Jump to content

Specific-3d-Design

Support for the Specific-3d-Design aircraft, Discuss Gliders, Robin DR400, Dimona

293 topics in this forum

    • 3 replies
    • 456 views
    • 7 replies
    • 593 views
  1. DR400 X PaintKit

    • 1 reply
    • 482 views
    • 2 replies
    • 1015 views
    • 3 replies
    • 792 views
    • 0 replies
    • 895 views
    • 6 replies
    • 1181 views
  2. Livery Request

    • 5 replies
    • 1071 views
    • 15 replies
    • 2105 views
  3. Serial number

    • 4 replies
    • 1188 views
    • 2 replies
    • 750 views
    • 6 replies
    • 765 views
  4. DR400 Shockwaves Lights

    • 0 replies
    • 592 views
    • 7 replies
    • 1733 views
    • 4 replies
    • 2571 views
  5. Robin Repaints

    • 40 replies
    • 6391 views
  6. Beacon Light

    • 4 replies
    • 1200 views
  7. GPS...

    • 11 replies
    • 1612 views
    • 4 replies
    • 948 views
    • 5 replies
    • 1065 views
    • 12 replies
    • 1808 views
    • 6 replies
    • 1169 views
  8. Bug tracking - P3D

    • 22 replies
    • 1906 views
    • 4 replies
    • 1239 views
  9. Flaps problem

    • 3 replies
    • 927 views
  • Posts

    • This week I don't have time for development or even a detailed reply; next week is a lot better in this respect.    I see some things above that are in fact errors needing relatively easy fixes and those will be carried out.  Other issues are more of a "not simulated" nature.  You must bear in mind that when development commenced a decision was made that failures would not be simulated -- the focus would be on normal operations.  Once failures are taken out, there is not much point in simulating all functionality that only exists to manage failures.   There will be further development.  But for FSX, nothing will be added that requires extra click spots.  The VC model is at its limit and even one more click spot will cause graphics corruption.  P3D doesn't have this limitation.
    • It's on my list for further development.
    • I really like the Aero Mexico one.  If time were unlimited, I would have made it as a default livery. 
    • Hi Aerosoft team,   I just updated my A320 Pro with the version 1240. All seems fine except the MCDU NAV/RAD page. I explain below.   In this RAD/NAV page we can enter VOR, ILS, ADF identificators.   I made a flight from Dublin to Glasgow.   I tuned first the IOM VOR. Ok , it displays corretly as attended. Note tha IOM is the only VOR known with this ident.   After that, I tuned the VOR of TRN. Sor I enter TRN in the scrachpad and click on one of the VOR fields of the MCDU (Left one). Doing this, the MCDU displays a list of VORs named all TRN (as there are many VORs named like this). I choosed the first one (by clicking the corresponding side key) and what happens, the VOR field of the NAV/RAD page remained blank. The only way to solve this is to enter the frequency of the chosen TRN VOR instead of the ident. Entering the frequency, the VOR field is updated as attended.   So there is a bug here, that were not present in version 1230.   Same problem for the ILS of Glasgow (IUU) as there are 2 ILS named like this (the one of Glasgow and another one), the ILS field cannot be updated via the ident, but also only by entering the frequency (here 110.10).   So, to sum up the problem: as soon as there are multiple objects (VOR, ILS) with the same ident (Here TRN or IUU), we cannot enter the corresponding field in the MCDU (after the choice screen),. We can only set the field by entering the corresponding frequency.   Never seen this on version 1230.   I just made a short flight from Dublin to Glasgow with the A320 (no flight plan) and noticed no other problem (Climb is Ok, approach is OK). I did not tested neither the A318/A319, nor the A321.   Thanks.   Patrice.
×
×
  • Create New...