Delta558

That would need the entire control and movement of the flaps and slats to be built in code. Currently, the flaps and slats are controlled by the default [Flaps] section of the FDE. With that, flaps and slats cannot be moved seperately unless you assign them consecutive movements: for example, you would be able to have the slats extend followed by the flaps but it would have to be two seperate selections of flap in the sim. With the correct selection (i.e. one selection of 'Flap Down'), they will always move together. Limitation of the sim, unfortunately.

I think you're saving using FSUIPC's Autosave function? The files the guys want are the base sim saved files, there are three for each save I think - unfortunately I cannot remember which ones they are.

That's quite a sweeping statement (and incorrect), but where 1101 is used it is likely for the aircraft to be backwards-compatible with earlier versions of P3D and even FSX. That is not the case with this aircraft, it is P3Dv4 ONLY, so there was no need to use that table as per the SDK.

Obsolete in P3Dv4 - check towards the end of the airfile, tables 1539 to 1544. If that works for you, great. For general info, I developed using max sensitivity / min null zones on all controller axes and realistic coefficients. I don't see the sudden pitching, but also I use a Thrustmaster Warthog with extension tube on the stick. Thank you.

The flap speeds is a 'known issue' - it's a problem with FS, you only get to specify one time for the entire range and the sim divides it up accordingly.

Wait and see how SP1 helps - the drag and low-end thrust have been heavily adjusted so you may find that, if not perfect on the steeper approach into London City, at least you may have a bit more throttle over the threshold to allow a better flare. And to pre-empt the following question, it will not be a long wait as the adjustments have all been made, new files are being compiled and whilst I have no idea how long that side of it takes, it's now 'imminent'. Paul.

As I said, not specifically aimed at you @Matty260191 simply a more general comment about people's expectations against the reality of the situation. So far this year, 3 family funerals and involved in a major incident in work only this week - it kind of puts things in perspective.

is the kind of comment that really pisses people off, after they have been spending their own time ('family time' after they finish their day job) sorting things out to make it work for you. Believe me, this is not a job that pays well - roughly £2 per hour, I'd say, and that does not include after sales support and extra work on SPs etc. It is actually done primarily as a hobby and to (hopefully) enable people to get some enjoyment from the sim. This is not a 'Level D' sim, but I think it has evolved into a very good simulation of the aircraft (at least, the rated pilots on the test team seem to think so!) @Matty260191 I apologise in advance if this seems like a rant towards you - it's aimed more generally, you just hit the 'trigger sentence'. I think there are a lot of people that expect perfection from an addon which costs a little more than the base sim, and which doesn't cost much more in real terms than the addons we were buying back in the days of FS9. Think of the functionality levels back then: basic VC (a black shape, couple of instruments if you were lucky), no real systems depth and I was certainly buying addon aircraft in the region of £30 just because (Shackleton, Vulcan etc) they were aircraft I wanted to fly in the virtual world. I didn't care that the only way to start the engines was Ctrl+E, I actually enjoyed my time in the sim. Back to today, the SP is probably out in the next few days. I hope it's good enough. I really do. I also hope that people will be a little more realistic with their expectations and look at this addon with fresh eyes. It really is pretty good in term of modelling and systems depth and if you want something equivalent to airliner-standard simulation you really should shell out a few tens-of-thousands of pounds on a professional cockpit and systems simulation rather than sticking with a 'cheap' home PC simulator. I know that's what I'll be doing when I win the lottery next week. Paul.

Quick search for 'Fuel' gives this : Sorry, thought it was actually showing in the 'update log', it has been corrected in the sim.

Fuel - check the 'known issues' thread and see SP1 which is shortly to be released.

Thrust tables have been adjusted, as has overall drag, flap drag, gear drag, induced drag. It's been a lot of work, in fact the 'final issue' that needed fixing was that, with all the drag adjustments, one of the testers pointed out that we weren't hitting the cruise mach numbers so more thrust had to be introduced at higher mach numbers / higher N1 (thus keeping the already-adjusted parts of the tables at lower N1 to allow for the descent profiles).

It shouldn't be long, but please bear in mind that some of the team working on this are doing it in our spare time around real-world jobs and families, plus the testers that are actually flying these things for real are often away from their PCs by the very nature of their job! It all adds to the timeframe, but I think SP1 should be released early this coming week. Paul.

Because you probably haven't any other add-on aircraft which have been developed with realistic coefficients - most aircraft still are developed with Microsoft's original massively over-damped settings. Go into your P3D.cfg file and find the line "TurbulenceScale=1.000000" in the weather section. Change it to "TurbulenceScale=0.15" and see how you get on, that's roughly the correct adjustment to default weather settings and while you may find the usual overdamped aircraft continue to run on rails, aircraft which have realistic figures behave a lot better (this is NOT the only one, there are aircraft by other developers which are developed in a similar manner. Unfortunately, few of them are airliners at the moment so you may not have come across them if this is your primary style of flying).

Check the 'Known Issues' post - FDE being worked on. This comes under FDE, along with your other post on the viewpoints. It really is much easier to just have the original post and not complicate it with further replies by us or by you (unless they bring new information). There's a lot of discussion and note taking gone on behind the scenes and the input from the likes of yourself is really appreciated, but hunting through to make sure every post is replied to is neither high on the list of priorities nor a sensible use of my limited time!

I would think that, along with many other parts of the aircraft, they have been left out of the cabin view for better frame rate purposes - if you move the view point on your own, there will be many parts of the aircraft that can't be seen. It's always going to be a trade-off between performance and amount of aircraft that can realistically be built for the intternal views. You have moved the view, there is no 'fix' for this as things stand. Cheers, Paul.