snglecoil

Regarding the discussion of level D visuals, I’ve just spent 3 days in Level D sims for ATP-CTP…including a brand new A320 sim. The emphasis is NOT on external visuals, and it didn’t take a thing away from the experience at all.

Here is an FAA Advisory Circular giving guidance on certification. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-136B.pdf

I don’t know if this is the reason for your issue, but in general it is preferable to climb using FLC to climb at a constant speed rather than a constant rate using VS mode. Several factors could contribute insufficient airspeed using a constant rate climb.

Hmmmm….😂 maybe someone took issue with it.

Yikes! That was brutal. I had assumed that there had to be some sort of licensing agreement in place to include the Cirrus planes in X-plane by name and likeness. Maybe not….but if so, I can only imagine how that conversation is going to go next time 😂

I mean I don’t think I could say it any better 🤷‍♂️

@mSparks, control malfunction as presented in the original video did not demonstrate any ability to recover. If the plane were to continue to roll inverted, you may quickly find yourself in a position where CAPS deployment is no longer a safe option due to attitude and/or airspeed. Cirrus has a 100% survival rate when CAPS is deployed inside airspeed and altitude envelope. Given what I saw in the original video. I’d quickly try to establish roll control using the electric trim, and if that did not quickly indicate a positive outcome, I’d pull CAPS while I still could. Not every abnormal or emergency scenario calls for a CAPS pull. If I have a fire, I’m not floating down under the canopy while the airplane burns around me. I still may pull at minimum altitude, however, if I’m unable to find a suitable safe landing option. Even if there were no fire and that great looking emergency field I picked as a landing spot revealed unseen hazards as I approached, I may still my pull CAPS. Full flap landing reference speed is 78 knots. That’s a lot of energy to dissipate in a small, unimproved location. It took me a while to embrace Cirrus’s CAPS philosophy, but given their track record, I’ve come around and make no apologies for teaching my clients.

What exactly gives you concern? I’d be happy to discuss.

I’m a Cirrus training center instructor with 500+ hours in the 20/22/22T in the past 12 months

@mSparks https://www.cirrusapproach.com/caps-training/

The truth is out there…but it seems you are more interested your personal crusade rather than discussing the merits of XPlane on its own. @Krakin, I think you called it. I’m out.

So is P3D. In fact, Redbird, one of the largest providers of ATDs, uses P3D as their software. FAA certification is not this lofty "Gold Standard" that I think you think it is. There are certainly requirements that the software has to meet, but the bar is not as high as you may think. If you'd like to see for yourself: FAA Approval of Aviation Training Devices and Their Use for Training and Experience If the fact that X-Plane is FAA certified makes you feel better about your purchase decision, that's outstanding! Go team XP! MSFS doesn't meet the requirements, but it doesn't seem that it would take too much for them to add the required functionality if they really wanted pursue it. It doesn't look like that is in their plans and that's ok.

@cagarini, thanks! Boldmethod is a tremendous resource.

I’ve got to say, I don’t understand all of the flight modeling calculations you guys are discussing, but as someone transitioning to my first jet job and digging into swept wing theory, I appreciate the effort to see it modeled with a higher level of fidelity in a (largely) home based sim.

True or not, at least they are entertaining. It could provide fertile ground for some good discussion if these threads could avoid devolving into merely another territorial skirmish.