Jump to content

Richard Dastardly

Members
  • Posts

    170
  • Joined

Everything posted by Richard Dastardly

  1. Any other mods / products installed? you can tune up the ILS on the ground, so it might be worth spawning in a bunch of places & just tuning NAV1 up & see if you get something - given you *did* get a LOC once it smells of either bad nav data or outside interference. Unfortunately as I discovered, the only way to refresh navdata for this thing is to reinstall it.
  2. The bold bit seems to indicate it's the well known long-standing systems crash. I thought that'd been fixed somewhat in the last update, though.
  3. I've no doubt you could insert your own code in there if you patched the entire plane to look at it instead of the aerosoft code, but then you'd have to write an awful lot of the system yourself anyway. You'll love how it actually works... as far as I remember any code a third party uses has to drive the MSFS built-in autopilot rather than taking direct control of the aircraft. I could be misremembering that but I'm pretty sure that's how it works. An autopilot is an autopilot, a FMS is a FMS, they all do the same job inn the end with differeint front-ends, so reusing CRJ code for an Airbus or anything else is quite possible.
  4. I'm quite interested if SU10 did anything about jet engine responsiveness... Justflight have complained about that issue too.
  5. This isn't the sort of thing a modder can fix unless they somehow decompile a bunch of code libs ( and if they did, they wouldn't dare say anything because that's well outside even generous T&C ). If Aerrosoft are reusing some code for a future project like the Airbus then it needs fixing anyway.
  6. I don't know how you'd end up in that situation - my own training & various jobs make me consider these sorts of ambiguities, so I ask just in case.
  7. You're doing 140kts, that is a long way below a decent climb speed ( about half! ).
  8. Related question for the CRJ pilots, what does the LEGS page look like before departure if you haven't put an originating runway in yet? if you've ever managed to be in that situation. In the model the active WP ( at the gate ) is the first WP, but there's no blue leg origin entry. As soon as you add a runway, that enters as the leg origin. I suspect if you take off without the runway entry the FMS will start sequencing & decide the head of the legs page ( which I assume is literally just listing the internal WP list ) is the origin. Sanity wise it does feel like the aircraft should take it's location at weight off wheels ( plus enough seconds to be sure ) & compare that to the first leg entry to see what it should sequence, but no idea what it actually does.
  9. I have to admit to copying later waypoints over the current one to cut out bits of the FP in the legs page ( in both the CRJ and the 146, which is the only other thing with a FMS I fly ), but I've never done that with the current one itself. Deliberately going direct to the current waypoint is a confusing idea if the aircraft isn't going to the active waypoint then there's something a bit wrong with either the nav system or the display - and in this case I think the displays do get a bit confused at times, cf my initial WP in the FPL changing all by itself. I still think the root cause is my departure runway not getting entered but the ambiguous state that leaves the FMS in is not good.
  10. We were asking why you are doing this - you are saying "copy waypoint1 over waypoint1 to make it active", which makes absolutely no sense. In my last flight on your route I took off & flew in HDG to gain altitude for a while, not pointing at the current WP - the current WP started as FUSCO & stayed FUSCO no matter what mode I had the aircraft in, until I reached it. The *previous* flight had problems - I'm pretty sure because the runway entry didn't stick for whatever reason ( probably me not checking properly ) and the FMS chose FUSCO as the originating waypoint & then got partly confused. I fixed that by putting FUSCO in via DIR INTC page, not by playing with the legs page.
  11. This is about LNAV though, and even for me who's had problems since the start ( a rig upgrade ago ) LNAV issues are inconsistent.
  12. Oops, think I found out what *I* did at least - originating runway didn't get entered somehow, so the FMS didn't generate an originating WP. What does the real one do? either way might need a basic sanity check there. If I were writing a FMS I'd probably default the initial waypoint to the aircraft's position when the first leg is created, but I don't write FMS, thankfully! Second go at the flight is going properly. Didn't need to do anything special, just gained some altitude on runway heading & put it in NAV. Need to try that somewhere with a closer first waypoint sometime.
  13. Ooh boy yes, some systems are getting awfully confused - progress page thinks it's on FUSCO-JCT, hud WP target is JCT, aircraft.. .steering somewhere. DCT INTC & entering FUSCO did actually point the plane at FUSCO, but the hud target didn't change ( is it meant to? ). Reaching FUSCO sent the a/c towards JCT, and reaching JCT has sequenced the hud to LEJON, so functionally it seems ok. Don't think you can copy a waypoint over itself, which seems to be what you were trying to do ( I mean, why would you ). You can copy later WPs over the current one. Edit: took another look at the FPLN page, first WP is now DCT JCT, when I did enter DCT FUSCO & it was originally showing that.
  14. Yes, this seems awkward & may require a whole chunk of code rewritten just to find it, let alone fix it... It does feel like it could be a gain issue, or possibly a clamping issue in a controller somewhere, although not sure quite how that relates to a 200nm leg causing oscillations without knowing the actual algorithms ( if the a/c is generating a steerpoint, then maybe there's a lot of noise in the generation when there's a long distance ). If that's the case the mystery is why, in a system which is *supposedly* accurately timesliced, some people have it worse than others.
  15. Done a cold & dark startup ( been a long time! I usually load into turnaround ), sitting here for 15 mins holding at the about-to-start-engines point, boost pumps are still showing white ( as expected went out after 2nd engine start sequence completed ). And, now, same for starting from turnaround - in fact I can't get them to go out without turning the battery off! the INS has decided it needs to realign ( really? just from a moment of power out? ) but the pump button lights relit instantly. If you load the aircraft in a state with the engines running ( Ready to Taxi I think is it? seems to use the default state when starting on the runway ) then yes the pump lights will be momentarily lit while it runs through the start sequence, and then go out. At that point playing with the pumps is redundant & you should be ( after sorting the FMS out ) using the taxi or takeoff checklists. If you want to do a full startup ( or just a turnaround startup ) at a gate every time, go into the EFB Aircraft page & set the Default State.
  16. It's worth practicing radio nav in a GA aircraft ( or at least a small one with simple nav gear ) to get a good feel of it - quite powerful & simple & actually I prefer it when there's an option, unfortunately VORs are disappearing at a rapid pace ( although you can use ILS localizers too, they're just not as powerful ). There are still non-RNAV STAR/SIDs you can fly with just radio gear to some rather large airports. With either a VOR+DME, or two VORs ( or even two NDBs ) you know where you are. You will need a map during the flight, though. That's one reason I like it, the entire flight is involving, not just banging in the AP & watching your altitude.
  17. I'd like to know the CRJ-specific steps to flying that approach without the FMS, too - presumably you still want approach mode armed? if I ever knew the entire list of things it does, I have forgotten :S Not something I've done by hand in the CRJ yet ( plenty in other aircraft,) but essentially to DIY it, tune the VOR up on the radio page, twiddle the CRS knob until it's set to 283, and then set the nav source to LOC1 as you overfly the VOR ( I'd probably have it in heading hold as you do that, put it in NAV once you're past ), it should start flying down the 283 radial so you can start sorting your altitude out. At 12m on the DME, put it back in heading,& start turning right, set 121 via the CRS knob & when the aircraft is somewhat in the right direction, put it back in NAV & it should start tracking the 121 radial. Keep an eye on the DME & make sure your altitude is in bounds, and keep an eye out for the runway, at that point it's like flying an ILS approach with the glideslope out.
  18. While I'm not denying there's problems with the CRJ - some of which I've reported in some depth, which has hopefully been a little useful - I'd be very careful putting any of the above on a pedestal. I own products from probably half of those & I can name issues with *all* of them - JF for one have said they're not going to bother updating aerodynamics while the sim is in flux, so you have aircraft from SU5 still. I'm not going to start on PMDG, or problems with WT's autopilot or some of the other's autopilots too - honestly the CRJ is somewhere in the middle, not at the bottom as you seem to imply - or this issue, or that issue. Stop with the hyperbole, it doesn't help anyone & people will use it to get threads locked. You obviously a) don't know much about software development, and b) haven't looked at the comically bad documentation Asobo are providing with the current SDK if you think devs should somehow get ahead of the sim. Given the current state of it I'm glad we actually have half decent aircraft at all.
  19. I remember someone at Justflight saying engine response in RPM ranges was backwards in the stock code, but no idea if the CRJ uses it's own or no. Or whether that was true, even ( although I don't know why they'd make it up ).
  20. It depends on the settings in the aircraft.cfg, which is overrideable by livery - I have quite often had them show up when I used default static traffic ( since I started using AIG I've turned that off ). I've been deliberately trying to get the live AI traffic to use a 700 for an E145, with rather less luck so far.
  21. Easier said than done, apparently - navigraph's FMS manager said it removed data, but the CRJ700 loaded in with the systems crashed ( and incidentally the ATC working fine! ). Had to reinstall and once again wished I'd not used the marketplace... How current is the supplied navdata, out of interest? I have bumped into enough data issues that I'd at least like to try your LIDO solution, but the lack of LNM integration ( and I guess simbrief wouldn't use up to date data either ) is a bit too awkward 😕 neither is your fault, of course. Anyway, reinstalled both CRJs & removed all mods. Flightplan in navigraph's plotter overlaid on the chart ( no I have no idea why they don't match either: What the FMS ( using default CRJ navdata ) gave me: And here's the track. I can confirm the CRJ does indeed meander back & forwards without attempting the procedural turn - when it *actually* turned back was when I gave up & put it on HDG. ( Incidentally that terrain plays havoc on the localiser..). The approach shown there is also from navigraph data, so don't read anything into that in particular. So, if there's a navdata issue with Navigraph's approach there's something far worse with the default / LIDO ( presumably ) or the processing of it.
  22. I'm using current Navigraph AIRAC data. It isn't necessarily the CRJ's fault - the WT G1000NX doesn't draw the turn, nor does the MSFS world map - and a G1000NX aircraft won't fly the full approach either. Might be a navdata issue.
  23. One more thing, which transition did you program? There is something related to high altitude airports I've forgotten about, too. Edit: not sure how well this approach is programmed - using current Navigraph airac & JAC transition. Certainly flew something like the right shape ( the wrong way round, though ), just considerably earlier than I was expecting so I never intercepted GS. There was no procedural turn in the FMS, though.
  24. It has in the past not been great at approaches, but I can't see anything in that particular one that should bother it. Pretty much every ILS approach into a smaller airport in the UK involves overflying a NDB, a specified outbound track and then a >180 deg turn to intercept & the current version of the CRJ seems to manage ok ( which is more than a fair number of other MSFS aircraft manage... ). I'll try this one when I have some time - what sort of weight?
  25. Don't use delete, copy the waypoint below over discontinuities ( or if there's complete duplicate segments pick the first repeating one and copy it over the first instance of itself ). I don't think that'll catch all of them but it will mitigate a lot.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use