Indeed I am.
Just trying to think of some other reasons. Is the plane heavier than normal? Is the runway sloped down? Is the runway paved and dry? How is the density altitude?
Basically, is it behaving worse than what you might derive from the performance charts for the conditions youāre in?
FWIW Iāve seen on other threads that braking action has been intermittent, despite controller bindings, etc. I myself have had flights in the 2024 VisionJet where I had toe brakes on landing, and the next day not. Could be a 2024 thing they are sorting out?
Maybe the brakes package didnāt load. Heh. Maybe itāll be part of a DLC.
Nope, it should not. Iāve got a combined time of ~150 hours on the 172S and 172RG, I recognize conditions for longer landing distances. None of them apply here.
Dry, level, paved runway, roughly sea level, reasonable weights for landing (though technically it should barely make a difference), even employing short-field techniques still has me overrunning 2000ā runways.
1 Like
Understood. I havenāt had the same issues so I wonder if itās like what @Nikita is saying, that thereās a problem loading the brakes module.
Or maybe the wind is mid-registering on the G1000 and itās actually a tailwind. Iāve seen some really wonky stuff with that.
Thereās something weird with the braking. I constantly lock the left wheel and not the right even with same pedal travel in the animations. It also turns horribly on the ground too. I can pull much tighter turns in a Skyhawk IRL.
2 Likes
I agree 100%. Iāve found that using intermittent half braking (differential, of course) works best to turn tight after a backtaxi on a narrow runway. Much harder than in real life.
2 Likes
Anyone else confirm that the basic 172 is working now?
It does for me, but it never didnāt work for me. I tried it the first time last Saturday evening.
You can change that in the camera settings. Default is at 50, I put mine to 65. It feels a little high, but I havenāt bothered to tweak it further. I have 65 set for all planes.
3 Likes
thanks. I sorted out my issue.
My joystick also has the rudder axis assigned to twist action. Deleting it and keeping just my rudder pedal assigned to rudder axis active solved the problem.
1 Like
Does anyone know how to change the altimeter baro from Qnh to InHg in the classic model?
Just to confirm, I tried the cessna 172 basic once again last night from cold and dark on the apron, and indeed no electrical power. Canāt start the engine
4 Likes
Yes, I saw the same, the fuel gauge moves now, regardless of electrical power, but the engine still wonāt attempt to start.
1 Like
I confirm that
I hope most G1000 problems are related to the same electrical problem and soon we solved, including G1000 inability to autotune NAV to ILS frequency on approach
How many levels of flap should there be in the 172? UP, 10, 20, FULL.
As I was finding I could move the lever to about 5 or so positions the other day, my lever was going to a position between UP and 10.
IRL years ago, the flap lever is continuous, albeit with a notch. In practice, flaps 10 downwind, flaps 20 turning base, and full flaps on final. Or something like that, as the situation dictates.
3 Likes
Historically, the 172 did have a max of 40 degrees of flaps (though I recall correctly, the full 40 would cause some handling issues).
It was around the M/N revision when Cessna swapped the toggle for an indexed flap configuration (flying C-GDDK back in July 2022 around CYHU via the āpilot for a dayā, the CFI from the Saint Hubert Flying College noted ~3 seconds per index of flaps of holding the toggle)
The M model config (though it does seem odd in this file photo, how the altitude indicator was not replaced in tandem with the Directional gryo, which could have resulted in a vacuum system deletion. For ref, the Directional gryo has been replaced with a G5)
Compared to the R/S models
Edit; Apparently the 172M did have 40 degrees of flaps available (not sure when the 40 was phased out to max 30, Cessna 172M 40 degree flaps | Pilots of America)
1 Like