

sunbeam60
Members-
Content Count
12 -
Donations
$0.00 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Community Reputation
5 NeutralFlight 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.
-
Hi all, I've been using the T.16000M Thrustmaster joystick, TWCS throttle and TFRP pedals. They've been serving me fine. I've been considering moving to the Honeycomb Alpha & Bravo, but I can't touch one before buying so thought I'd ask for advice here. The Thrustmaster is sized for massive hands ... like I'm 12, using my dad's tools 🙂 I can use them, but feels a bit like the original Xbox controller, where every button is just 0.5cm too far away. I'm an average European, about 180 cm (5'11''), with normal sized hands and from the looks of it, the Honeycomb is equally sized for bigger hands. Are there any smaller yokes out there? Or anyone who can directly compare the Thrustmaster and the Honeycomb?
-
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,
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.