Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

I have fixed another error.

TNCM Sint Marteens files where compatible only with FSX stock airport but not with the Fly Tampa Scenery (runway 09-27 becomes 10-28 in Fly tampa scenery).

So , I have uploaded updated files in two versions : one for FSX stock airport, and one for Fly Tampa Scenery;

If you have Fly Tampa scenery, download the right version and rename the folder in "TNCM";

Francois

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

I'm trying to code the approaches for SKBO (Eldorado Intl, Bogotá, Colombia). Here are the charts I'm using as a reference. http://www.aerocivil.gov.co/AIS/AIP/AIP ... 20SKBO.pdf.

Runway 31 L/R require either a VOR app or a RNAV APP. The VOR app (VOR-C) has an instrument part (fly 12 NM from BOG VOR on the 123° radial) and a visual part. Is it correct to code only the instrument part? The chart states that the pilot is allowed to fly whatever path he or she wants after the instrument part is over.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi A320pilot,

if you talk about this approach :

Image

You are right; you code your approach from the BOGOTA VOR, then you crate a user waypoint for the MAPT waypoint (if there is no existing waypoint in FSX) and you finish by the the runway threshold.

The MAPT is the Missing Approach waypoint, and its altitude is the minimum under you cannot go without disconnect the AP. The runway threshold will have the dsame altitude, but the MAPT must be write in the file in feet above Sae level, here 12200 ft, and the runway threshold altitude must be write in the file above the airport elevation : here 1840 feet.

So to summurize, if the BOGOTA vor is an IAF (the last waypoint of one your STAR, you appraoch data of your BOG.csv file will have 3 waypoints :

1 : the MAPT, minimum alt 12200, speed 185 (probably a user waypoint to create with PLAN-G to get coordinates
2 : ROMEO ;that is for me the FAF, so speed = 0 and altitude = 12200
3 : the runway 31 Theshold : type R, with altitude = 1840 ft

And you write in your text file, about this approach, that the AP must be disconnected passing the MAPT for a visual hand final approach and the p ilot must have the runway in visual at this moment.

I hope that I have undestand what you want.

VOR approach have always a hand final approach, because, these approaches are rarely in the runway AXIS. VOR give a reference to find the begining of the approach, but you must always finish by hand.

RNAV approaches, in the most cases, give the trajectory until the RWY threshold, with just a higher MAPT altitude than an ILS or LOC approach, execpt RNAV RNP approaches, which give a a very precise approach, even with the altitude

Francois

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

fdd_fr wrote:Hi A320pilot,

if you talk about this approach :

(...)

1 : the MAPT, minimum alt 12200 [sic] [it's 10200'], speed 185 (probably a user waypoint to create with PLAN-G to get coordinates
2 : ROMEO ;that is for me the FAF, so speed = 0 and altitude = 12200
3 : the runway 31 Theshold : type R, with altitude = 1840 ft

And you write in your text file, about this approach, that the AP must be disconnected passing the MAPT for a visual hand final approach and the pilot must have the runway in visual at this moment.

I hope that I have undestand what you want.

Francois
Yes, you have understood what I want. At the MAPt, I set the speed at 170 kts, which is below the 185-kts maximum speed. This value might be changed depeding on how the aircraft performs after a test.

I think you are slightly confused. ROMEO is not the FAF. It is part of the missed approach path. If the runway is not visible by the MAPt, you must fly straight to ROMEO, then to SOACHA (SOA VOR) and then to AMBALEMA (ABL VOR).

ROMEO can be used as a reference when doing the visual turn to land at 31R, as it is located along the extended runway centerline, but it is not mandatory to overfly it.

I've coded three waypoints: the BOGOTA VOR, the MAPt and the runway threshold.

---

Does it make a difference to code a waypoint in the .xml file as NAMED, UNNAMED or OFF_ROUTE?

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

You are right about ROMEO. I had look at this chart too quickly.

About speed, you can always select a speed minus than the speed write on the charts. Chart speed are always a maximum.

About waypoint type in the xml file, you can use "NAMED", "UNNAMED" , "OFF_ROUTE", "IAF" or "FAF". (and VOR for a VOR or NDB for a NDB)

more information here : https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/librar ... x#Waypoint

Never add airways information, because airways have changed, and this was the problem with the Graham Mitchell AIRAC; I think that he added airways informations and when we used his AIRAC? the FSX flight planner created crazy routes.


Cool, there will be 4 airports in south america now ! I have completed SPIM - Lima at 50%. And I work also on PHNL - Honolulu.

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Working on SKBO and SKPE. The initial release of SKBO for the FD-FMC will only have the STARs and instrument approaches. A later version will have the SIDs.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

TheA320Pilot, thanks for your work !

I sent you a mail. In SKCL approaches, you forgot do let the number of approaches in each first line of each approaches files.

And I thonk that you reverse the STAR directioon information. Think that about a STAR, the direction must be the direction of the first segment of the STAR, by tiniking "I come from .....".

I did a test flight on SKCL, and I thionk that STAR direction are reversed. Can you check ?

Thanks

Francois

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

I will post this afternoon (UTC time :D ), :

- SPIM - Lima Peru
- ETNO - SANDEFJORD - TORP - NORWAY
- LFTW - Garons Nimes - France
- LFFR - Rennes - France

and if I will finish,
- PHNL - Honolulu Hawaï USA.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

I am just finishing my flight at SKCL. The FSX default G/S of the runway 01 seams to be totally wrong. My aircraft touched the runway at the end !

If someone can do a test, to know if there is a problem in my FSX, or if this is the FSX AFCAD that have a problem ?

In this case, I will check if it exists a freeware scenry for SKCL, or I will edit hte AFCAD to fix the RWY 01 Glide Slope and publish a fixed AFCAD.

Thanks

François

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

SKCL: ILS RWY01 G/S visualization in FSX default

Wulf

Image

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

About SKCL, I'm currently using a payware scenery by the name of Colombia Virtual Xtreme Edition 2011 from Virtualcol. With it, the planes perfectly capture the glideslope and if I let the A320 perform an autoland (although it is a CAT I ILS), it touches down a little after the big white touchdown marks on the runway. I'll test with the default SKCL and see how it works. I'll try to make an AFCAD (any ideas?) with the corrected glideslope and publish it soon.

How do the VOR and RNAV approaches work in SKCL?

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

According to the manual, the direction of the STAR in the index sheet must be the direction of the first STAR segment.
Image

For the ISOPA1A arrival into SKCL, for example, the first segment has a magnetic orientation of 030°.
Image

So, I set the direction to NNE, even though the aircraft is comming from the SSW. That's why my data has the STAR direction reversed.

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

wulfbindewald wrote:SKCL: ILS RWY01 G/S visualization in FSX default

Wulf

Image
How did you make those red squares appear in FSX? Or did you made them yourself?

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

The320Pilot wrote:According to the manual, the direction of the STAR in the index sheet must be the direction of the first STAR segment.
Image

For the ISOPA1A arrival into SKCL, for example, the first segment has a magnetic orientation of 030°.
Image

So, I set the direction to NNE, even though the aircraft is comming from the SSW. That's why my data has the STAR direction reversed.

I agree that my manual is not clear about this point. I will change this explanation tomorrow and I will update the toolkit with the complete waypoint database of all the world, at the date of today, that allow to win many time to add missing waypoint when you create your ICAO.xml file.
I will add also more explanations about the STAR/Approaches speed and the FAF speed, according the different cases.


Thank you to report me this mistake.

The right explanation dor a STAR is : The direction is where you come from. So, for ISOPA exemple, the direction must be SSW.

Sorry for the mistake.



Wulf, I am like TheA320Pilot : How you display these rectangle ?

But, it is clear that there is a problem with the G/S of SKCL. I will modify it with ADE and I will post an update of the AFCAD



I have updated the website. I no wrote a new pages to announce, but you can download the new AIRAC (02282015) and the following Airports :

- ENTO - Sandfjord Torp - NORWAY realized by Guillaume Massé
- LFRN - Rennes Bretagne - FRANCE realized by Jean-pierre Varnier
- LFTW - Nimes Garons - FRANCE realized by Jean-pierre Varnier
- SPIM - Lima Jorge Chavez Intl - PERU



The new AIRAC include waypoints for PHNL Honolulu, but i havn't completed the tests, so I will post the airport tomorrow, I think; But AIRAC is ready for PHNL.

Francois

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

The320Pilot wrote: How did you make those red squares appear in FSX? Or did you made them yourself?
The 3D visualization tool of NAV1 or NAV2 vectors is embedded in the FSX default menu.

--> 3D Display VOR/ILS radiants in FSX on any airport:
Open a free flight, go to "aircraft" in the menu on top of the screen and click the button for "show flight track" and you´ll find the spec. menu. I do not know the correct engl. expression as I have the german FSX version.

It would be helpfull to have a 3D tool for development and validation from SID-STAR-APPROACH tracks and legs too. Unfortunately I don´t know of any 3D visualization tool.

Wulf

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Ok, the SKCL data has been checked. The G/S for the ILS 01 must be corrected, though.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

I have uploaded a updated version of SKCL, realized by TheA320Pilot, which fix the STAR direction . Many thanks Carlos !

I will try to edit the G/S of the original FSX SKCL AFCAD and I come back to you.

Francois

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

New and Important :

For people, who want join our communauty and create airports files, I have uploaded on my website, the world database of all waypoints used by airlines, updated at the end of 2014, realized by hervé Sors; this database is a list of XML files, classified by the 2 ICAO regional code, and you can found inside, all the missing waypoint of FSX. You have just to do a copy and paste of each missing waypoint block in your ICAO.xml file.

Go to the "Airport creation tools" menu --> English version : Airport creation toolskit and you will find the link to download this database.


The zip file is protected by a password. Send me an email to get the password. The reason is that Hervé, don't want that his huge work is not used by anybody. He givedme the permission for all members who want create airports files.

You can find my email adress in the user airport creation manual.

Francois

Prosdocimo
Posts: 277
Joined: 10 Oct 2014, 12:05

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Prosdocimo »

Hi! Just a question, how is your state of art on FMC adaptation in A330? Thanks!
I'd like suggest, in order to differentiate the two A320/A330 cockpits, you could change textures colours

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Are there any proposals on improving the A320 VC to match it to the new Airbus cockpit? The Airbus A320 now comes with a new cockpit layout (like the one of the Aerosoft A320), while the default FSX A321 VC has the old layout. (Oh, and add the two AP buttons and change the V/S display; it should look like 15oo instead of 1500.)

It would definitely improve the quality of the FD-FMC A320. :)

Old layout.
Image
Image


New layout.
Image
Image
Image

Belerophon
Posts: 2
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 02:00

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Belerophon »

After two hours of search I found a forum where Francois Doré is posting. Yippie! :-)

Could you please tell me where the Airbus 319 and 320 v3 models on Avsim have gone?

There are a lot of links around which point to Avsim, but the only file I was able to find was the Airbus 318 (which is absolutely amazing).

Thanks a lot, Francois, for your hard work.

:-)

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Excuse me for my delayed response. My week has been overbooked and PHNL - Honolulu gived to me many works because airport is complex (many procedures) and I have added to the FMC the possibility to manage LDA appraoches (Localizer deviated approch).
I am doing a final test to see if all works fine, with this new procedure.

PHNL has a LDA approach on the RWY 26L and the Localizer is present in the FSX stock aiport. So I can do a test. If it works, I will send a email to ray Smith to ask him if he can add the two missing deviated localizer in his RJTT - tokyo Scenery.

Prosdocimo wrote:Hi! Just a question, how is your state of art on FMC adaptation in A330? Thanks!
I'd like suggest, in order to differentiate the two A320/A330 cockpits, you could change textures colours
I have began to work on the adaptation of the FMC on the A330 model. But my priority is ti finalize the A320 to publish it on AVSIM. I have just added to day the LDA procedure in the FMC and I wait know the english Translation of the user manual from Sean Kneppers.

Be patient. When its job will be completed, I will work on the A330.I did some flights but many impovment must be do, because I must find new mathematical formulas for the pitch controls of the A330 (aircraft is very heavier than the A320, and I must change many calculations).

And I wait that the definitive PA A330 VC will be ready. So, today, A330 is not competed.

Be patient.

The320Pilot wrote:Are there any proposals on improving the A320 VC to match it to the new Airbus cockpit? The Airbus A320 now comes with a new cockpit layout (like the one of the Aerosoft A320), while the default FSX A321 VC has the old layout. (Oh, and add the two AP buttons and change the V/S display; it should look like 15oo instead of 1500.)

It would definitely improve the quality of the FD-FMC A320. :)

Old layout.
Image
Image


New layout.
Image
Image
Image

Hi carlos,

No problem for the digit of the V/S button; I will see it. I can't add buttons on the VC. Buttons are hard coded in the VC mdl file, and that requires to have the source file; And I don't know how to use Gmax or other 3D software. You cannot add button, swich or anything in an existing VC.
Sorry.
It is possible only in the 2D panel.



Belerophon wrote:After two hours of search I found a forum where Francois Doré is posting. Yippie! :-)

Could you please tell me where the Airbus 319 and 320 v3 models on Avsim have gone?

There are a lot of links around which point to Avsim, but the only file I was able to find was the Airbus 318 (which is absolutely amazing).

Thanks a lot, Francois, for your hard work.

:-)
hi Belopheron,

I have removed the A319,A320 and A321 V3 from AVSIM library, because engines sounds of the IAE version was under copyright. I did an error, thinking that these sounds where freeware, but not. This is the reason why you can't find these aircraft.

So, if you want, I can prepare and upload on my website, a nex package of hte V3 version, with the same sounds packages for CFM and IAE (sounds packs freeware).

But I think that is better that you wait some days, because the final edition of the A320 FD-FMC will be ready coming soon, and this new version is much more advanced compared to V3 ! You will have a panel very close to a real Airbus, a FMC very easy to use, and a real vertical navigation feature !

Do you want to wait one or two weeks ? and you will have a A320 100x better than the old V3 !!

for everybody :
I do my last test on the LDA approach of PHNL and I will post in few hours, news airports realized by the freenav team, with the new AIRAC.


@ Wulf
I am overful of work; I know that you want new approaches on KPSP; If I send to you my EXCEL datasheet and the charts of the airport, do you want to try to add your approach ?

Because I finalize the panel, to be ready to upload on AVSIM the aircraft, when I will receive the english manual.

Francois

Belerophon
Posts: 2
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 02:00

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Belerophon »

hi Belopheron,

I have removed the A319,A320 and A321 V3 from AVSIM library, because engines sounds of the IAE version was under copyright. I did an error, thinking that these sounds where freeware, but not. This is the reason why you can't find these aircraft.

So, if you want, I can prepare and upload on my website, a nex package of hte V3 version, with the same sounds packages for CFM and IAE (sounds packs freeware).

But I think that is better that you wait some days, because the final edition of the A320 FD-FMC will be ready coming soon, and this new version is much more advanced compared to V3 ! You will have a panel very close to a real Airbus, a FMC very easy to use, and a real vertical navigation feature !

Do you want to wait one or two weeks ? and you will have a A320 100x better than the old V3 !!
Hi, Francois!

Yes, of course I will wait more than happily. Seeing what hard work you go through, to make this A320 FD-FMC happen makes me happy anyway and I am very much looking forward to the results. :oops:

But of course, AFTER the great day has come and we will fly with the arguably best freeware Airbus ever (I count the days), could you please reupload the 319 and 321 without the copyrighted sounds? This would be great and very much appreciated. But after, not before.

Thanks again for what you and your friends here do. :-)

Belerophon

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

fdd_fr wrote: @ Wulf
I am overful of work; I know that you want new approaches on KPSP; If I send to you my EXCEL datasheet and the charts of the airport, do you want to try to add your approach ?
Francois
Hi Francois, don´t worry. The current KPSP approaches are sufficient for now and can be optimized later on.
I think the A320 family completion to V...? should remain prioritized. By the way are there any add. features included in the panel beyond the current panel beta 0,80?

Wulf

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi wulf,

Yes, I added some features and fixed some bugs, since the panel 0.80. But I don't post a new beta, because I prefer now wait the english manual and publish the final edition

What's new from the 0.80 :
=======================
- SPEED white frame on the FMA, was displayed, in some case, even if A/THR was disconnected : bug fixed
- New Go-around code : in panel 0.80, when you engage go-around mode, V/S was a static value (2800 feet/mn) : Now, Go around is managed by the FMC with pitch control to keep 15° of path angle (same code that duriing Take-off). This features works only is you have loaded an approach.
- I have optimized the FMC XML code; less of "key events", better frame rate and less CPU use.
- I added a security, during take-off, to avoid exceeding 16° of pitch, when AP is engaged, even with gravity center too far back.
- Some minor improvement in the displaying of the data in the FMC pages (SID/STAR and Approaches pages)
- Now, FMC manages LDA appraoaches (Localizer Deviated approach): first test successfully completed, at PHNL, runway 26 (see picture below).


Image

You have just to disconnet the AP for turn. Great with the FPA mode.


FSX stock AFCAD of PHNL has the right Localizer. I will update Aspen/Co Sardy, which have a LDA approach .

And I hope that ray Smith will update his great AFCAD of RJTT, with the 2 missing Localizer .

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi,

Website updated : http://freenavdbgroup.com/?p=592

New Airports included :
- PHNL - Honolulu Hawaii USA
- LIPZ - Tessaro Marco polo Venezia - Italy realised by Georges.


Existing Airports updated (bugs fixed) :
- ENTO - Sanfjord Torp - Norway, by Guillaume Massé : STAR and approaches speed improvement
- SKCL - ALFONSO BONILLA ARAGÓN - CALI - Colombia, realized by Carlos Mrio Diaz, now provided with an updated AFCAD, to fix the error in the FSX stock airport, about the wrong glide slope path angle of the RWY 01
- LSGG - Genève Cointrin, Switzerland, realised by Jean-pierre Varnier, and corrected by Michel rapp , who fixed some bugs in the SPR approaches



François

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

Hi there,

enclosed a scenery pic from a SPZO Cuzco approach RWY28 for those simmers who prefer
challanging approach w/o ILS .... in reality for special authorized pilots only.
Several SIDs for RWY10 and STARs for RWY28 are available.

The Cuzco X scenery from AS is well made with a sloping runway.

Wulf

Image

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

wulfbindewald wrote:Hi there,

enclosed a scenery pic from a SPZO Cuzco approach RWY28 for those simmers who prefer
challanging approach w/o ILS .... in reality for special authorized pilots only.
Several SIDs for RWY10 and STARs for RWY28 are available.

The Cuzco X scenery from AS is well made with a sloping runway.

Wulf

Image

Hi Wulf,


I will realize SPZO and also La Paz. 2 challenging airports.

I have the Aerosoft scenry for Cuzco, and It bug on my computer. If I don't save the flight just before approaching airport, Runway is under ground. Have you the same problem ?

And as the runway as a slope, AI aircrafts cannot land or take off at Cuzco. AI traffic is cancelled in the airport area.

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Francois, would you mind changing the name of my country in your Freenav DB ICAO O-U page? It is not Columbia, it's Colombia. Thanks. ;)

Image

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

fdd_fr wrote:
Hi Wulf,
I will realize SPZO and also La Paz. 2 challenging airports.
I have the Aerosoft scenry for Cuzco, and It bug on my computer. If I don't save the flight just before approaching airport, Runway is under ground. Have you the same problem ?
Thanks in advance, Francois.
I have not any prob with the scenery...plug and play.
Pls. check your scenery lib. Do you use any spec. South America mesh-scenery or similiar allocated with higher priority in the lib?

Wulf

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

The320Pilot wrote:Francois, would you mind changing the name of my country in your Freenav DB ICAO O-U page? It is not Columbia, it's Colombia. Thanks. ;)

Image
Oh, I am sorry ! I correct immediately !!


wulfbindewald wrote:
fdd_fr wrote:
Hi Wulf,
I will realize SPZO and also La Paz. 2 challenging airports.
I have the Aerosoft scenry for Cuzco, and It bug on my computer. If I don't save the flight just before approaching airport, Runway is under ground. Have you the same problem ?
Thanks in advance, Francois.
I have not any prob with the scenery...plug and play.
Pls. check your scenery lib. Do you use any spec. South America mesh-scenery or similiar allocated with higher priority in the lib?

Wulf

I use FS Global 2010. I will test without it.

Thanks

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Carlos, your country has now the right name. I am so sorry

François

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

fdd_fr wrote:Carlos, your country has now the right name. I am so sorry

François
Thanks.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi,

Website update with 3 new airports and new AIRAC file :

- LFPO - Paris Orly - France - realized by Jean-Pierre Varnier
- SPZO - Cusco - Peru - realized by me
- YBCS - Cairns - Australia - realized by me.


Nota :
- Cuzco is for good pilots : Very high altitude airport (more than 10000 feet ! you must take-off in TOGA mode in the most cases) and visual approaches only
- YBCS : Be carefull ; Some approaches can be used only with dedicated STAR. read the Airport inforamtion file in the FMC. I added a little text in the FMC approach page, but in your actual beta panel version, the text is not totally displayed. I will be in final version; so read the information page in the AIRPORT information FMC page

Edit : Wulf, Can you tell me if Cusco files are ok with your aerosoft scenery ? thanks !


For those who realize airports, , in the "B" column of the approach ECXEL datasheet, You can add a little text in this case like this sample from YBCS :

RNAV-P (RNP) SUNNY 3P only means that this approach mmust be selected only if you used the SUNNY 3P STAR


That's works also wiith ILS or LOC approach, but think to respect the LOC synthax for the frequency ; Sample :

LOC-109.90 Y UPOLO 5 only

LOC frequency must always placed like this : "LOC-xxx.xx" , as the FMC can set the Radio NAV 1 frequency to the LOC frequency when you load the approach.


I am working on the FMC approach page, to get more space to write this new feature

New AIRAC : 03142015

François

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

fdd_fr wrote:
Edit : Wulf, Can you tell me if Cusco files are ok with your aerosoft scenery ? thanks !
François
Hi Francois,
Aerosoft SPZO Cuzco: Just made a spot check from one selected SID RWY10 and one STAR RWY28 Approach. The defined RWY28 approaches should all have an additional intermediate waypoint between MUMKY and KIMOR at URC to ensure the required min alt 17400ft, pls. see pic. Otherwise the A/C will descent after MUMKY to 14500ft acc. to KIMOR alt definition.

Another question is to offer STAR approaches to RWY10 although only RWY28 approaches are allowed (against RWY slope).

Wulf
Image

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi Wulf,

I will add a user waypoint at URC location with a 17400 ft constraint in the RWY 28 aprroach, because FSX GPS bugs when you use 2 times the same waypoint in a flight plan.

I use the actual AD-2 Peru charts :

Image

I added for each runway approach the possiblity to land on other runway, because in SPZO, the missing RWY x approach fix hold is always the IAF of the opposite runway.

And in real life, you can have a radar vector guidance, if weather change to choose another runway. In FSX, weather can change (according weather engine quality) and you have selected a STAR for a specific runway and when you arrive, you havn't the wind in the expected direction, this is a bad surprise.

So, when I see on charts, a possible links, I use it.

I know that is not the true true reality of the chart, but as the missing approach path offer this posiblitity, I think that in the real life, ATC use the same path to change at the last minute the landing runway.

May be I am wrong to write my files as this manner, but in these cases, I try to be an ATC and predict the expected tracks. I think that in the this case, my interpretation is not totally unreal.

So, in this case, I put always in first place in the approach file, the official approach (in URC approach file, RWY 28 appraoch is in first position because RWY 10 approach is not an official approach, I used the RWY 28 missing approach hold to start the RWY 10 approach)

My goal is to offer the best service, the closest the reality, because I know that FD-FMC user will not have the charts on the knees.

If you want follow, point per point the xharts, you cannot code the majority of the US approaches for example, because on US charts, you have always a "hole", between the end of the STAR and the begining of the approach.

In all case, I think that this way is a 3000% better than the FSX ATC bullshit .


Do you see what I mean ?

Prosdocimo
Posts: 277
Joined: 10 Oct 2014, 12:05

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Prosdocimo »

Great. You mentioned a topic that I was always in troubble. Which STAR should I choose during FMC planning, if I cannot know the local weather when I arrive? Could I change the STAR at the last moment upon I know the assigned runway from ATC?
Thanks

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi Prosdocimo,

You must load your STAR before to reach the TOD. This is mandatory.

You must load an approach, before to reach the last waypoint of the STAR.

ONce the descent is engaged, you wiil cannot load a STAR or an approach.

To know the airport arrival weather, that's depend of your weather engine. if you use the stock FSX weather engine, this is impossible, beacause it is very cheap and not realistic.
And even if you use the Airport ATIS of your destination airport during your flight, the FSX weather informations are false, because this is the weather of your actual position and your actual altitude not the airport destination (even if you are on the destination ATIS frequency). A big bug of FSX !

Personnaly, I use Active Sky 2012, and before to launch your flight, you load your flight plan in Active sky and it give you the weather (wind direction ) at your destination.
And with active SKy can give you your destination weather by set the radio Com on 122.02 Mhz (vocal report of the destination surface station).

This is the reason why I try to code, the closest the reality, the maximum Rwy approach per STAR, but this not always pôssible.

Other solution, load on ly a STAR, without load your approach; Think that you can add with the gauge, waypoint in the flight plan, and you can add with FD-FMC, waypoint after the end of the STAR and create your approach, without load.

If you have the ahets of the airport, you can create with the gauge all your flight plan manually.


Frncois

Prosdocimo
Posts: 277
Joined: 10 Oct 2014, 12:05

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Prosdocimo »

Thank you! I use FSrealWX, and you gave me an idea.. in FSrealWX I can read the local METAR bulletin for the arrival airport. In this way, I could know the local wind at the arrival airport hoping that it does not change during my travel. FSrealWX should "overwrite" the FSX bug about ATIS informations and thus I could plan the STAR approach early in FMC. Next time I will test all this.

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Salut, François!

You've told to me before that there was a problem with the ISOPA1A STAR on my SKCL files. Well, I tried it today on the FD-FMC A318 and it worked without any issues. The only thing missing are some speed constraints and that should be enough for this arrival.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Hi Carlos !

I think that the problem that I had with ISOPA1A STAR came from the wrong altitude of the SKCL stocck airport, that it was more than 800 feet under the real altitude.

This is the reson why we will do 2 version of the airport.

At wulf :
Here, is a sample of my interpretation of the STAR when I realize airport files. I am working on RCTP Tapei - Taiwan
IAF of Runway 23L/R is "AUGUR" and IAF of runway 05L/R is "JAMMY"

the first STAR chart is designed to land on runway 23L/R only :
Image

But another STAR CHART, allow to land on all runway, when you come form the same direction (north east). :
Image


So, I take the freedom to code all STAR of the first chart with the possibility to land on runway 05L/R, because, there is a existing path that join the 2 IAF. This is not an official action, but the link between the 2 IAF exist on another chart, so I think that in reality, ATC can accept these procedures

I think that my interpretation is not "unreal".

If someone think that I should not do this interpretation, tell me.

Francois

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

Hi Francois,

recently You reported an scenery elevation problem with Cuzco X from Aerosoft. If there is still a prob I recommend to uncheck all sceneries in the scenery library (with exception of ORBX FTX, because proven conflict free for South America). If this does not help it is helpfull to look for any file file in all FSX files with *SPZO* content. A wrongly prioritized scenery or a common payware AI traffic software is usually the culprit.

Wulf

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

fdd_fr wrote: No problem for the digit of the V/S button; I will see it. I can't add buttons on the VC. Buttons are hard coded in the VC mdl file, and that requires to have the source file; And I don't know how to use Gmax or other 3D software. You cannot add button, swich or anything in an existing VC.
Sorry.
Apart from the digits on the V/S display, is there any possobility to correct something else in the FD-FMC A32X cockpit? Wihile the default FSX A321 PFD, ND, & ECAM displays have a wrong blue tonality, black is not correct either. Could you please recheck these gauges on the A320 so that they have a more realistic background colour?

Thank you very much. I'm sure that when the FD-FMC A320 is finished, it will be the best freeware FSX aircraft. :D

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

In addition, I'm having a problem with the callouts. They all sound correctly, but they are not synchronised with the RA. I get the 10' callout when my RA is showing around 30'. Any ideas on what may be wrong? If you ask if I've reinstalled the Callouts-FD package, then, yes, I have.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

wulfbindewald wrote:Hi Francois,

recently You reported an scenery elevation problem with Cuzco X from Aerosoft. If there is still a prob I recommend to uncheck all sceneries in the scenery library (with exception of ORBX FTX, because proven conflict free for South America). If this does not help it is helpfull to look for any file file in all FSX files with *SPZO* content. A wrongly prioritized scenery or a common payware AI traffic software is usually the culprit.

Wulf
Hi Wulf,

I hadn't the time to install again the aerosoft scenery (because I had to do a new install of FSX 6 month ago) and all my free time is to work on the final bugs of the FMC and create new airports, to have a good airport database when the aircraft will be published.

But when aircraft will be on AVSIM, I will take a little time, a little hollydays to play with FSX and I will re-install again Cuzco and try if the problem still exists .

In my memory, the problem was when I arrived to Cuzco, the runway was under ground; But if I saved the fligts before arriving (50 nm bafore) and reload the flight, all was ok. A mysterious bug.

I will test when I will have a little time.


The320Pilot wrote: Apart from the digits on the V/S display, is there any possobility to correct something else in the FD-FMC A32X cockpit? Wihile the default FSX A321 PFD, ND, & ECAM displays have a wrong blue tonality, black is not correct either. Could you please recheck these gauges on the A320 so that they have a more realistic background colour?

Thank you very much. I'm sure that when the FD-FMC A320 is finished, it will be the best freeware FSX aircraft. :D

If you see the 4 first pictures in your previous cockpit, display background color is black. There is only the fifth picture that show displays with a blue background, but all the systems are turn off, may be the reason.

All the videos that I have seen on youtube, in real airbus cokpit, show a black background color for the display.

You can see on this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3TJMro_NzA


I used this video, with the AIRBUS FCOM to understand all the FMA messages and code them in the FMC gauge.
The320Pilot wrote:In addition, I'm having a problem with the callouts. They all sound correctly, but they are not synchronised with the RA. I get the 10' callout when my RA is showing around 30'. Any ideas on what may be wrong? If you ask if I've reinstalled the Callouts-FD package, then, yes, I have.
In first versions of the panel, Autoland and callout was based on the radar altitude. But with experience, I have discover that this solution was not the best, because, for people who use addon mesh, you have often a runway elevation like this :

Image

And in this case, autoland will crash the aircraft, because it cannot detect the final elevation of the runway threshold.

This is the reason why, since beta 0.70 if my memmory is good, I have totally re-write the autoland gauge, which is now based on the atmopheric pressure altimeter and the airport elevation data (this case on ly when there is a flight plan loaded, because without flight plan, I can't know the destination airport elevation).

So, now, autoland works only withthe atmospheric altimeter (Kohlsman). That's allow to have a perfect autoloand, with all mesh. So, this system has a disadvantage : You must set precisely your altimeter during landing. This is the reason why I added in the FMC memolist of the upper ECAM, a warning if QNH is wrong during approach (QNH text becomes red), and according your weather engine, atmospheric pressure may change during the approach and you may have to set several times the altimeter.

As the callout gauge works with the same data, if your altimeter is not precisely set, there will a bug.

I will do to change the 2 last digit of the VS window, but I must tell you that I am tired after near 3 years of work (and I think near of 2500 hours !!! ) on this panel, and I would like to publish it !

François

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Well, the times I've entered to a 32S (IATA code for the A320 Family) cockpit, I seen the displays with a blue background. But that was on the ground; I've never seen any cockpit on flight. I'll watch the video you suggest.

I re-downloaded the Callout-FD package and installed it again. I tested it yesterday in a flight from SKRG to SKBG and it worked properly. Something I've seen is that the QNH message on the ECAM stays yellow or red no matter how many times I press the B key to automatically adjust the aircraft's altimeter. That's really weird.

This must be the best freeware ever; you've put so much dedication to it. We appreciate that a lot. In fact, I'm currently flying mostly with the FD-FMC A320/A318 or with the CLS MD-80 (I'm a huge fan of both aircraft).

Best wishes.

fdd_fr
Posts: 1764
Joined: 03 Jan 2012, 16:02

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by fdd_fr »

Many thanks Carlos,

You will have you 2little digit on the VS window ;)

Prosdocimo
Posts: 277
Joined: 10 Oct 2014, 12:05

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by Prosdocimo »

Hi, I'd like change a little bit the eyepoint position in A320. To me it's too much advanced on the windshield and I cannot monitor displays and see outside the runway approaching. Maybe I could also change zoom factor.
In aircraft.cfg file the eyepoint is at 49.22074, -1.73061, 4.355627

Which of these parameters should I change to backwards my eyepoint?
Thanks!

wulfbindewald
Posts: 501
Joined: 20 Jan 2014, 21:27

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by wulfbindewald »

Prosdocimo wrote:Hi, I'd like change a little bit the eyepoint position in A320. To me it's too much advanced on the windshield and I cannot monitor displays and see outside the runway approaching. Maybe I could also change zoom factor.
In aircraft.cfg file the eyepoint is at 49.22074, -1.73061, 4.355627

Which of these parameters should I change to backwards my eyepoint?
Thanks!
Views eyepoint=49.22074, -1.73061, 4.355627 //Longitudinal, Lateral, Vertical (feet).
So You have to change the first paramater and reduce the eyepoint value to go backward.

Wulf

The320Pilot
Posts: 354
Joined: 29 Jul 2014, 22:47

Re: Project FMC simplified for Project Airbus

Post by The320Pilot »

Francois, I must be the most annoying FD-FMC A320 user, but this project is so good that I just want it to be as good and real as possible.

In addition to the V/S digits in the FCU, could you please check the V/S display in the PFD? In FSX, it looks like this...
Image

..., while in the real 32S it looks like this...
Image

Any chance to get that modeled? You don't have to if you don't want to; it's just a suggestion. ;)

Post Reply