Interesting that you saw this. I observed it on a short test flight I did. I “diverted” to Duluth Int’l Airport in Minnesota. Programmed the FMC for an ILS RW 27 approach. It captured LOC and G/S, but took me down far off course. I should have saved a screenshot from Little Nav Map.
I thought maybe it was a nav data thing, so I loaded up in the C172 G1000, and it flew the ILS perfectly.
Make sure the APU is on and APU bleed is switched on. You can’t start the ngines without some APU bleed air!
Check all that but basically to start engine all you do is switch to A or B then start whichever engine and introduce fuel at 20%. Then do the other engine when the start button lights up. Once enginse on put the engine switch back to off then turn off the APU and APU bleed air.
Hi all… just wanted to chime in if data is being collected on such things…quick test at the gate at KBUF with IRS alignment to realistic… IRS still not aligned after 20 minutes. Just a finding, not a complaint. Love this aircraft and looking forward to flying it maybe this evening, family permitting
I flew my first RNAV approach last night with success, but it did something unexpected. Coming up on the FAF, I had full flaps and speed on approach speed in alt hold. I pressed profile to arm P Des. At the FAF it captured P Des and descened on the RNAV approach, as expected. But it also throttled the engines up quite a bit to around 160 knots or more when I had started the approach around 145. My weight was fairly low and this was a lot higher than stall speed or normal approach speed. Any idea why this might have happened? Is there a final approach speed I can set in the MCDU?
Yeah, The APU I figured out the hard way. I was under the assumption that once I got one engine going, the second could be started off the first…not the case. I even verified in the manual to keep the APU going until the second engine is fully online.
Can’t under why I had to use the crank to get the engines going. What’s the purpose of “crank”
Just want to say a huge thank you to iniBuilds for bringing this amazing aircraft to msfs. Since su11 its the only aircraft I have been flying.
Frequently however I find myself confronted with the aircraft failing to descent when the glideslope is captured and the FD bars not showing a descent
In this case i just engage CWS and push the nose down to chase the glideslope from above, then the FD appears to show behaviour that its following the glideslope however it cause the energy of the aircraft to be mismanged sometimes
Is this bug? or am I not utilising the A310’s systems correctly? Thanks!
I have seen that cabin pressure issue as well. In my case, the cabin altitude was stuck at 1,000 ft (actual altitude was FL340), OFVs were full closed, dP was 12psi. I switched to manual mode, forced both OFV full open, no change to cabin pressure occured. I turned off the PACKs, again no change in cabin altitude.
I’m not an expert, but I’d be willing to bet that the g1000 is as advanced or probably more advanced and capable than the FMC in this airliner. It’s pretty old and I think they kind of modeled that really well…but on the other hand…I have experienced that drift. I wonder if it’s present if you do an autolanding? Both APs on?
Love this plane, but can’t say I have noticed any performance improvement since the patch. Still getting 22 fps (limited by main thread) at the gate at CYYZ with identical settings prior to the patch, whereas I achieve 40+ FPS with the PMDG 737 at the same location with the same settings.
First load of the plane after the patch was still < 1 minute.