Don’t have the GTN750
Have not tried the LPV GPS RNAV
Did not know about the “split”
Good afternoon!
I looked for for a long time along this thread, but i did’n find anything talking about that.
I have a little strange problem with this aircraft, that I don’t know how to solve…
I’m playing Flight Simulator on Xbox Series with the Xbox Controller (by the moment), and since Yesterday, this beautiful Milviz C310R offered me a limited thrust… It´s as if it offered 70% of its power. It`s nothing about the aircraft configuration, it must be something from the command controls, or that the aircraft detects the speed brakes on (that’s not the problem, because this reduced power it’s also on ground…), or something like that… I haven’t changed anything. I follow the same procedure that I always follow to fly.
Does anyone have any idea how I can fix this??
And; If I delete the aircraft and reinstall it, do you know if the data such as the flight hours of the aircraft counter are deleted?
Thank you so much in advance!
Do you have engine damage realism settings enabled ?
Are you at an airport with a really high altitude above sea level?
MSFS CESSNA 310 MILVIZ: Asobo GNS530 vs PMS50 GTN750 (free version)
I’d like to make an observation on an avionics glitch to see if any have experienced same.
Because I was a Carenado plane enthusiast, I always kept the pms50 gt750(free version) available in the community folder to use as an alternate. I also use it in the Cessna Milviz 310 and have found that all functions work well.
Except, that the pms50 free version approach button does not work on all msfs Milviz liveries. If I switch back to the original Asobo gns530 and run the same flight plan, the button does work with all liveries supplied.
Also note that if I add a Flightsimto livery to the plane in the community folder along with the pms50 free version while using the pms50 during the flight, the approach button on the free version does not work, but the approach button while using the Asobo gns530 will work with any livery from msfs or Flightsimto site.
Nothing else is in the community folder.
Update 051223 10:20PM
After more testing between the two avionics, it turns out that it is an airport specific glitch. I did approaches to airports in my usual area with the pms50 gtn750. Everything worked fine.
Today I do a flight from KMGC to KORD, runway 28R using pms50 gtn750, as I passed between waypoints ADAME and WILLT, I press the approach button and it does not accept…nothing happens, GS does not appear. Being ready for this, I quickly paused the flight and switched over to the Asobo GNS530. It showed me on the screen in a different spot which was between waypoints WAVIE and ADAME, the leg before approach should be pressed. That is why the glide slope is not working at some airports. The PMS50 GTN750 is showing you in the wrong area in space, but not at all airports. I hope I wrote this in the correct discussion.
That’s a pretty interesting observation.
If I read it correctly the PMS50 GTN750 is misrepresting the aircraft position?
Were you able to validate this through reference to other sources, such as reference to ground features, or an external app that reads the lat-long via simconnect, eg LittleNavMap or Volanta?
It would be interesting to see if it were repeatable by other users and in other aircraft types? It’s a pretty serious bug for a GPS to display the aircraft in the wrong location.
1 Like
It only happens in some airports…I am only starting to list them now as I continue my usual days of fun.
1 Like
Are they default airports or payware?
it makes we wonder if there is a discrepancy between the NAV database called by the GTN750 as opposed to the 530/430🤔 Try to grab screenshots and yes might be better raising in the relevant GTN750 thread.
1 Like
At the time the C310 aircraft was designed the hot swap between the different GPS models worked well but the GPS code has been repeatedly updated and now hot-swap is problematic. When both are running (one foreground, one hidden) the GPS units interfere with each other. You need to decide which GPS you want to use with C310R and prepare the community folder before starting MSFS.
- If you want to use the GNS530, then remove the GTN750 mod from community.
- If you want to use the GTN750 then you need to install the WTT Mode mod for C310 from Aircraft page on pms50.com This mod enhances the GTN750 and disables the GNS530.
There is more information in the instructions for a community mod on flightsim.to – search for “WtGNS530-Fix-CDI-Milviz-C310” and download the correct mod to enhance the HSI indicators.
I wish it was simpler, but if you get the right set of mods installed in community folder then the C310 release version will do LPV or ILS approaches perfectly using your choice of GPS. But having two GPS running simultaneously is to be avoided.
1 Like
Thank you for your reply…much appreciated
Hi all, I have the TDS GTN 750/650 Xi combo. Only issue is that in cockpit, I get 2 x GTN 750’s instead of 1 x 750 and 1 x 650. Gould some kind soul please give me a hint as to where I may have gone wrong in the install process. I’m sure it is something I have probably done.
Thanks in advance.
That’s how it’s supposed to be.
1 Like
Cowl Flap – Performance Question
Is the C310R truly modeled to detect and react to a rapid descent?
I recently had an experience where I pretty much lost most of my engine power just as I was about to come in for a landing. I had been on a 500 mile flight, mostly at 11,000 ft. I then did a thousand-foot-per-minute descent to get ready to land. All was well till that final 1000 foot descent to the runway… when suddenly both engines lost almost all power. The engines didn’t die, they just had no power. Fuel mixture for the final few miles was set to full-rich (the runway was at sea level). Somehow I managed to nurse/glide my way to the runway and made a good landing… but, I was really lucky and just barely made it. In that last minute or two the engines had a tiny bit of power, but not enough to control my final descent.
My question is, could not having closed the cowl flaps during my 10,000 foot descent have been the cause of losing engine power? Up to now, I’ve never bothered adjusting the cowl flaps; I’ve always left them full open.
From my readings, I understand the purpose of the cowl flaps is to prevent shock cooling during a rapid descent. So I guess part of my question is whether the C310R is truly modeled to react to a rapid descent… and was my experience likely caused by not using the cowl flaps… or was my engine performance problem likely caused by something else?
It was a great enjoyable flight… till that last few minutes of not knowing whether I’d make it to the runway.
Thoughts?
1 Like
When you say no power, what was the indication that you had no power? Were Manifold Pressure, RPM, fuel flow indicating no power, or were those fine and the airplane performance simply wasn’t responding to pitch and power settings?
I wish I could give you good answers to your good questions, but I didn’t have the presence of mind to take note of those things. I do remember that when I gave it full throttle, it did seem to have a little more “power”, but just not very much. If it ever happens again, I’ll try to pay more attention to what the gauges are telling me.
1000 fpm doesn’t seem to me like a very rapid descent. I doubt it was shock cooling.
2 Likes
A 1000 fpm descent from 11k feet doesn’t sound like something that could give you shock cooling in this plane, that’s pretty standard. (If it wasn’t a blizzard in Alaska during a record winter) 
There is some info about the cowl flaps in the manual, it’s not recommended to close them for most situations because of their protected placement in this specific plane. From what I know, Blackbird even considered to not model shock cooling at all, as the difference in the real plane with closed or open cowl flaps was very small. Not sure if they changed their mind as I have seen conflicting info, but I would fear the opposite.
The cylinders in this thing get crazy hot during normal approaches in landing configuration, and most people don’t even notice it, because the analogue gauge is on the co-pilot’s side and the digital one is often wrong. I’m regularly touching the red band, despite deploying gear as late as possible to avoid additional drag that would make me add more power.
3 Likes
I’ve noticed the high CHT on approach also, and after looking at the engines.cfg, I believe the issue is how the CHT is tuned to respond to engine RPM. If you keep RPM at 2300 throughout the descent and approach, CHT remains quite reasonable, but if you push the prop levers full forward during approach, CHT rises very quickly. I’ve begun flying approaches at cruise RPM, only pushing the prop levers forward once I’m on the ground and vacating the runway. This isn’t normal procedure by the POH, but it works to keep temperatures lower in the sim.
Mike Busch seems to follow something similar in his turbo 310. He describes how he manages the levers for a go-around here: Leaning Basics - YouTube
1 Like
Thanks, might be useful. I’m actually using both depending on how busy the approach is - both setting final RPM at approach start, and at last minute and I think in both cases it’s the hottest piston plane on approach I have ever seen in a sim
For me, it seems like the plane in approach configuration is simply producing too much drag, which requires a very high MP, even if the plane is already on a standard 3 degree glide slope.
That saying, who knows, maybe that’s exactly how the real plane is, and might be also partially connected to the cowl flaps hidden in the engine nacelles, that simply don’t generate enough air flow at low speeds.
But, coming back to the problem mentioned by the author here, In the end, I don’t know, in the 70 hours I’m flying it I have luckily never had any failures, so don’t even know how it looks like when it happens.
As the author successfully landed, he could have done an inspection - maybe something would be visible there.
1 Like
It’s not likely shock cooling, 1000 fpm descent should be fine; but one thing you should consider on descent with the throttle pulled back is to rev the engines every minute or two. I bet they’ve modeled plug fouling, and with the engines at low throttle for long periods they are susceptible to plug fouling.
4 Likes