This will really scare me in a real aircraft

Discussion Hub General Discussion
1

Have anyone else noticed this strange behavior?
As a IRL pilot, this will really scary me if occurs during my flight.

BATTERY switch is ON and ALTERNATOR switch is OFF.
AMMETER should show a slightly negative value, based on actual power draw from battery.
Actually in sim it shows positive value as the charge current is > power consumtion of all electric systems.

C150_ALT_OFF
C150_ALT_OFF2560×1440 788 KB

When both BATTERY and ALTERNATOR are ON, actually in sim AMMETER show strong negative value. That means that battery is not charged, there is probably no power from ALTERNATOR:

C150_ALT_ON
C150_ALT_ON2560×1440 798 KB

Seems like ALTERNATOR swich or some alternator logic is reversed.

Maybe this is caused by some more common bug on electrical systems.
A320 suffers also on some electrical systems failures / APU + ENGINE1 failures after the patch.
Also there are some issues with displays / screens suddenly switching off.
Maybe this is somehow connected?

I didn’t try other aircraft yet, but I’m going to do so.

7 Likes
2

Scary!

Have you made a zendesk post?

3

Not yet - after testing more ACFTs, I’ll do so.
This is obvious.

1 Like
4

Just tested C172 and the behavior is the same. When i turn on the alternator, AMMETE needle goes to negative values. When turning on some appliances, it moves to the + side. When increasing engine RPM, it moves to discharging (negative) side. In Cessnas it should be pretty opposite.

Not sure whether this has some real impact on battery charging / draining or is just reverse reading on the gauge.

Also the red light below ammeter should indicate if alternator is working or not.

It happened to me once in real C172 and I really needed to turn off all unnecessary devices (incl. transponder) to save battery for flaps. I was like 10 minutes from nearest airport. :wink:

Going to report this to ZenDesk.

2 Likes
5

Thanks OP.
Upvote. We need more reports like this.

1 Like
6

I already made a report in Zendesk.

7

It’s good to have more people report it so they can see it’s not isolated. :small_airplane: :smiley_cat:

8

Yes you are right :smiley: :+1:t2:

1 Like
9

It would scare me if Asobo developed software systems for real aircraft.

2 Likes
10

Reported to ZenDesk (for C152 & C172 steam gauges)

2 Likes
11

People do mistakes.
What about Boeing and their 737 MAX real bugs?
Asobo is not developing for them… :wink:

2 Likes
12

There’s a lot of oddness to electrical systems in MSFS. Kind of a carry-over from FSX. Seems to go deep into the way they are accessed.

13

Are you sure? Did Microsoft contract Asobo to develop MCAS for Boeing? I’m just asking questions… Perhaps that is what the wink is for. Scary stuff.

14

I really don’t think so. :smiley:
But Boeing had some real troubles with 737 MAX that did cost a lot of real souls.
Despite who they (Boeing) hired for that job…

1 Like
15

There are several things that behave vice versa to the real counterparts and to logic and physics. Drop the flaps in GA planes and watch the nose. Or the torque and ITT behaviour of turoprops. They made a good start but they have to fix a lot of basics. And as these basics have been done so fundamentally wrong I fear that the devs just don’t understand them. This would make a good fix/improvement unlikely to happen.

3 Likes