|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Nov 14, 2009 18:33:49 GMT
Quite by accident recently we discovered an issue we never knew we had .... and one which affected only those B707/720 and DC8 panels of ours which are equipped with either call-outs and/or similar such GPWS warning lamp advisories. Up until about 1 year ago .... as I recall .... a few people (very few of you indeed though) had reported "TOO LOW FLAPS" .... and .... "TOO LOW GEAR" .... nuisence callouts during T/O. We, at the time, thought this issue might have been the result of another FS installation possibly interacting with our own panels .... and we couldn't make any sense of it .... until just recently. It seems that these "TOO LOW FLAPS" .... and .... "TOO LOW GEAR" .... callouts during T/O were only occurring at high-altitude airports, but, not at all when operating from low altitude airports. Just how high an airport one needed to operate from in order to experience these nuisence callouts is still unknown, but, "altitude" does seem to be the common denominator in respect of this particular issue .... and .... what was causing these nuisance call-outs/GPWS advisories. I only discovered this recently and during the course of my own testing of a new series of aircraft panels which we are currently readying for release here. The "GOOD NEWS" is that we do now have a "FIX" for this issue  .... thanks to George CARTY  For this reason we will soon be uploading new "GAUGES/CORE FILES" packages for our B707/720 and DC8 panels and which should resolve this particular issue. I want to extend a special thanks George CARTY .... for his kind co-operation and efforts on our behalf in order to try and achieve perfection .... "THANKS" George .... much appreciated indeed !  Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Nov 14, 2009 19:03:16 GMT
The problem is that GPWS Mode 4 (which is responsible for "TOO LOW FLAPS", "TOO LOW GEAR" and "TOO LOW TERRAIN") is armed by climbing above 700 ft AGL, but is only disarmed by selecting gear down and landing flaps.
Starting a flight in FS9 at a high altitude airport must somehow send an erroneous radio altitude above 700 ft to the gauge code (perhaps within FS's internals the aircraft altitude is updated first, based on the airport data, while the ground altitude is updated later). This erroneously arms Mode 4 while still on the ground.
My gauge fix will disarm Mode 4 if the gear is down and either landing flap is selected or the aircraft is on the ground.
Oh, and by the way, the new DC-8 core files package will include an option to display fuel quantities in kilograms, if the International preferences are not set to "US System".
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Nov 15, 2009 19:53:37 GMT
And .... a similar CV880/CV990 panels GAUGES/CORE FILES package will also be released soon too .... featuring the same "METRIC/KG" fuel flow edit.
I need to stress .... and this will be reminded at the time of its release .... that only those whom fly with the "METRIC/KG" preference activate within FS stand to benefit from these edits.
Those whom fly .... as most folk already do and should .... with the "US SYSTEM" prefernce selected within FS don't need to concern themselves with these particular details, but, are recommended to replace their panel GAUGES/CORE FILES packages for these aircraft in order to benefit from the GPWS fix George has provided.
Once again all of these details will be remnded at release time !
Mark C
AKL/NZ
|
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Dec 26, 2009 14:17:04 GMT
I need to stress .... and this will be reminded at the time of its release .... that only those whom fly with the "METRIC/KG" preference activate within FS stand to benefit from these edits. Those whom fly .... as most folk already do and should .... with the "US SYSTEM" prefernce selected within FS don't need to concern themselves with these particular details, but, are recommended to replace their panel GAUGES/CORE FILES packages for these aircraft in order to benefit from the GPWS fix George has provided. Once again all of these details will be remnded at release time ! Mark C AKL/NZ Surely the most accurate way would be to use "US system" when flying for an American or British airline (or possibly from any English-speaking country, given the age of these birds), while using "Metric - altimeter feet" for airlines from the rest of the world. By the way, the "Tin Mouse" 737 series has fuel units set not by the user's International preferences, but within the aircraft.cfg file (I think the full name of the aircraft livery has "Kgs" in it if the fuel gauges are to display in kilograms). I didn't adopt this approach with my panels as it would require vast numbers of liveries to be modified and re-uploaded! George |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 26, 2009 19:41:10 GMT
Firstly .... I only reported "precisely" what you told me several weeks ago .... Whichever system folk choose to enable and fly with is entirely up to them .... of course ! Don't think so George !  My understanding is that the majority, if not all, of the aircraft we're talking about here (B707/720, CV880, CV990, DC8 only) were equipped with instrumentation which functioned according to imperial units of measurement only .... therefore suggesting it's more accurate to enable the "US SYSTEM" option .... regardless .... if folk want to be "Technically Accurate". I regard the "METRIC SYSTEM" as nothing more than an alternative option .... and one perhaps best employed with these aircraft by those whom are accustomed to thinking in terms of metric rather than imperial values. That's how I, personally, interpret things ! I doubt many folk, if any, would be inclined toward resetting these options for sake of flying an aircraft from specific geographic localities  Most folk make decisions based on their personal preferences, then enable their desired FS options accordingly .... and then just leave things at that. I don't know what TIN MOUSE may have done in respect of their B737 panel/s .... I'm not familiar with their product Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by bluestar on Dec 27, 2009 0:48:36 GMT
George and Mark,
Hopefully I'm not going off on a tangent. Most altimeters have a scale that reads pressure in inches and meters. When flying in countries (Asia) where the standard is meters then the meters side is used and the opposite for places that use inches (US). The pressure maybe QNE, QNH or QFE (Another story). Russia and China use Meters for altitude clearances as opposed to feet just about everywhere else. For flying in Russia/China I use a simple chart that would convert the altitude issued in meters to feet on my altimeter. An example would be if I were assigned a flight level of 11,100 meters I would look at my chart under 11,100 and find 33,100 feet and that would be the altitude I would fly. My pressure would be set to 1013 (QNE).
Bill
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 27, 2009 3:05:57 GMT
Not at all Bill .... I got a lot out of that ! Although the main thrust of my earlier reply was really in relation to F/F (imperial measurements in particular) .... and as a result .... I think I can now understand what George was probably intending to try and communicate ;D Thanks Bill ! Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Dec 27, 2009 17:15:03 GMT
Don't think so George ! My understanding is that the majority, if not all, of the aircraft we're talking about here (B707/720, CV880, CV990, DC8 only) were equipped with instrumentation which functioned according to imperial units of measurement only .... therefore suggesting it's more accurate to enable the "US SYSTEM" option .... regardless .... if folk want to be "Technically Accurate". I regard the "METRIC SYSTEM" as nothing more than an alternative option .... and one perhaps best employed with these aircraft by those whom are accustomed to thinking in terms of metric rather than imperial values. That's how I, personally, interpret things ! This Lufthansa B707-420 panel has F/F gauges reading up to "7" (which can only reasonably be 7,000 kg/hr).  |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 27, 2009 20:29:51 GMT
Likely because metric units of measurement are indeed the German standard .... and have been for a very long time past. I perhaps need to clarify here .... I've by no means denied such exceptions existed among these aircraft .... some being configured with metric instrumentation .... F/F gauges in particular in this case. What I said was .... the majority, if not all.... implying that such exceptions were less common (as I understand) whilst also acknowledging that I wasn't entirely certain. The only details I really insisted upon were .... It's end user choice regarding whether or not either the US SYSTEM or METRIC options are enabled within FS. And .... that I "assume" most folk would likely select the preference they, personally, are "most familiar" with .... regardless (of realworld accuracy and protocols/conventions etc) .... and rather than seeking total authenticity in relation to specific aircraft/operators and regional standards .... again with exceptions of course ;D That's all I endeavored to communicate .... however possibly vaguely worded ;D I expect most younger folk, along with those living in places where METRIC values have been the standard long before they were ever adopted elsewhere, would indeed enable the METRIC option "by preference" As for me, myself, and I .... My own "preference" is to enable the US SYSTEM option .... "regardless" .... simply because those are the values I, personally, best understand and relate to Mark C AKL/NZ |
|
.... thanks to George CARTY 
