FWAviation

member
  • Content count

    393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

386 Excellent

1 Follower

About FWAviation

  • Rank
    Gliderpilot

Recent Profile Visitors

2174 profile views
  1. Okay, thanks a lot, Hans! And that means that it will be included in the next update - or do you plan a hotfix any time soon?
  2. I tested the EDLP 24 approach again in the -900 and could capture the glideslope - but only after tuning the ILS frequency on NAV 1 and NAV 2. If I tune it only on NAV 1, the autopilot still doesn't capture the glideslope. But actually it should be sufficient to tune the ILS frequency only on NAV 1, right? At least that worked in the previous CRJ versions.
  3. After the test of @AndyUK I tested the CRJ-700 myself for the EDLP 24 approach - and that one captured the glideslope. So it might be a problem only of the CRJ-900.
  4. @Hans Hartmann I approached EDLP 24 in the default 737 now and the glideslope was captured perfectly. The ILS for runway 24 at EDLP must have been a full-fledged ILS including glideslope already at the time when the Aerosoft scenery was released. And it's on 108.55 like in your video. I never had any problems with that ILS with other planes or even with earlier versions of your CRJ. I even have a glideslope indication in the CRJ (SP1 version), but the autopilot simply resists capturing it. I just tried that one more time, still the autopilot only captures the localizer. And that would also explain why I have the same problems at EDDL 23L - an ILS which already was a full-fledged ILS when that Aerosoft scenery was released and which has never created me any problems with other airplanes or earlier CRJ versions either. I'm afraid that there might be a bug regarding only the FSX version of the CRJ?
  5. @Hans Hartmann No, I did not have the throttles in TOGA or MAX and did not abort the takeoff. The announcement happens when I have taxied to and lined up on the runway and then have set the parking brakes. So the throttles were only on idle or a few percent of N1 above idle. Last night, it happened shortly after I had taken a flight (including landing) with the CRJ - so I had the throttles in TOGA there. But then, it should actually be possible to "de-arm" the takeoff abort announcement automatically between both flights since it could get annoying if you fly a turn-around and get the announcement shortly before your second takeoff of the day. I just took another test flight now - and of course Murphy's Law took its tool and the announcement didn't occur, even after landing and then preparing a second takeoff roll (with parking brakes set). But instead, I had a "cabin secure, passengers all aboard" announcement at the start of the first takeoff roll. So it's sometimes really hard to predict which announcement will occur when. And regarding the SOP to not set the parking brakes on the runway before take-off: Since the CRJ has the tendency to start rolling even on idle power and I do not have pedals, it's easier for me to set the parking brakes before the takeoff roll if I still have to do some checks. That way, I have both hands free and don't have to keep my thumb on the brakes button on my throttle quadrant.
  6. I have updated to version 1.2.0, but these errors practically exist since the first version: "My" cabin crew always announces that we have aborted the take-off when I set the parking brakes before starting my take-off run. Also, the cabin crew reports that all passengers have left the plane when all doors are already closed again and the engines are started up. Okay, that error could have occurred because I closed the doors a few seconds after de-boarding had finished, but still, I wonder why that announcement doesn't come immediately after the end of de-boarding. I also get the "all passengers boarded" message by the cabin crew when we are already taxiing to the take-off runway. So I wonder why the cabin announcements are still all over the place and what actually triggers them? The setting of the parking brakes shortly before take-off should surely not lead to a "take-off aborted" announcement.
  7. I had deliberately skipped version 1.0.5 because I had read of the glideslope problems some users had and therefore stayed on version 1.0.4 - but now, after installing SP1, I sadly have those problems myself. I approached EDLP 24 and EDDL 23L (both Aerosoft sceneries) out of 4,000 respectively 3,000 feet, with NAV source tuned to VOR/LOC 1 and the correct ILS frequencies dialed in. In APPR mode, the autopilot captured the localizer very well in both cases, but it just didn't capture the glideslope which I intercepted from below. I flew at about 180 knots IAS in both cases. In the end, I had to switch off the autopilot and fly the approach manually. I didn't fly a STAR and also didn't use the FMS, we are talking about two flights where I used the autopilot just for maintaining a manually selected heading and altitude before arming the APPR mode. I fly in FSX with SP2 and installed the CRJ SP1 after a clean uninstall of version 1.0.4. Any ideas?
  8. We know that, Tom, and I guess no one has ever assumed that the Sim-wings team does not work hard currently. It's a tremendous task. But since Mathijs mentioned that Tenerife is not far from release, three weeks have gone by and a competitor has released its version of Tenerife, so I guess it's only a natural impulse to ask how this version fares.
  9. Same here. Maybe a status update directly from the Sim-wings team would help. I was wondering anyway why they provided updates in the Gran Canaria topic in recent months, but now have fallen silent in this topic. @Autopiloth, @737Pilot (sim-wings), anyone?
  10. I second that. I had some difficulties to keep my hands away from the competitor's product in the recent sale, so I'm still waiting for sim-wings but also hoping for some kind of status update.
  11. You expect apologies, @Qseries, where sim-wings and Aerosoft have no reason to apologise. As it has been pointed out several times, sim-wings had announced already months and years ago that they intend to update all their airports. Even the prospect of a new Tenerife South airport was floating around these forums years ago. And as you say, they have a big portfolio of airports - and as a two-man team, updating all of them sure can't be a quick and easy task. What other developers do is a wholly different thing, and I think it's inappropriate to blame sim-wings for the decisions of other developers. Should there be better communication between developers? Maybe. But are we the ones who get harmed most by the multiple versions of one airport - or the developers themselves, since the market might get overcrowded? This is why I find it so inappropriate to complain. We, the customers, have the freedom to decide. In terms of sim-wings, it was planned anyway to update TFS, so it's not even the case that any neglected airports remain untouched because of their decision to do that airport. So how serious is the harm done to us? Not very serious, if you ask me. And by the way: sim-wings never claimed that the Canary Islands are "their own". They only stated that they did them in the past and planned to update them. What other developers did, is - again - a wholly different matter.
  12. And before we forget this: Until only a few days ago, Tenerife South was largely an untouched destination. Or did you all have the Simbreeze version installed? I didn't, because for me, it didn't match modern quality standards in scenery design. So maybe we should be grateful that that airport finally gets developed by modern standards instead of instantly complaining that it is developed by too many people at once.
  13. While I am puzzled, too, that airports get done by three (or as in this case, four) developers at the same time, I find it intolerable how some of the users here reacted. Are there no more serious problems in the world than that you have to choose between three different versions of a particular airport scenery? Yes, other airports are left untouched, but if you are informed about how difficult it can be to get proper photo material and access to the respective airports (just take a look into the Johannesburg topic), then you should refrain from any reproaches towards developers. In the end, if you all know it so much better than the professionals, why don't you start scenery development yourself?
  14. FWAviation

    Talk to the management? Here's your chance...

    Thanks a lot for the heads up and the kind offer, @Mathijs Kok!
  15. FWAviation

    Talk to the management? Here's your chance...

    Thank YOU for your quick help, @DaveCT2003!