3-2-1-Now

It will also cancel any further step climbs. Did you clear any route discontinuities or anything like that? I suspect something is not right with the flight plan as you entered it. Best regards, Robin.

Sounds like you have the "auto uplink alternates" option enabled in aircraft settings. Best regards, Robin.

I would doubt it. Also, PMDG don't need to simulate the feel unit because our controllers are always wanting to return to center, which by default gives a feel of weight. Wait for SP1b and try it again. Best regards, Robin.

Edit the list on page 1 manually. Best regards, Robin.

So you use FSUIPC to get the yoke to actually work in FSX? Best regards, Robin.

Hmm. I tried the steps that Ryan sent me (trim ref below current airspeed) and it worked - as I trimmed I could feel the need to remove forward pressure whilst trimming, but it didn't work when the trim ref speed was faster. I'm not entirely sure what calibration could do with it, either. Unless you have a stick that is not centered when you release it (fixed by creating a larger null zone) then I can't see how it can upset it. I did determine why the trim was getting stuck though - it is related to stick position, airspeed, and whether the last trim operation used blip trim. Best regards, Robin.

Hi, It seems that because the AT system retards the thrust to idle later, and a bit slower than manual thrust, it is this fact that results in the different feel of the flare. I have found that the FBW seems to be trying so hard to compensate for the thrust change, that the stick input becomes secondary, with the apparent feeling that it is being ignored unless you pull harder than you think you should. I found that I had to pull much harder than with the AT system engaged. On the second manual landing attempt, I retarded the thrust levers much slower, and found a better pitch reaction. I also experimented with the FBW and "attacked" it by performing hard pitch up/down maneuvers to extreme angles (without stalling/overspeed) and found that the FBW seems to have some interesting behaviors. I also discovered that the FBW will not allow you to deflect the elevator to its maximum deflection despite having the stick pulled all the way back. This resulted in the curious behavior of the flight control page showing the elevator at half deflection for some time, if it reacted at all. At one point, when close to VMO with the TRS set to 180 kts, I couldn't push at all, until I centered the stick, waited a moment, then tried it again. I also discovered during the pitch up part of the tests, that the FBW will limit the max g/pitch rate initially, then it will suddenly release the protections, and result in an accelerated pitch rate. It seemed to be related to passing a certain pitch angle, I would guess around +30 degrees. It was also approaching VMO at this point (but not exceeding it). I think it was during these rapid pitch rate changes that resulted in exceeding maximum g load. It was consistent in its behavior, and required that you pitch up to maybe 45-50 degrees to see it. It seems that the FBW elevator commands are being used to replicate the "speed stability" to the detriment of pilot input (it seems the FBW overrides pilot input, even if no limits are being exceeded and no protections are in effect). I also found that the FBW system will result in the maximum commanded deflection being offset by the deflection that it had when the stick was centered. e.g. if it had 1/4 nose down elevator at neutral stick (e.g. to counter engine acceleration), then full aft stick would result in 3/4 elevator deflection. Note that it was at very low speed when I was observing this behavior, but not stalled or in the speed protection range. It would seem there is a small issue with mixing of commands. I also managed to over g the aircraft, and break multiple systems (worth trying if you want to use the QRH!). This didn't appear to affect the tests - the FBW mode was "Normal". Best regards, Robin.

Very interesting finding. I thought I noticed a difference as well, but figured there was something in the way I was flying (when using manual thrust, I retard the throttles earlier and faster than the AT system). I was going to fly a few circuits anyway - I'll give this a try. Best regards, Robin.

PMDG tried the steps I posted and re-created the problem. Previously they didn't see the issue because of the way they were testing it. It should be fixed in SP1b, yes. Best regards, Robin.

Any job can involve pressure and fatigue. Sure, if a pilot screws up, then lives are at stake, but this is no different for a myriad of other occupational areas. Flight experience of a 777 or 747 is largely irrelevent. They involve many hours of sitting at cruise altitude, with the odd radio call and flight progress checks, but otherwise, not much is going on. If you fly short-haul on a small turboprop then you'd have far more flight experience than a long-haul pilot. Several long-haul pilots I know do 2 landings and takeoffs in 4 days duty period. Compare that with the guys doing 6 sector days short-haul - they would do 48 takeoffs and landings in the same period. A little perspective doesn't hurt... Best regards, Robin.

This is a big mistake to make. The first, is to assume that "flight simmers" have no real-world aviation experience. The second, is to assume that because they are "flight simmers", they don't know anything about flying, operations, or procedures. It's as bad as some real-world pilots becoming complancent, or just being out-right arrogant because they "do it for real". What Kyle said is absolutely true. When you think about it, having 30,000 hours does not make you better! You could have 30,000 hours of clear blue skies, calm winds, and 30,000 hours of flights where nothing ever goes wrong. ...or you could be the 1,000 hour guy who had 2 engine failures, in flight fire, flight control failure, flew in the worst storm in history (through no fault of their own), at night, *but lived to tell about it*. I'd take the 1,000 hour guy. Best regards, Robin.

If you're accidentally hitting TOGA in the real thing, you need to ask why your fingers are wrapped around them in the first place (poor operating procedure). On most aircraft, it is no small matter to operate TOGA. Even deliberate engagement requires effort, due to the intentional location of them. I suppose these same pilots accidentally take reverse, too? Best regards, Robin.

Doesn't affect the basic principle. I'll bet you don't worry too much about positive/neutral/negative spiral stability do you? The tailplane in a conventionally rigged aircraft is a lifting device like anything else. The "lift" produced by the tailplane pulls the tail down (the CoG on a conventional aircraft is ahead of the center of pressure and would result in nose drop if not corrected). Think of the fuselage as a see-saw. Without the tail to balance the forces, the aircraft will simply pitch down. The tail provides a force in order to prevent the nose from dropping. Regardless of whether we are talking about elevators, stabilators, canards, deltas, etc.., if you change a parameter (airspeed) then the lift generated will change, the forces required to maintain a given pitch attitude will change, and so you must re-trim the control forces for the new speed. This applies to any aircraft, regardless of how it is achieved. Pitch stability (actually, longitudinal static stability) refers to how an aircraft will react if it encounters a pitch down disturbance. Positive: it will pitch up with increasing airspeed Neutral: it will neither pitch up nor down with increasing airspeed Negative: it will pitch down even more with increasing airspeed. Modern airliners are rigged to be neutral at worst, with most having some degree of positive longtitudinal stability. Negative stability is a feature of fighter aircraft, and require flight control computers to give the aircraft stability, otherwise it would be impossible for a human pilot to fly. Best regards, Robin.

Do you have ASN? Best regards, Robin.

Hi, So the problem appears to be that in the sim, when trimming, it is neither my imagination nor a problem with my specific set up that the aircraft exhibits zero pitch response to trim with the controls deflected. I don't think it is related to lack of simulation of an artificial unit; I think it is simply that the trim is not being applied when the stick is not centered. If that could be fixed, I think it will be a dream to fly. I guess we need to wait for PMDG on this one. Best regards, Robin.

@Rob: In the real aircraft, if you trim out the forces does the control column stay where you put it, or do you return it back to the mid-point? Best regards, Robin.

Hmm - was the gear up or down when it failed to move? I have found a couple of times now the FBW can sometimes have an adverse reaction to gear operation, but this has been whilst the gear was in transit. If the trim was operating as it should, then the pitch reaction (regardless of how it does it) should be the trigger to cause the control column to be moved in response to trim input. I know we can't feel forces, but the pitch reaction should still be there (the force in reality being a secondary effect of this). Best regards, Robin.

Hi, I have the Warthog, and before it, the SideWinder 1 from way back! That stick lasted me 10 years. I do have a T.16000 stick I can try to se if it makes any difference, but I can't see why it should. To those apparently NOT having the problem of the FBW system waiting for the stick to be centered before applying the trim, can you please try this? * Set the trim reference speed to 320 kts, but fly at 210 kts * To fly straight and level will require a lot of back pressure (I think you will have sufficient elevator authority to do this) * Holding straight and level with the control column only (stick back), hold it there and trim nose up * As you trim, do ***** NOT ***** move the stick to center! Hold it where it was the entire time Does the aircraft pitch up? For me, it does NOT. Video of the flight control page as you perform this test would be perfect, then I can compare here. Best regards, Robin.

Check your trim - I found it was set 0.7 units to the left for some reason when I flew it. Not sure why. It was OK afterwards. Best regards, Robin.

Very nice! Best regards, Robin.

Hi, The wing tanks have > 52600 lbs and the center has 500 lbs of fuel in it. Both the center tank pumps are OFF, yet the PRESS lights on the left/right pumps appear to be blinking at random. What are the pumps doing? Is it some kind of de-air function? I'm at cruise, FL350. Best regards, Robin.

Delete your custom panel states (not the PMDG states) and start from scratch. I had all kinds of weird alerts on the first run as it was using a custom pre-SP1 panel state. Best regards, Robin.

Well that in its own right indicates a problem as it is not possible to get TO as an FMA mode at any time. Best regards, Robin.

I'm thinking it is related to transition from flight to flare mode; it seems that the wrong reference speed/trim reference is maybe being fed to the FBW causing a pitch up? Best regards, Robin.

Preaching to the converted. I know this is the correct technique, but the problem is when trying to find the trimmed condition, something about the FBW behavior means you can't feel when it is trimmed, because it is just reacting wrong when the stick is deflected. @Rob: Yes, I can fly the aircraft on trim alone. Not sure what you're getting at? I did realize why I can apparently fly better with the null zone set to 10% - the null zone is not only a null zone - it enabled the FBW to apply the trim setting "better" than if the stick was pulled outside the null zone, whilst also reacting slightly to pitch input in this range. So far it seems: * Null zone is where set trim is applied to the FBW system * Nul zone is not truly a null zone - it has a small input to the flight controls * Outside the null zone, most of the trim is not applied until the stick enters the null zone. The size of the null zone determines how aggressive this application is (smaller zone, more aggressive). Regarding Swen's issue - I see the same thing. Engagement of the AT system disturbs the flight path. Best regards, Robin.