC and nav database format to allow for proper use of RNP AP and RF legs which the other aircraft are equipped and capable of doing. That aside I also have to agree the 747 LNAV performance is somewhat questionable, it seems to struggle to follow many SIDS and STARS, even conventional ones, often missing turns, leaving them late and then overcompensating at a strange place, in fact to such a high occurrence I'm surprised this ever made it through Beta testing. Some of the other aircraft aren't perfect either, the 737(although haven't tested it recently since the upgrades) often enters holds incorrect, etc. To be fair I think the last aircraft that I saw do LNAV/VNAV following the best was the PIC767(the first version) which had it totally perfect.
  11. JC75

    [POLL] What do you think PMDG will do next?

    Update the NAVdata and FMC to use ARINC424 data so that full PBN can be done, with RF legs etc.
  12. Whilst really pleased to see the new 747 and just starting to enjoy it and learn all about it again after not using the old one now for some time. I was a bit disappointed to see that after such a long development time, that PMDG still using old navdata formats and the FMC logic not been updated to take advantage of ARINC 424 and true PBN. Is there any plans to refresh the PMDG line of products - rather than more products that will slowly become unusable as real world procedures will require more and more need to be able to fly RF legs etc.? I see FSLabs have enabled their aircraft to do so - and with real world mandates from ICAO and EASA now pushing this ahead - its disappointing this one aspect hasn't been addressed by PMDG to really make their aircraft a study sim and procedural trainer.
  13. Good work - be nice that this type of work wasn't required, in the next set of PMDG and patches, about time RF legs and the other ARINC 424 sets were supported.
  14. JC75

    Go check out the PMDG Facebook page!

    Hmmm shame on facebook...and not something the forum can support instead. I'd rather not have to sell my soul just to find out about PMDG feature.
  15. JC75

    ARINC 424 Navdata

    With other products now utilising ARINC 424 data - allowing RF legs etc, is this something we will see now for the next PMDG aircraft? This was discussed a couple of years ago,but not heard any updates since. Will the 747 have it? Or will we have to still fudge flying the ever increasing number of approaches/sids/stars that require this capability?