Just looked at my own version numbers.
Seems I started with V1.25 then moved to V1.26 for FS2004 only.
There are later V1.30, V1.31, and V1.32 files for dual FS2004/FSX compatibility but I've not used these
Just a couple of additional comments in relation to some of Walters earlier observations .... primarily in regard to "altitude loss/gain during banked manoeuvers ....
That shouldn't happen .... of course .... BUT .... FS being what "FS" is sometimes these sorts of issues can arise and become "extremely difficult" to resolve with perfection
AP's, in the RW, usually restrict bank angle to around 15*, but in FS, setting MAX BANK = 15 .... whilst this reduces bank angle and can also have the positive effect of limiting tendency for "some simulations" to rise and fall too much during AP controlled banked manoeuvers (momentarily loosing a wee bit of altitude during any turn, then momentarily gaining a wee bit of altitude again when rolling out of any turn, before eventually settling into the commanded AP controlled level flight after completing any turn) .... restricting the bank angle as such, in FS, also results in the arc for any AP controlled turn being increased accordingly too, and which can then present minor issues in regard to efficiency of the like of both VOR/LOC and ILS/GS intercepts.
For this reason I generally set the MAX BANK angle to "20*".
Any value greater than the above setting, whilst having the effect of reducing turning arc, can also potentially increase tendency for momentary altitude loss and gain during AP controlled turns (due to the increased bank angle) .... prior to reacquiring commanded AP controlled level flight.
Loosing altitude during banked manouvers and with flaps extended though can be more symptomatic of either of the following ....
- Too much flap extended prior to any bank manoeuver.
- The bank manoeuver being flown with excessive airspeed and flap deployment.
- The FLAP data (and/or other lift related scalers) within the FDE possibly being edited with too greater lift values.
.... either of which can result in quite dramatic altitude loss and gain observations during AP controlled bank manoeuvers .... if not promptly checked/controlled.
With some simulations the extent of such altitude loss and gain during AP controlled bank manoeuvers can be greatly minimized ... by
"gently" tapping keyboard command TRIM UP during the fall, and TRIM DOWN during the rise (without actually disengaging the AP) .... and as many times as may be necessary in order to try'n maintain relatively level flight (there's an art to this though that's dependent on one timing the tapping of either trim response in order to successfully control these oscillations) .... although this action may not work in regard to every simulation considering other variables that might be compiled into a particular FDE.
Another thing too ....
I generally don't set more than the LE slats (or 1 increment of flaps in the case of slatless aircraft types) during the downwind legue of any FS approach to landing (and the same also in regard to the base legue too), but, "only if necessary" .... normally to avoid the AI indicated nose/pitch attitude exceeding +2* during airspeed reduction. This can also aid reducing severity of any rise/fall oscillations during AP controlled banked manoeuvers too .... "with some simulations only" though .... and provided these manoeuvers are also flown at sensible airspeed.
In a lot of cases the result is actually dependent upon one's applied "flying technique/s" .... in as much as its also dictated by FDE values too.
This's just a little of what both Mike, and I, have learned over the years and try to apply to HJG simulations .... both within our FDE editing and also in regard to our recommend basic flying guides too.
It must be remembered too that the way simulations fly in FS isn't necessarily the way aircraft actually fly (or should be flown) in the RW. In FS compromises are necessary in order to be able to get any seemingly realistic result, but, true fidelity is impractical due to the host program/FS not being composed of all of the necessary parameters that dictate the physics of flight .... and that's about as "Real As It Gets" or can be made at least.
It's all "a whole lot more complex" than just mere suggestion and desire Alex
Mark C
AKL/NZ