Mathijs Kok

Not following ascent/descent path

Recommended Posts

Simbol, on the picture above Mika is climbing in managed Climb. Please check your knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Joan Alonso said:

Well, without time acceleration and all types of weather, also clear skies, and many load types and CI’s, -from almost empty to full-, the bus climbs really really fast every flight I did. In all situations. I believe that the A319 is capable of do such a high pitch climbs (for me always between high 3000 to almost 6000vs after TO and Managed climb) but I can not imagine the A321 doing so. I haven’t got any stall or problems with it, so I’m not really sure if there’s any problem regarding this. But yes, maybe the little bus is too much “agile” for me. Can’t say if it’s like the real one though. Can’t remember exactly, but I think that the 32 were much “softer” with climbs and descents, at least I can not remember having issues with it.


Hi Johan,

 

Can you perform a flight were you get 6000 fpm or more and provide me with screenshots of your instruments?, please include the auto-pilot section and anything else you can.

 

Also can you please record these information for me:

  • Flight Plan information (include star,  arrival and runways used please).
  • Cost Index used (CI).
  • Number of passengers, cargo Loaded and fuel loaded and how you loaded this data (Aerosoft tool or other).
  • Flap configuration used during take off.
  • Trim configuration used during take off.
  • If the problem occurs during descend please provide the distance from TOD (positive or negative).
  • List of all your Add-on's running at the time, for example: Active Sky, Chaseplane, EZdok, PRO-ATCX, etc.
  • Let me know how are you flying, online / offline, etc.

Finally let's aim for clear skies and no bad weather to avoid having any weather variables changing the case study, this way I can replicate your environment and conditions to see if I hit the same problem.

 

Kind Regards,
Simbol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OVI said:

Simbol, on the picture above Mika is climbing in managed Climb. Please check your knowledge.

 

Ah apologies.. still 4000 fpm is normal.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok! Thank's. In picture i climbing from 4000ft to FL380. 4000ft is an initial climb altitude every SID's from Helsinki. I always do it same Managed alt + SPD. Previous busses follows restrictions of speeds in fixes which is limit, (not sure new ones) also altitude. Now It seems i do it all wrong way? I fly my flights into Ivao or Vatsim always since 2009 without problems. I tried today selected modes, as you guided from EDDT to EFHK.

T: Mika.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MikaV said:

Ok! Thank's. In picture i climbing from 4000ft to FL380. 4000ft is an initial climb altitude every SID's from Helsinki. I always do it same Managed alt + SPD. Previous busses follows restrictions of speeds in fixes which is limit, (not sure new ones) also altitude. Now It seems i do it all wrong way? I fly my flights into Ivao or Vatsim always since 2009 without problems. I tried today selected modes, as you guided from EDDT to EFHK.

T: Mika.

 

The Bus not following crossing restrictions during climb is a known issue and documented several times here in the forum.  The LNAV and VNAV is currently being reworked by the developer.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes i notice that yesterday. Flying manually now those restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today i was fly the step-by-step flight EDDF - EGLL (I programmed MCDU exactly the same as in the instructions). Initial descent rate at the T/D was aggressive (around 4500-5000 fpm) and after i used speedbrake this value reached 7200 fpm. The rest of the

descent path was good. I used clear skies weather without wind.

2018-8-17_17-27-51-996.jpg

2018-8-17_17-27-53-577.jpg

2018-8-17_17-27-56-644.jpg

2018-8-17_17-28-3-47.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2018 at 11:40 AM, simbol said:


Hi Johan,

 

Can you perform a flight were you get 6000 fpm or more and provide me with screenshots of your instruments?, please include the auto-pilot section and anything else you can.

 

Also can you please record these information for me:

  • Flight Plan information (include star,  arrival and runways used please).
  • Cost Index used (CI).
  • Number of passengers, cargo Loaded and fuel loaded and how you loaded this data (Aerosoft tool or other).
  • Flap configuration used during take off.
  • Trim configuration used during take off.
  • If the problem occurs during descend please provide the distance from TOD (positive or negative).
  • List of all your Add-on's running at the time, for example: Active Sky, Chaseplane, EZdok, PRO-ATCX, etc.
  • Let me know how are you flying, online / offline, etc.

Finally let's aim for clear skies and no bad weather to avoid having any weather variables changing the case study, this way I can replicate your environment and conditions to see if I hit the same problem.

 

Kind Regards,
Simbol

 

Hi @simbol

Thanks, but it would take an amount of time that I can not spend. Do not misunderstand, I appreciate your help. But believe me, I tested it with all types of configs. and I’m not the guy who forgot a managed clb mode or forgot to fill the mcdu data. All was there, and the bus always behaves the same, climbing between 4000 and 6000, wich it seems to me excessive.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heya,

 

I got similar problems like the ones mentioned in this thread that on descent the airplane tries to get down waaayyy too fast and hits descent rates of 6000 FpM+ and overspeeds even with speedbrakes fully extendend while wanting more drag.

 

But what seems to cause this for me is that the actual ToD is too close to the destination thus leading to a descent that is by default to steep to be achievable. E.g. yesterday I was flying this route:

 

EGPH GRIC3C GRICE DCT ERSON UN601 STN UL612 MATIK DCT MY ILS30-Z EKVG Cruise FL380

 

After entering all the info into the MCDU and programming the arrival the MCDU calculated at ToD with about 90 NM left to fly which is about 40-50NM closer to the destination than what PFPX showed while planning the flight. Also if I use the rule of three for descent I get  about 115NM required for descent.

 

NavData used on this flight was the most recent AIRAC cycle provided by NaviGraph. Performance was also at the frame limiter all the time.

 

Attached is a screenshot from that flight with the plane turning into the approach show the extreme rate of descent and more drag announcement on the PFD.

2018-8-19_0-0-58-448.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello.

I reinstalled Aerosoft bus again.
I also did step by step flight. Same issue.
I can't use the product. I asked for a refund cause I can't fly with the aircraft.

Gregory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gregoryv said:

Hello.

I reinstalled Aerosoft bus again.
I also did step by step flight. Same issue.
I can't use the product. I asked for a refund cause I can't fly with the aircraft.

Gregory

 

Gregory,

 

These aircraft are often flown without VNAV, which is the work around for those who are having this issue.

 

As Mathijs posted a few days ago, we finally have some information on this issue that allows us to look at and make some changes to the code and that is being done.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

 

Gregory,

 

These aircraft are often flown without VNAV, which is the work around for those who are having this issue.

 

As Mathijs posted a few days ago, we finally have some information on this issue that allows us to look at and make some changes to the code and that is being done.

 

 

 

Hi Dave,

 

Agree that aircraft can be flown without VNAV, but...

 

For more than 1 month that I am having issues with the bus, I cannot receive appropriate support.

All that I hear it is : Thousands of customers don't have any issues but only few peoples".

And "We don't have issue with a code". 

I did many flights, with/without weather, step by step flight , reinstalled/ installed bus and checked many things but the issue remains.

The only answer I received from the support was: we unable to reproduce the issue and etc...

Now you are saying there is smth in the code...

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a test yesterday. With a CI of 15, 66t, climbing out of LIRQ, passed FL12, no constraints ahead, managed speed of 260. I selected speed to 310 to restrict the climb for a while, the bus made the climb at 400fpm wich I think is ok, maybe it took a little less of time than I think it would in RL, but ok. As I rely on beliefs and not facts, you can ignore that. The problem was when I went to managed speed again, the bus pitched up to 7100fpm almost immediately to compensate, I believe that something is definitely wrong there, as it’s hard to believe the bus would pitch up that way. As said before by Dave, let’s wait an update to solve the vnav issues, because now it’s almost impossible to enjoy it, unless you go selected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Joan Alonso said:

 The problem was when I went to managed speed again, the bus pitched up to 7100fpm almost immediately to compensate

 

So you were at 310kts selected and then you went back to which managed speed? If there is a delta of like 40kts here the AP will ofcourse increase the pitch to reach this new speed "fast". I am not saying that the AS bus is acting correctly here, probably too aggresive, but flying like this will get you very high climb rates.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Frank Docter said:

 

So you were at 310kts selected and then you went back to which managed speed? If there is a delta of like 40kts here the AP will ofcourse increase the pitch to reach this new speed "fast". I am not saying that the AS bus is acting correctly here, probably too aggresive, but flying like this will get you very high climb rates.

 

Back to managed 260 if I remember well. Of course I expected a high pitch, It's what I was looking for. But not 7100. I could understand 4000+, even 5000?, and it did it almost immediately. It seems that there’s no limit for the bus (not a safe limit, because the bus understands that can easily reach these climb rates without compromising the safety of the aircraft) but at least a “comfortable” limit to climb or descend.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gregoryv said:

Now you are saying there is smth in the code...

 

Sorry but that is incorrect. We are at this moment unaware of anything in the code that could cause what you see. There is work done on the code but that is on a larger scale to adapt the code to be able to handle the A330 as well. And indeed we got many thousands of people NOT having this issue so logic dictates that there simply HAS to be a local issue on the machines of the users that show the issue. We're talking computers here, if code is incorrect it will behave incorrect on all machines.  In the meantime I got notice from two more people who installed a fresh sim and had the issue solved. This strengthens our idea that there is something there that can cause this issue.

 

I fully understand that this is a very annoying issue, but if it is caused by elements out of our control there is not a lot we can do. Everything I stated in the starting posts is still valid. Two more users have been in email contact asking for refunds claiming that they had indeed fully re-installed the sim, but when we asked the checksums some of the files and folders it was clear some files were not from P3D V4.3.

 

We are still trying to recreate these issues on our development and test machines. But only when we purposefully do not follow procedures (like the case Frank discussed above) can we recreate problems. We agree that when procedures are not followed at all the effects can be strange and we are working on that. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have expereinced similar problems with the bus not adhering to the altitude constraints in P3D so flew the Step by Step EDDF EGLL today without ActiveSky and weather as set out in the document.  On the descent to EGLL we just achieved FL251 at LOGAN, at SABER it should ahve been at FL160 but passed at FL183, LAM11 should have been FL 070 but was FL090, then 7000ft at D1270 should have been 6000ft, at D132 we were at 4300 should have been 3500 and at D127L we were at 3700ft should have been 3000. 

 

At 6.5nm from tthe runway the landing memo was asking for gear down and full flap but we had only slowed to 200kts. The more drag messgae only appeared briefly after SABER.

 

I've flow the FSX Steam version many times and know what the aircraft can do. Hope this feedback helps.

Geoff

SABER MCDU.JPG

VERT rev SABER.JPG

SABER FL160.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So @Mathijs Kok, just to know where are we, are the climb and descent issues (extreme rate of climb and descent) being looked at? I got lost a little bit with this topic, and I’m not really sure what is being considered a bug and what just a problem for some people. P3D 4.3 virgin install here, with high FPS after upgrading PC.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joan Alonso said:

So @Mathijs Kok, just to know where are we, are the climb and descent issues (extreme rate of climb and descent) being looked at? I got lost a little bit with this topic, and I’m not really sure what is being considered a bug and what just a problem for some people. P3D 4.3 virgin install here, with high FPS after upgrading PC.

 

Thanks!

 

As we have a few customers who have the issue and thousands who do not it has to be the second option, a problem for some people. We are simply totally unable to recreate this and what I written in the initial post is still very much true. In fact we now have more people who report the issue is solved on a clean install. But they are very much looked at. This afternoon I logged onto a users system who had the issue. When I checked the checksum of the base folders they were not as a clean install would give so I advised that user to re-install the sim, I hope he will report later this evening. 

 

I asked if people would fly the step-by-step flight to the letter to make sure we are talking about the same things. So far only one person reported he did (but he failed to inform us of exactly where things went wrong). Would you mind doing so?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GeoffB said:

I have expereinced similar problems with the bus not adhering to the altitude constraints in P3D so flew the Step by Step EDDF EGLL today without ActiveSky and weather as set out in the document.  On the descent to EGLL we just achieved FL251 at LOGAN, at SABER it should ahve been at FL160 but passed at FL183, LAM11 should have been FL 070 but was FL090, then 7000ft at D1270 should have been 6000ft, at D132 we were at 4300 should have been 3500 and at D127L we were at 3700ft should have been 3000. 

 

At 6.5nm from tthe runway the landing memo was asking for gear down and full flap but we had only slowed to 200kts. The more drag messgae only appeared briefly after SABER.

I've flow the FSX Steam version many times and know what the aircraft can do. Hope this feedback helps.

 

Yes, I do not think this is the same issue totally but it is certainly good info to work with!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got some time tomorrow (German business hours) to login to users machine that has the issue (Remote Desktop).. Not to see a flight, as we do believe some users have the issue, but to see the checksum values of the files of the sim. That shows definitely if the sim is fully 4.3 without any 4.2 remnants. We did this 4 times now and four times were able to proof the sim was not fully updated. But more proof is better so why not?

 

Of course this only makes sense if you believe without a doubt that the sim is fully correct. As we explained using the client only update does happen to fail to be a complete update. So looking at those machines makes little sense. Only when you did a complete de-install and full re-install and still have the issue does it make sense to check the files. So far we have not found any such system.

 

If you allow me full access to your system (no other way, but I am a rather nice and responsible dude) drop me a mail at mathijs.kok@aerosoft.com.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found out the Issue also happenes under those conditions :

 

Flight from doesnt Matter to Vienna ! FL370

 

Venen Arrival..

 

I program the star and the Transition, then i set the ALT Constraint for MASUR to be on FL170 !

okay, everything good so far..

 

Then i get a Direct to MASUR and not following the Route..

Waiting for the Top of Descend.

Then when the Aircraft reaches the TOD the airplane starts to descend, and in this case something is wrong because the bus thries to force the aircraft down to FL170, with a descend of 7000 !!!

 

Thats just not real, thats not a fault of the Sim either..

If we need a clean install, does it mean the bus is just working with any defaults and whatsoever ?

and ofcourse i didnt follow the Programmed route, sometimes you need to deviate, sometime on VATSIM/IVAO you get a direct to somewhere !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Thanks Mathijs, but I installed 4.3 from scratch on a clean win10 install on a less than two months old PC.

After watching several YouTube vids of the bus since the release I have seen the same behavior for everyone. So not only me but everybody is experiencing the "rocket climbs", but I think I am the only one reporting this, which leads me to think that everybody but me sees this totally normal.

 

I think there are two big issues:

1. Pitching up aggressively / sudden / fast  (a lot)

2. Really high pitch (easy +5000fpm does not seem to me something “normal” at all with a high load).

 

Two different issues that I do not know if they are related to each other. I hope the update of the VNAV can smooth things a little bit because now I feel like flying a fighter jet with 134 dizzy passengers on board.

I also watched vids of the P3D 3 version and they climb as would be expected, no such a high pitch there. (I thought for a while to install V3 again and test, but I think it's not worth it).

 

BTW, many thanks to all the team, I really appreciate the daily feedback here in the forum for all sort of problems and questions we may have.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then maybe someone of Your workers could post a Video where he climb out from Airport to FL 100 in menaged mode and sudenly Change to Altitude wich is allready passed for example after Pasing 5000' put in to the box 4000', and after Aircraft stop climbing get back to FL 100 and we will see what will hapend.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Sprajcik said:

sudenly Change to Altitude wich is allready passed for example after Pasing 5000' put in to the box 4000', and after Aircraft stop climbing get back to FL 100

 

You do know that this is in no way remotely RL do you? There may be many ways to trick up the AP in the sim and it would be nice if it would behave like a simmer „expects“ but let‘s focus first on normal AP use ok?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now