Jump to content

Dutch727

Commercial Member
  • Content Count

    199
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

315 Excellent

About Dutch727

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/18/1953

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

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

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I doubt it's too imminent. Notice in the upper right of the landing video the warning system appeared to be INOP, all lights dark. If course that's no guarantee of anything, I don't know the status. But if that's not ready that's a pretty major undertaking to finish right there. I hope it's soon, it's far and away my favorite airliner. In fact, my only one unless someone does a 727.
  2. A deep dive into the historical navigation system in 1939 and it's simulation in the MSFS JU-52. TL;DR version: the MSFS JU-52 simulation is useful for sim pilots to fly in IMC, but it isn't realistic to the way it actually worked in 1939. --- Deep Dive Follows. I posted this in the MSFS forums and this is a text copy of that post -- The two round navigation gauges at the top of the pilot's side of the panel in the 1939-style JU-52 are an AFN1 "beam guidance" gauge on the left, and a less sophisticated and older ZA.1 "Zielflug" ("Line flight") beam-guidance gauge that does the same thing as the AFN1 on the right. According to the document linked at the bottom of this post the AFN1 gauge in the real-life 1939 JU-52 would be used to follow a Lorenz “beam” to or from a low-frequency radio transmitter station. A typical beam station would have four horizontally aligned high-power beams which could be followed like a VOR radial. The “Lorenz ILS” system consisted of two lower-power beam transmitters projecting from the end of the “ILS” runway one aligned vertically and the other horizontally, the vertical one providing glideslope. Almost all approaches had marker beacons for the outer, middle, and inner markers and the light on the AFN1 would light up when you crossed these beacons. This system was in common use in 1939 with about 38 stations across Germany and others in other parts of Europe. A typical AFN1 would provide the ability to follow a course by keeping the left/right needle centered. The vertical needle is a signal strength indicator in the real unit. It’s important to note that following a Lorenz beam is following a predefined course. Like one does when following a VOR radial, except a VOR has 360 radials and the Lorenz transmitter had only 4 which could be aligned in different predetermined directions. The AFN1 simulation in the JU-52 sort of does this, but not really. It’s useful to us as sim pilots but doesn’t work like the real historical units. This is mostly because there are no Lorenz stations in MSFS 2020 of course, only VORs and NDBs and they are not the same thing at all. If you tune an in-range VOR or ILS on the NAV radio the AFN1 will deflect based on the heading to the tuned VOR/ILS. It’s behaving as if the VOR is an NDB. If you keep the needle centered you’ll “home” to the station. When you pass it it’ll notice that by a full needle deflection but the light doesn’t light up as it should. If you’ve tuned an ILS, the vertical needle will show glideslope but not very precisely. (Not realistic, this needle was a signal-strength indicator in the real unit.) As you pass the markers no light illuminates on the AFN1 as it should. The left-right deflection needles will only provide homing guidance to the transmitter! Only by keeping the needles centered and flying a heading aligned with the runway heading can you be on the “localizer”. By following the needles in this way you can approach a runway successfully in IMC but with with much less precision than a modern high-frequency ILS. The “beam deflection needle” isn’t realistic to the way it worked in real life, but it is useful to navigate to a VOR or ILS in IMC like it was an NDB (actual NDBs can’t be tuned in this JU-52.) The other two navigation instruments on the cockpit are the ZA.1. “kick” beam guidance device and the radio compass located on the co-pilots side. The radio compass simply points to the tuned VOR/ILS if it’s in range and is super useful. In this sim the ZA.1. essentially provides a duplicate of the needle on the AFN1, useful for homing to a VOR/ILS, but with a little more precision mostly because its a little bigger. In real life this was a “kick” style needle - it would deflect or “kick” to the side every second or so to turn into if you were off course, and center if you were on the Lorenz beam. Useful for following the horizonal course between beam stations but not for a blind landing approach. More detail on radio navigation in the pre-1946 aviation environment. Search for "AFN1’ and ‘Lorenz VHF’ in the document to get more details on the nav equipment in our 1939 JU-52. https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio/hellschreiber-modes-other-hell-RadNav.htm
  3. I think this is fascinating and fun aircraft to operate and fly, especially in the 1939 incarnation. Some notes on the autopilot and VOR navigation I've learned by practice. The autopilot works you just can't expect it to work like a modern one. It'll only hold a heading, and it can't make big corrections. To use it: 1. Use the crank on the compass to crank the upper compass card to the desired heading. (The lower one shows your current heading.) 2. Steer the aircraft manually to on or near the desired heading. It WILL NOT make large changes. It only uses rudder not ailerons. 3. When approximately on the heading you want (the cards are roughly aligned) turn on the AP with the rotary switch below the yoke. 4. Press IN the switch with the fan on in on the lower part of the compass card device. This selects "heading hold". 5. The aircraft will generally track the selected heading. It may wander a bit but will get back on track. 6. There is no altitude hold. Trim it carefully and it will generally stay level. But you have to watch it. Radio navigation. Again, don't expect anything remotely modern. It can point you towards a VOR and it can offer crude guidance for an ILS. It will not fly down the ILS beam for you it just provides guidance. There are three nav-related instruments on the top of the pilot's panel and one on the lower left of the co-pilot's panel. To use them, tune the NAV1 radio to an in-range VOR or ILS. To track to a VOR use the leftmost and rightmost pilot's instrument . The one on the right is labelled ZA.1. and it will tell you in a crude way which direction to turn to point your nose towards the VOR station. If the needle is inclined to the left, turn left, and vice versa. When the needle is centered you are flying directly towards the turned VOR or ILS. There is no indication of what radial you are on nor can you tune a radial. In effect it makes the VOR/ILS work like an NDB. The pointer on the instrument on the first officer's panel will always point the relative direction to the tuned VOR/ILS, just like an NBD needle. (You cannot, as far as I know, actually tune an NDB with this system, it's VOR only.) The instrument on the top left of the pilot's panel is a more precise version of the one on the left, you will see the white marker align with the carets if you are heading straight for the VOR/ILS. The instrument in the top center of the pilot's panel is the ILS receiver. It mostly provides crude glideslope information with the tiny brown dot in the curved track on the left. The little dot works like the glideslope needle on a conventional ILS receiver. If it's high, climb, if it's low, descend; if it's near the center you are on the glideslope. The needle on the right works like the needle in the VOR tracking instrument - it doesn't tell you if you're "on the localizer" It just tells you if you're pointed towards the end of the runway and which direction to turn if you aren't. To get approximately on the localizer be sure your compass card is pointing to the runway heading while you are pointing directly at it. I don't think this ILS would be much good at CAT II approaches! Hope this helps.
  4. We're expecting the Asobo "Local Legends" JU-52 to appear on the Marketplace tomorrow. From what's been teased so far it looks like a pretty, and fairly deep, simulation of both a modern and a classic Tante Ju. We'll know for sure when we get our hands on it.
  5. The PC-6 isn't my team so I can't say. At Milviz each separate team makes decisions about their own project, subject to the overall goals and quality standards of the company. Remember MV doesn't work on only one project at a time. The Porter team has been working hard for release, but that doesn't hurt the steady progress on the 310 or any other ongoing project. In fact it helps, as we share solutions and best practices as we learn the quirks of MSFS.
  6. The MSFS 310R will have a complete and accurate set of circuit breakers. We're taking advantage of the circuit breaker coding options that are new to MSFS that didn't exist in P3D and would have required custom code for it in that platform.
  7. Unfortunately no, because it's out of our control. My understanding is that compatibility is dependent on the evolution of the NXi code which is still a work in progress. At some point in its evolution the few areas where odd things should up in the Porter (due to the NXi) will go away. That could be sooner or later, it's dependent on the progress WT makes with some core code in MSFS. I don't believe it involves any changes that need to be made on the Milviz side.
  8. I can only speak for the Milviz C310R, but the reason for the delay has nothing to do with avionics. The 310 was one of the first (if not the very first) aircraft we ported over to MSFS in the early days. A lot of work went into it at that stage, and a lot of it was learning. One of the things we learned (around the time of the release of the Corsair) was that the model and textures of the 310 as they were then just wouldn't cut it in the much more demanding visual world of MSFS. So the model and textures were scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up and that was a major effort that took time. That phase is done but the systems code has to be adapted to the new model and various other issues worked out before release. It's coming along well, but it's a rather ambitious project, and quality simply takes time. No way around it. In the end I think you'll be glad you waited, even though waiting isn't fun for any of us.
  9. I've noticed some small local airports have been improved including the one closest to where I live. More accurate layout, buildings and parking spaces. Someone's working through a list. Probably the one provided by the community project for missing/borked airports. That's kinda cool.
  10. We'll do our best to let everyone know by all the usual flightsim channels. It won't be a quiet event when it goes out the door. As mentioned, the FB page is one way to monitor any of the products as they move along towards release. For sure any 310 significant news will appear there. Dutch
  11. The 310 isn't on the back burner. It was expected to be first or 2nd out, but after careful consideration we decided that the visuals had to be completely overhauled to meet the high standards expected of high-quality MSFS aircraft. It was okay before, but okay isn't good enough. That's what the holdup is -- work is proceeding as fast as practical with dedicated people working on it. It'll be ready when it's ready. Thanks for your patience, no one wants to see it out more than we do. Dutch
  12. Here's the official scoop for ya. The C310 isn't on hold; work is progressing steadily. However it won't be out as early as we'd originally planned because we're revamping the visuals, systems and flight dynamics to meet the highest standards for MSFS. There aren't any technical obstacles stopping us, we just took a hard look and realized we had to upgrade some things before release. It will certainly be released this year, we are aiming for this summer, but it won't be done until it's absolutely as good as we can make it. The community deserves no less. I'll keep everyone updated here when significant milestones are reached. Dutch
  13. I'm seeing more accuracy since the update, I live about 3 miles from the local airport and so far, the conditions in the sim have matched what I see out my window. Yesterday we had a line of rain pass through, changing the partly cloudy skies to rain for a while then clearing up. Essentially the same weather was depicted in the sim. So far here (the SE United States) it's more much more accurate than it was before. I suspect this is related to the accuracy of the MeteoBlue weather model in local areas so I'm not surprised to see other with different experiences.
  14. I should mention here, as I did in the similar thread on the MSFS forums, that the 310R will have an option to support the third-party GTN750 as well as an option for a classic layout with no glass navigation - in addition to the 530/430 layout familiar from the P3D/XP versions. Progress is proceeding on all fronts every day. The visuals, systems, and flight model are being upgraded and refined. The goal, as always, is no compromise on quality. All I can say about a release date is "sometime this summer." We all hope sooner rather than later but it won't be rushed out before it's ready.
  15. Yes, I believe we can. No absolute promises - but we are working in that direction.
×
×
  • Create New...