Jump to content

sunbeam60

New Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

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

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Awesome - that’s great news that they’re also tackling the big jets. Although that must be starting later, as their progress section only talks about G3000 and GTNs atm.
  2. I'm pretty active on their Discord. They're currently focussed on v1.0 of G1000NXi (coming with SU10), then onto GTN 650/750, then G3000 and ProLine 21 (which they've done once, but on the outside of Asobo's fence, so they are re-doing it now that they have a much better auto-pilot and all the inside knowledge/contacts on the inside of Asobo). It's quite clear their aim is to attract more GA and business jet development to MSFS, rather than airliner. If they've made statements about Boeing or Airbus avionics, I've missed them,
  3. LOL - well, I could have chosen a more diplomatic title for my first ever thread, granted. Next time, I'll stick to class C drug references only 🙂
  4. Not a problem for me, FWIW - I'm relatively new to simming, so reading everyone's opinions is actually quite interesting. My late return to the thread is more about having 4 kids and it being the weekend, so unfortunately this would have to wait till next "post bed time" moment 🙂
  5. My apologies - I've clearly walked into a tense bar 🙂 on this one, but I'm even more open to being wrong than the ATC being wrong. For example, I had missed that the MSA from the SW was indeed 5000', so the altitude makes sense (although it would make for an interesting FPA given how close I was getting to INS). But especially the 40 radial instruction puzzled me - when Navigraph had updated MSFS and the radial is clearly 41, not 40.... and I can't find any other approach that uses 40th radial, so it's not like it's stuck me on non-expected approach.
  6. I'm working my way up to VATSIM 🙂 I've done a couple of flights on VATSIM and ended up needing a shower after both, so decided to practice for a bit longer.
  7. I'm a neophyte - and writing here to be schooled - so I'm sure you are right 🙂
  8. Ahh, yes! I had missed that ... though it does make me wonder why the approach starts at 4000' if the MSA in all bar 0-90 degrees is higher than 4000'. Yup, active navigraph subscription and fully up to date. In the flight plan I did request the VOR ILS DME Rwy 23, but there are not STARs for Inverness, so no transition could be selected.
  9. Hi, (Supporting screen shots, flight plans etc. here: https://imgur.com/a/iSoJzIF) I was doing a quick flight from Edinburgh to Inverness under IFR. I had the following flight-plan: EGPH/24 GRIC3C GRICE DCT INBAS N560 DAVOT EGPE/INS.I23 (please see imgur link for illustrations). This was planned via SimBrief/Navigraph, exported to .pln and loaded in MSFS. That is to say that I was coming from the south on the N560, intending to fly over the INS VOR, then following the 41 radial out to D8.5, where I do a right-hand turn to line up with the IDX LOC and GS. As I approach from the south on the N560, ATC recognises me and says "Expect ILS runway 23" - as specified in the flight plan, so to be expected - "via INS 40 radial, 10 DME arc. Cleared to INS.". Here I'm getting confused. "INS 40 radial" is sort of right - I was expected 41st radial, but ok. Much more confusing is the "10 DME arc" instruction as that would put me on the ADN or BONBY transition. In addition, MSFS ATC insists on keeping me at 5000'. Now, 2500' I could understand - if it had gotten confused about which transition I was taking - but I can't find any transitions that start at 5000'. Am I missing something obvious here? It seems to be MSFS is quite confused about how to machine read (no doubt) the AIRAC to keep the approach plate that includes INS VOR overflight.
×
×
  • Create New...