Le fil de discussion

Bienvenue sur le fil de discussion. Cette page contient dans l'ordre chronologique des articles sur la simulation de vol et les commentaires d'utilisateurs éventuellement déposés. Vous pouvez laisser un commentaire. Les commentaires sont modérés. Ils apparaitront dans l'ordre chronologique.

Welcome on the blog page. Articles and comments will appear in the chronological order.

Ajouter un commentaire

Add a comment

Transatvia.com Fil de discussion

Laisser un commentaire

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Bonjour et bienvenue sur le fil de discussion. Vous pouvez laisser un commentaire ou une suggestion. Je vous en remercie par avance. Les commentaires sont modérés. Ils apparaitront dans l'ordre chronologique. Je me sers également de cette page pour ajouter des articles.

Hello and welcome on the discussion/comments/blog page (all mixed in the timeline).

Image

Principaux articles / main topics :

  1. Héraklion et le parking aviation - How to park in Heraklion airport ?
  2. Nouvelle carte pour Heraklion - New LGIR chart
  3. Ultimate 146 Collection Test Bed (Banc d'essai)
  4. Météo du pourtour de l'Europe
  5. Presenting YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !
  6. The idea behind YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !
  7. Version 1.7 of YART is out !
  8. YART 2.0
  9. A word on Embraer E-Jets v.2 Embraer 175 and 195
  10. Comparison between the Avro RJ 85 and the Embraer 175
  11. Fuel calculator for the Embraer 175
  12. The simulated Embraer 175, RF-legs and RNP AR procedures
  13. A comment on old school navigation and modern airliners
  14. 737 Service and Flight Interphones
  15. A new comment on the Ultimate 146 Collection

Image : transat.jpg par Image : transat.jpg par

10/08/12, 7:02 pm, Ajouter un commentaire, add a comment, back to the English website

How to park in Heraklion ?

Image

Good Morning, This is Katzantzakis Ground. I would like to explain you the way aircraft park on Heraklion apron with a few pictures. I know some of you are uncomfortable with those greek apron markings. Especially those of you who doesn't fly much in Greece.

Image
In the above picture, you can see the ground pattern assumed by yellow lines. Sophisticated, isn't it ?
Image
Above picture shows it is easier to do (at your discretion) a single right turn to enter in the stand, depending on your aircraft size.
Image
Image

Feel free to add a comment on this. The idea of this topic came when a virtual pilot asked me for help with the LGIR parking. Thank you for your reading. I'd be deligthted to service you from the tower next time on the network.


Image : transat.jpg par Image : transat.jpg par

11/08/12, 22:42 pm, updated 13/08/12 11:45 am, Ajouter un commentaire / Add a comment

Nouvelle carte pour Héraklion - New LGIR chart

TransaTvia.com écrit :
- For flight simulation only -

As you may have noticed, a few chart are available for flightsim enthousiats for Iraklion, but they all lack the new east apron L near taxiway G. So I have reworked the latest available chart to provide a good depiction of the current parking. Click on the next image to download the LGIR chart.
EDIT 3 SEP 12 : LGIR chart available for download.

EDIT 7 MAY 13 : Chania (LGSA) airport charts
28/08/12, 10:07 am, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Cimavia, les liaisons régulières au centre du continent européen

 Cimavia, parcourez les cimes enneigées !

En parallèle de mes destinations favorites en méditerranée (sous les couleurs purement fictionnelles de TransaTvia.com) j'assure un service régulier en Europe centrale (sous les couleurs de la toute aussi fictionnelle Cimavia, pseudo-filiale de TransaTvia.com).

Accéder à la page Cimavia (EDITION : page retirée)

Transatvia.com Ultimate 146 Collection Test Bed (Banc d'essai)

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Bonjour à tous.

Dans ce fil de discussion généraliste je vous propose une petite revue de détail sur le AVRO RJ de QualityWings©. Je vais commenc er en français.

I will now make some comments on the QualityWings "The Ultimate 146 Collection"©, first in French, then in English. Don't hesitate to share your own experience adding a comment. Jump to the english version !

- Mentions légales. QualityWings, Avro, Airbus, Boeing sont des marques déposées. -

Je précise tout d'abord que j'utilise une machine qui fait pâle figure aujourd'hui en simulation : c'était une très bonne machine il y a 10 ans. J'arrive à faire un vol complet avec l'AVRO RJ. Il est arrivé que Windows® augmente la taille de la mémoire virtuelle disponible avec l'AVRO RJ, malgré une défragmentation de la mémoire vive avant de lancer FS. Enfin, sachez que le simulateur tourne sans les privilèges de l'administrateur sur l'ordinateur.

== Empreinte mémoire

On peut lire sur quelques forums des remarques de personnes considérant que l'appareil a une empreinte mémoire un peu trop grande. Ce problème n'est pas systématiquement reproductible chez différents utilisateurs. Mon expérience personnelle m'a fait passer d'une situation où l'appareil était difficilement exploitable à un appareil exploitable en 2D et vues extérieures. Pour cela, j'ai installé la mise à jour n°1. (La version testée ici est donc la version 1.1, avec les Avro RJ 70, 85 et 100). J'accepte des limitations comme le fait de ne pas pouvoir utiliser le cockpit virtuel par manque de mémoire, alors que c'est possible avec la série des Airbus bien connue et avec le B737TNG d'un autre éditeur renommé. J'accepte également un faible nombre d'images par seconde mais j'ai utilisé une astuce (voir dans le texte) pour réduire l'empreinte mémoire due aux textures à haute résolution employées.
Conclusion : 1) vérifiez d'abord que les caractéristiques de votre machine sont compatibles avec celles requises pour la Ultimate 146 Collection (d'après QualityWings), sinon acceptez certaines limitations ; 2) le vol complet peut se dérouler sans encombre.

La deuxième mise à jour est sortie, promouvant l'Avro en une version 1.2. Ce billet a été édité quand c'était nécessaire pour souligner les améliorations de la version 1.2.

== Robustesse de la programmation

Avant de commenter l'aspect graphique, je cherche à savoir si les lignes de code qui décrivent le fonctionnement des systèmes de l'avion sont robustes (notamment l'interaction des multiples modes du pilote automatique en relation avec les paramètres de l'ordinateur de bord). En situation réelle (pardon, virtuelle), je dois pouvoir faire confiance à mon avion virtuel pour passer rapidement d'une approche ILS avec un circuit d'attente paramétré à une remise des gaz guidée par le radar au sol, enchainée avec un atterrissage manuel ou une reparamétrisation de l'ordinateur avec un nouveau mode du pilote automatique. Dans un environnement évolutif - voir dégradé - à forte charge de travail, la modélisation doit tenir le choc ! Sinon, point de place de choix dans mon hangar.

Doit-on faire confiance aux lignes de code de QualityWings© ?

Quelques tours de pistes sont nécessaires pour le savoir. Ensuite, multiplier les vols IFR courts. Faire des aller-retours entre le manuel et le poste de pilotage pour bien comprendre l'utilisation des commandes et surtout, dans quelle mesure elles ont été modélisées. Au bout de quelques jours on maîtrise suffisamment bien l'appareil pour voir comment les petits exercices mentionnés plus haut se passent.

L'appareil est relativement robuste dans un environnement à forte charge. Il est tout à fait possible de changer de mode du PA : passer de l'un à l'autre ne fait pas apparaître de bogue. Engager une descente en spirale dans un circuit d'attente est possible, l'appareil réagit correctement. Les trajectoires des circuits d'attentes sont parfaitement superposables. Le circuit d'attente est donc bien codé. Par contre, j'ai rencontré un problème en demandant à sortir du circuit d'attente pour enchainer sur une pente ILS directement. Au lieu de finir le circuit main droite pour arriver aligné et à bonne distance (proche de l'IAF), l'appareil a viré à gauche, est sorti par le chemin le plus court vers le FAF sans resurvoler le point utilisé pour le circuit. (Autrement dit, la sortie n'a pas été armée pour être activée à la fin du tour de boucle actif, elle a été activée tout de suite).

Autre chose, même en circuit d'attente établi, si le mode APP est engagé et si l'appareil croise le LOC, l'appareil le suivra et abandonnera l'attente, alors même que rien ne change sur l'écran du FMC. Donc armer le mode APP uniquement lorsque l'on est sorti du circuit d'attente. APP est plus fort que LNAV. (Effectué avec le TNG, ce test se termine de la même manière : APP est plus fort que VNAV/LNAV. A ceci près que le FMC du B737 TNG 1.4 efface l'attente programmée quand APP lui fait dépasser le point d'attente (sans exécuter celle-ci)).

Pilote automatique actif, quand seul un mode latéral est engagé on perd le contrôle manuel sur le plan vertical. Avec seulement un mode vertical on perd le contrôle manuel en latéral. Ce n'est pas très fonctionnel et oblige à conserver à la fois modes manuels et verticaux en permanence.

Evidemment, ce n'est pas le cas avec le B737 TNG qui est plus réaliste.

Le manuel ne le mentionne pas explicitement mais le FMC accepte les contraintes d'altitudes de type "à", "à ou plus bas que" et "à ou au dessus de". Ces contraintes s'ajoutent avec les terminologies, XXXX, XXXXB et XXXXA respectivement. Par contre, il n'y a pas de prévisualitation sur l'HESI des
modifications apportées à la route dans la page LEGS jusqu'à l'appui sur la touche EXEC.

Après une remise des gaz, lorsque tous les points programmés ont été survolés, il est impossible de remettre rapidement un point dans la page LEGS pour engager LNAV ou VNAV (alors que c'est toujours possible avec le TNG). On peut rentrer un point mais le FMC l'efface immédiatement après "l'exécution" du nouveau plan de vol. (Passer par la page DEP/ARR offre cependant de remettre les points d'une approche finale, mais seulement ceux-ci). Il faut donc rester en manuel ou utiliser les modes du pilote-auto qui exploitent seulement le MCP. Pendant ce temps, une solution bricolée permet de reprogrammer des points dans le FMC. Pour cela, on effacera complètement toute trace du plan de vol. Il faudra effacer le nom de l'aéroport de départ sur une des pages INIT du FMC. Puis on recréera une navigation avec un départ et l'arrivée et enfin les points de navigation désirés, et voilà ! C'est un bricolage papy transatvia.com.

Si la charge de travail est trop importante pour batailler avec le FMC et les modes qui l'exploitent, la page FIX est tout à fait fonctionnelle pour ajouter une indication visuelle d'un point sur l'HESI pendant une remise des gaz. En fait, je recommande de laisser tomber le FMC en approche manquée.

D'une manière générale si les points de navigation déja survolés s'effacent bien de la page LEGS, ils ne s'effacent pas tout seuls du HESI (un des écrans de navigation du cockpit), au contraire du B737TNG (je ne sais pas si c'est le comportement réel du FMC de l'AVRO RJ).

De la même manière, le plan de vol n'est pas totalement effacé de la mémoire durant le roulage post-atterrissage, alors que le B737TNG le fait. Limitation de l'AVRO RJ réel ou bien simplification de QualityWings ? Je pencherais pour la seconde option.


La page progression semble bien calculer l'ETA aux différents points et sur un vol longue distance, les prévisions de carburants proposées par le FMC étaient très bonnes dès le départ, correspondant aux réserves choisies. La consommation de carburant semble avoir toujours respecté mon devis de masse pré-vol. C'est très bien ! Testé au rayon d'action maximal (qui est fonction du remplissage), la réserve calculée avant le vol était effectivement conservée à l'atterrissage après un vol entre la mer Egée et la France (1100 miles nautiques, avec une montée gérée manuellement sur le MCP pour être très économe). La consommation de carburant par l'APU n'est pas modélisée (voilà une simplification de QualityWings©). Ce n'est pas très grave : l'AVRO RJ n'a pas besoin d'APU pour démarrer : il est possible de faire un vol sans jamais s'en préoccuper. Le démarrage des moteurs ne nécessite en effet pas d'air comprimé ! Démarrer seulement sur l'alimentation électrique fournie par un groupe électrogène externe (reproduit en 3D par QualityWings©) est possible. Enfin, les moteurs tournent sans actionner les pompes de carburant, par alimentation par gravité comme le précise le manuel (même à 35 000 pieds, à la différence du TNG).

La façon dont l'appareil peut intercepter l'ILS a également été testée. Commençons par le cas le plus courant, l'interception du plan de descente "par le bas". La première étape est de bien stabiliser l'avion sur le LOC (navigation latérale). Il faut également stabiliser l'avion à l'altitude d'interception publiée avec ALT HOLD ou VNAV. En suite, l'engagement du mode APP au moment opportun suffit à mettre l'appareil en descente (je le fais quand le curseur d'écart au plan de descente ILS commence à être centré). J'ai mis en difficulté l'atterrisage automatique avec un vent mi-face mi-travers de 15 noeuds avec des rafales à 24 noeuds en courte finale. L'alignement n'était pas parfait. J'ai dû passer en manuel quelques instants avant l'altitude de décision. (Effectué avec le TNG, ce test s'est déroulé de la même manière, les rafales de vent latérales ont mis en déroute le pilote automatique en courte finale en raison notamment d'un choix de VREF trop faible). Si vous n'êtes pas bien stabilisé, reprenez les commandes et demandez un atterrissage en visuel à la tour : le pilotage de l'avion est très agréable et le résultat un peu plus prévisible.

De nombreux essais infructueux ont été menés avant de réussir jusqu'à l'arrêt complet une interception en mode automatique du faisceau ILS "par le haut". En général, j'utilise le mode V/S (vitesse verticale) pour régler une vitesse verticale négative importante jusqu'à la rejointe du plan (plus de 1000 pieds par minute). Pour que le mode V/S soit efficace dans l'Avro de Quality Wings, il faut régler une altitude cible sur le MCP (en général assez faible pour s'autoriser le recoupement du faisceau ILS). J'active le mode APP au moment opportun, ce qui corrige la pente de descente mais interrompt parfois la descente lorsque l'altitude choisie sur le MCP est atteinte ! Pour moi, le mode APP devrait toujours amener à suivre le plan de descente ILS, quel que soit les modes précédemment engagés. (sur le B737 TNG le comportement est plus sain : en ILS par le haut, il suffit que APP soit engagé pour que le reste du MCP soit oublié par le système). Quoiqu'il arrive, en réglant l'altitude cible du MCP à l'altitude de décision et si vous y déconnectez le pilote automatique le problème ne doit pas se poser.
EDITION : la mise à jour numéro 2 a amélioré les transitions entre les modes du pilote automatique choisis au MCP. Des tests approfondis n'ont pas été menés, mais après quelques essais le ressenti est bien meilleur. L'approche ILS par le haut a été un succès lorsqu'elle a été testée.

Toujours désactiver les manettes des gaz automatiques lorsque l'on ne se pose pas en atterrissage automatique complet ! Ce n'est pas un Boeing 737 !

Au niveau des radios, il n'est possible d'écouter et d'émettre que une seule fréquence à la fois ! Encore une simplification des développeurs. On aurait aimé pouvoir écouter sur 2 fréquences en même temps.

Un bouton du FMC arrête immédiatement le simulateur et se solde par un retour au bureau : c'est "Charger le plan de vol ATC". Normalement ce bouton permet de lire le plan de vol issu de l'organisateur du simulateur et de le convertir pour l'AVRO. Pour charger un nouveau plan de vol dans le FMC, il faut donc obligatoirement rentrer à la main les points de navigation pour contourner ce bogue. Heureusement qu'il ne s'agit que d'un avion régional ! EDITION : semble corrigé avec le SP2 (testé une seule fois avec des points de navigation présents à la fois dans FS et dans la base de données de l'avion).

Autre chose à noter : désengager le directeur de vol n'empêche pas le pilote automatique de suivre le plan de vol. Mais ça n'arrivera pas si vous respectez les listes de contrôle bien sûr. (Le fonctionnement normal est par ailleurs très bien décrit dans le manuel).

Concernant la pressurisation, le système est très simple : il suffit de régler l'altitude d'arrivée avant d'amorcer la descente. Le delta de pression maximal toléré par la cabine m'est inconnu et sa modélisation n'est pas bien réalisée. Il n'a pas été possible de tester le différentiel de pression auquel se produit une rupture de charge et où la cabine monte sans que les packs d'air conditionnés n'aient été activés. Sur le TNG, lorsque le pilote virtuel "oublie" les packs sur OFF, la cabine monte toute seule lorsque Dpsi atteint 15 psi (à comparer aux données constructeur pour le B737 : 9,1 Psi). Dans la collection AVRO RJ, il n'y a pas de différence dans la pressurisation cabine selon que les packs aient été correctement activés après ou avant le décollage ou ne l'aient pas été ! [EDITION : sera corrigé dans le future, bogue relevé par l'aquipe QW.] Le réglage de la température intérieure n'est pas non plus affecté par l'absence de packs actifs. Autre point, l'ouverture de la valve RAM AIR n'a aucun impact sur la température mesurée en cabine, alors qu'il s'agit d'air froid issu directement de l'extérieur et injecté en aval de l'air conditionné par les packs. L'ouverture d'une porte de l'avion à haute altitude ne déclenche pas d'alarme de pressurisation. Avec tous les réglages de température et pressurisation, on a donc de quoi s'amuser un peu et respecter les procédures, mais sans être trop regardant.

Tableau des pressurisation relevées en vol d'essai :
ALTEXT Dpsi ALTCAB
9000 1,8 2340
25000 5,3 5380
35000 7,5 8000
Conditions PACKS ON et PACKS OFF indiscernables.
Rupture de charge : inconnue.

Conclusion : rien n'est très embêtant dans le cadre d'un vol où le joueur respecte ses procédures et ne cherche pas à pousser cette simulation dans ses retranchements ("complexity simplified" rappelez-vous !). Il faut penser à quitter les circuit d'attente uniquement au moment opportun. La robustesse générale est satisfaisante une fois les modes apprivoisés, même s'il y a certainement moins de lignes de codes derrière le FMC QualityWings© que derrière le FMC d'autres éditeurs. (EDITION : les mises à jour apportent réellement des améliorations au FMS). C'est le slogan de QualityWings de "simplifier la complexité", mais c'est aussi sûrement parce que c'est plus facile aussi pour les développeurs, qui ont un travail en dehors de la programmation pour la simulation. La première mise à jour vers la version 1.1 laisse un certain nombre de bogues mais on peut facilement les délimiter pour les contourner.
Pour un pilote virtuel de B737, la transition est minime, vous reconnaitrez un MCP très proche de celui de certains B737. La logique du FMC est également proche. Les circuits d'air, de carburant et d'hydraulique nécessitent une visite dans le manuel pour comprendre leurs caractéristiques et leurs différences avec le B737. Les pilotes venant du monde Airbus auront plus de difficultés à maîtriser l'oiseau : il faut comprendre à la fois une nouvelle logique et ce que QualityWings© en a fait ! Cependant ils retrouveront la philosophie du poste sombre où tout est éteint si tout va bien.


== Les tables et le manuel

Le manuel est très beau et bien rédigé (en anglais). Les systèmes d'un avion de ligne sont très bien expliqués. Un pilote de B737 virtuel comme moi se demande souvent comment telle ou telle connaissance peut être transposée sur l'AVRO RJ. Vous trouverez toujours la réponse dans le manuel. Il y a des tableaux de limitations (vent de travers à l'atterrissage, masses maximales et rayon d'action commercial...). Il manque les tables de planification !

Il n'y a pas non plus de tables de distances de décollage et d'atterrissage ! Il faut chercher sur internet un document qui résume ces caractéristiques pour les avoir. Ces tables manquantes sont en phase avec le type de produit que revendiquent les développeurs : un produit simplifié.

Aux tables on peut substituer un logiciel de chargement du carburant fourni par les développeurs. Ce qui ne soustrait pas à l'obligation de faire quelques calculs pour ajouter de la marge au résultat de ce logiciel. Notez que la méthodologie de carburant est décrite à un endroit dans le manuel, mais de manière très succinte et il est très facile de manquer cette page.

Etrangement le manuel stipule que le bouton VNAV du MCP est inactif. C'est sans doute une erreur car le bouton VNAV est bien fonctionnel.

Enfin, il n'y a pas de procédures d'urgence (et pas de gestionnaire de panne dédié).

== Poste de pilotage 2D

C'est beau mais c'est écrit en tout petit ! Si vous ne savez plus ce que vous avez fait de vos yeux d'aigle ce matin, utilisez le cockpit virtuel. Les polices des cadrans du 2D utilisent une toute petite taille ! C'est le plus gros défaut sur le plan graphique, même si cela ne m'a pas empêché de voler.
Copiez la police ttf quartz (située dans un des répertoires créés par l'installation) dans le dossier des polices du système d'exploitation pour pouvoir lire les quantités de carburant et le panneau de configuration de la poussée.

EDITION : avec le SP2 il est possible de zoomer sur l'écran du TCAS qui était inexploitable auparavant.

== Aspect extérieur

Très bon aspect, mais la Version 1.1 censée retravailler les cales de roue les a fait complètement disparaître. C'est un bogue. (Edition : les cales de roues de la version 1.1 apparaissent bien sur certains ordinateurs, mais pas sur d'autres [EDITION : activer le message de freins rouge pour corriger le problème.]). La gestion des lumières et des phares est la meilleure que j'ai jamais rencontrée dans un supplément pour ce simulateur ! La meilleure. Les compromis utilisés sont excellents et dissocient les lumières LOGO, cabine passagers, éclairage cockpit, etc... Le tout servi par une qualité de texture incroyable (mais gourmande en ressources).

Pour réduire les temps de calcul, j'ai divisé par 4 la taille de toutes les textures non-essentielles. Toutes les textures extérieures et les textures de nuit sont concernées. La réduction de résolution de chaque couche (la couche de base et la couche de transparence alpha) de 1024*1024 à 512*512 économise énormément de ressource à l'affichage. Pour le cockpit virtuel, j'ai réduit toutes les textures en 1024*1024 non essentielles en 512*512 ou même 256*256 (le dessin du plafond de la cabine, le dessin des sièges et ceintures de sécurité...). J'ai conservé les textures en haute résolution uniquement pour les tableaux de bord.

== Divers

La sauvegarde automatique de l'état du tableau de bord lors de l'enregistrement du vol est une très bonne chose.

Concernant l'agencement de la cabine passager, le gestionnaire de charge autorise au maximum l'embarquement de 70 personnes sur l'avro RJ 70, 85 personnes sur le RJ 85 et 100 personnes sur le RJ 100. Ce qui est un agencement de cabine non standard et non conforme à la répartition en deux classes (Business et Economie) qu'il propose. Dans la réalité, un AVRO RJ avec une séparation en deux classes Business et Economie devrait emporter 85, 100 et 112 personnes au maximum pour les RJ70, 85 et 100 respectivement (source : documentation constructeur). Mais ce n'est qu'un détail qui n'a pas d'impact sur le calcul des masses, seule indication qui vaille au cours de la préparation des vols. Nous concluerons que nos AVRO RJ offrent un espacement des sièges intéressant pour les jambes des passagers.

Testez le gestionnaire avant d'alourdir votre machine sinon installez la dernière version de .NET framework. Vous pouvez également choisir, comme l'auteur de ces lignes le fait, de ne pas utiliser le gestionnaire et de calculer vos masses et le carburant tout seul pour les ajouter à l'appareil via les menus internes du simulateur. Il est possible d'installer manuellement une texture en renommant un fichier .qwl en .zip.

== Bilan

Bilan général : après quelques jours de vol, j'ai confiance dans cet appareil dans les zones de robustesse que j'ai délimitées, je vais pouvoir l'utiliser intensivement, aidé par un manuel bien rédigé et une base de données Navigraph. On observe que le public visé n'est pas le plus puriste (il manque des tables, le FMC est programmé pour fonctionner réalistement mais laisse apparaître qu'il n'est pas aussi complexe que d'autres). En utilisant ma propre feuille de calcul pour les masses et le carburant avec une table de planification issue du manuel réel de l'appareil il est possible de reproduire un comportement proche de la réalité avec mon AVRO RJ. Ce qui compense les aspects simplifiés de l'appareil. Ajoutons qu'il reste quelques bogues (des options de configurations qui ne semblent jamais prises en compte...). Pour terminer, rappelons que cet appareil vous sera coûteux en ressources (processeur, carte graphique).

Picture. To be uploaded... Appréciation personnelle (subjective)

Je garde l'impression d'un bon appareil. La simplification est contrebalancée par le sentiment d'immersion très satisfaisant (qui s'améliore avec les mises à jour). Les puristes pourront tout de même l'aimer, sauf si les imperfections leur paraissent rédhibitoires. Pour les procédures d'urgences, il doit être possible d'utiliser celles d'un B737 si vous en possédez. Il gagnera une place dans ma liste de suppléments préférés à cause de l'immersion procurée, même s'il restera derrière mes Airbus et Boeing qui me paraissent plus fluides et encore plus robustes. Pour le joueur occasionnel qui n'a pas le temps de faire de longs vols un appareil régional est intéressant. Cependant son rayon d'action (proche de 1200 miles nautiques à remplissage maximal) permet déja de faire de beaux trajets à vitesse de croisière élevée au niveau 350. Pour ceux qui veulent un avion commercial avant tout pour son FMC (pour simplifier leur navigation), celui-ci pourra faire l'affaire. Pas besoin de plus complexe. Bien que les instruments soit grossissables en cockpit 2D par simple clic, ce n'est pas suffisant et il manque une vraie fonction "zoom" pour gagner en lisibilité, ce qui en rebutera peut-être certains. Je ne me soucie pas trop de devoir rentrer à la main les points de navigation dans l'ordinateur à cause du bogue d'importation. Les petites imperfections ne gachent pas mon plaisir avec ma façon de piloter qui conduit à les ignorer en vol normal. Une deuxième mise à jour serait peut-être la bienvenue. (Edition : une deuxième mise à jour est disponible. Elle améliore significativement le ressenti du FMS et du MCP). Pour finir, cela fait toujours plaisir d'avoir un manuel esthétiquement correct et rédigé. Car sans manuel abouti, même le plus perfectionné des suppléments pour Flight Simulator ou X-Plane perd beaucoup d'intérêt.

Merci beaucoup de votre lecture !


== Quelques problèmes corrigés par le SP2 (parmis d'autres) : sélection de l'atitude sur le MCP, Page FIX du FMS, restrictions de vitesses dans le FMS, altitudes calculées par le FMS, page Perf Init du FMS, calcul de VNAV TOC, problème de mode latéral en revenant du mode VOR/LOC, bascule de mode par le MCP depuis le mode VOR/LOC.

- Cette prise de vue représente une estimation personnelle et a été réalisée de manière la plus objective possible. En revanche, les conclusions dressées restent une appréciation dépendante de multiples facteurs : la puissance de la machine de l'auteur, la configuration de son simulateur, etc... Il est possible que ses conclusions ne soient pas adaptées à votre propre machine ou à votre propre façon de simuler le pilotage d'un avion. -

Transatvia.com = The Ultimate 146 Collection Review === English version

Share the link : http://gf3.myriapyle.net/aero/transatvia.comms.php#rjen


Hello everybody and welcome on my flight simulation web log !

I will now make some comments on the QualityWings "The Ultimate 146 Collection"© in English. Don't hesitate to share your own experience adding a comment. - Legal information - QualityWings, Avro, Airbus and Boeing are trademarks registred in several countries -

Information : the simulator is running with normal user privileges only. I review here the 1.1 version of the Ultimate 146 Collection.

Oct. the 24th, 2012 : SP2 is released, promoting the Avro to revision 1.2.
== Memory footprint

On the Internet some people are wondering : does this add-on have a big memory footprint ? My personnel experience is that the service pack 1 improved the memory from a frozen simulation to an near enjoyable aircraft, even if the operating system is forced to increase the virtual memory size on some occasions (it never occurs with other add-on). Of course, I plainly accept my PC limitations (I have a 10 year old PC so far), and do not fly in virtual cockpit with the Avro, while I can fly in the VC with the B737 TNG and other well-knowned Airbus add-ons.

It is you own responsability to check your system specs are compliant with the QW product. But I can tell you that on my PC, I can run a 1100 nautical miles flight in 2D cockpit from the very start to the very end.

== Programmation strenghtness

I don't comment graphics first. It's not the main thing for me. Rather, I'd like to test if the modelisation can allow some "wild" stuff while flying.

Like mode changing in heavy workload environnement such as departures and arrivals. Can I trust QualityWings© AVRO RJ in a missed approach event ? Can I trust it to switch from manual to FMC-driven auto-pilot mode in the worst situation ? Does the reactivity allow FMC reparametrization in a hurry ? If it doesn't pass, then the aicraft is not for me. And all that stuff depends on how the code lines where written by the developpers.

So, first, you need time to get familiar with the aircraft. There is a learning time to handle the thing. We have to practice circle to land. We have to practice small IFR flights in testing facilities around the world (like Chateauroux LFLX, often used for IFR training). You need to read the manual while flying to really understand the AVRO specificities. In a few days, you'll get comfortable with the various procedures in the aircraft to execute the various procedures on the chart. It is there that the hard-testing work begins !

In a nutshell, the Ultimate 146 collection passes the test ! In a heavy workload environnement, the flight computer reproduced by QualityWings proves itself reliable and robust. It is easy to determine where it is not anymore, in order to get the thing working anyway.

So switching mode to mode does not reveal any bug. You can switch the mode during a holding pattern and engage a low spiraling descent, the simulated aircraft reacts good. Keeping the hold, the pattern is kept without deviation in time. That's perfect. Well, I encountered a problem when I commanded the exit of the holding pattern : the aircraft didn't finish the current right hand pattern to the currently active holding waypoint before resuming the navigation. Instead it turnd left, flying a direct to the next waypoint, which was bad and had to be tricked by disconnecting the PA in my final approach context. So think before commanding the exit of the pattern ! The exit is not armed to be executed only after current turn but rather is activated immediately. Wait to be where you want the aircraft to be, for instance seconds before overflying again the holding waypoint.

Another thing with the holding function : if you make the mistake (or the anticipation) to activate APP mode while in hold, the aircraft will follow the LOC (if tuned of course) when you cross it but will not change the FMC status. The FMC still think you are holding and propose the function to exit the hold. So make one thing at a time ! when you are holding, just hold. Then disconnect the hold to engage the approach if any. If your orders are a mess, then the reaction by the autopilot will be a mess too ! (The same appends with the B737 TNG for comparative purpose : APP is stronger than LNAV/VNAV, but the TNG's FMC erase the skipped HOLD on LEGS page when crossing the previously expected holding point).

Autopilot active, we lost lateral control when only a vertical mode is selected, and we lost manual vertical control when only a lateral mode is selected. So, in contrast with the reality, we must keep together a vertical and a lateral mode active in the same time.

The FMC accepts altitude constraints like "AT", "AT OR BELOW" and "AT OR ABOVE" with XXXX, XXXXB et XXXXA terminology respectively.

There is no previsualisation on the HESI of LEGS modifications and the drawing is only updated upon EXEC.

We saw that in some testing situations the aircraft did not exactly what I wanted him too (but it was because of my own input in the system for testing purpose) and I took manual command to fly the aircraft, and not let the aircraft fly me. During a normal cruise, you can easily change the route in the LEGS page. But once in a missed approach, I was faced with a problem. I crossed my last programmed waypoint and overflow the airport (because of missed approach). I couldn't anymore add a new waypoint in the LEGS page to engage VNAV and LNAV (with the exception of a new final approach via the DEP/ARR page).

During normal operation, waypoints are erased from the LEGS page as soon as the next waypoint is activated. At the end of the route you are left without waypoint anymore. That's perfectly normal. At the same time, the route already flown is not erased from the HESI (as it would be with a B737 TNG for instance). So the route management by the FMC is simplified and there is surely less code lines here than in other products. (Or maybe this behavior is the reality in the AVRO RJ, can't know since I don't fly this aircraft for real). Since the route is active, the path is not erased on the HESI. Another thing is that after landing, the flight plan is not erased from the FMC memory as in a B737.

Back to my story, there was at that time no more waypoint in LEGS page and the path flown still displayed on the HESI. I couldn't quickly add a waypoint in the FMC (while it is always possible with the TNG) and had to fly manually or use auto-pilot MCP-based modes such as level-change and heading. To trick the thing in order to get LNAV and VNAV working I had to erase the flight plan totaly in the mean time (by discarding the departure airport). Then reactivated a new plan with departure and arrival airports. There I could program again a new waypoint after my missed approach. Pretty time-consuming.

Well, if your workload is too heavy to make those tricky changes in the FMC while flying low, you still can use the FIX page to display fixes on purpose. For me, that's good enough if an unexpected situation occurs.

The PROG page make good ETA calculations. Fuel prediction where good in any tested conditions. Every time, the reserve on board after landing was the reserve I previously calculated during my pre-flight briefing. 'sounds really good. I made a 1100 nautical miles trip. It was near from the max range with my payload. I worked hard my climb in vertical speed mode for an easy fuel consumption but upon landing the reserve was great : enough for a hold or a go-around. QualityWings didn't include APU fuel usage. HuHum... But you can completely ignore the APU with the Avro RJ if you wish (unless for AirCond purpose). The AVRO RJ does not use APU Bleed air for engine start-up so you may use only external ground power unit. Engines can run on ground (and at 35000 ft !) with fuel pumps off, by gravity feeding as the manual states.

Downside ILS interception works as it should. Engage APP with the aircraft stabilised on the LOC and it will descend the aircraft in due time on the glide slope. I was faced with a problem with a 15 knots headwind (a little bursty crosswind too). The aircraft wasn't perfectly aligned on short final and I had to disconnect the AP shortly before the decision altitude. So if it seems the aircraft is not stabilized, do it manually, as manual flying is very pleasant and enjoyable. (The same with the TNG : the burst fooled the auto-pilot in short final). I also tried upside ILS interception. In a B737 TNG I use Vertical Speed mode on MCP to descent quickly and to rejoin the glide slope. Then I engage APP mode in due time and land. But in the Avro I can't manage to land the aircraft as easily. I first use V/S as usual, with a low target-altitude on the MCP (in order to give me some time to intercept the slope in V/S mode). Switching in APP mode may not totaly clean V/S mode and when you reach your MCP altitude it may level off. To me, that's bad : in APP mode, I want the computer to follow the glide slope. That's not 100% reliable. So you'd better forget fully automatic upside glide interception with the Ultimate 146 Collection. EDITION : with service pack 2 published, problem seems to be solved. TransaTvia.com did not encountered the problem any more after upside interception. Anyway, if you set the MDA/DH as MCP target-altitude for A/P and if you disconnect the A/P at this altitude you should not have been faced with this bug.
Don't forget to deactivate yourself auto-throttles in manual landing.

I don't like the radios. It's impossible to hear multiple channels. I could only speak and listen to one frequency at a time. That's QualityWings simplification.

The FMC 'Load ATC flight plan' option crashes to desktop. So write your flight plan in the ROUTE page, do not import it from the simulator-native navigation tool. Be happy, you are only in a regional jet ! EDITION : fixed in SP2.

Flight director disengagement does not affect the autopilot. But surely you won't disengage F/D in flight if you follow the checklist. (The relation between the F/D and the A/P is well described in the manual).

The pressurisation system is fully automatic. Set the landing altitude before descent. That's all. However, I couldn't see any impact of the PACKS status on pressurisation and temperature control. With PACKS OFF, the cabin can climb normally and the temperature setting is still possible. So you have some buttons to play with in order to respect the procedures, but don't look too far beyond. [EDITION : this has been seen by the QW team and will be fixed in the future.]

Flight test pressurisation :
ALTEXT Dpsi CAB (ft)
9000 1,8 2340
25000 5,3 5380
35000 7,5 8000
PACKS ON and PACKS OFF not discernable.
PACKS OFF pressurisation break (equiv. to Max DeltaPsi) : couldn't be reached with this lack of modelisation.

To sum up, if you scratch behind the surface we see that QualityWings© made "the complexity simplified" as their motto says. We saw that the FMC modelisation seems to be made of less code lines than in other products. I guess that making the complexity simplified is also simpler for the developpers who have a life and a job besides aircraft programmation. Transition is easy for a B737 virtual pilot. MCP and FMC in B737 and Avro RJ are relatives ! Airbus pilots won't be faced with the logic they are used to. Anyway, RJ and Airbus birds share the same dark cockpit concept (if it doesn't need care, then it's not illuminated).


== Manual and performance data

There is no emergency checklist in the manual. The manual is beautiful, clear and can answer every question a virtual B737 pilot would ask to understand the differences between his previous and his new little birdy thing. There is also a lot of basic performance data (limitations and so on) but there is no plannification table ! No required take off and landing field charts ! Again, you clearly see that is not designed for hardcore pilots, as QualityWings states. But, you can find those data on the web and use 'hem. (You will even find a flight plannig table on TransaTvia.com).

You can also use the embedded fuel calculator, but add a bit of reserve fuel. The fuel planning methodology is explained in the manual, but that's a bit too light and you may easily miss it.

Strangely, the manuels states that "VNAV button is inoperative. There are VNAV pages on the FMS CDU, but there does not exist a VNAV A/P mode!". I don't understand this statement, as VNAV button is perfectly functionnal. Maybe an error of the manual or a missunderstanding.


== 2D cockpit

Beautiful but... ...if you haven't eagle-eyes, use the virtual cockpit ! Font size is so small in 2D... Really small. That the biggest graphical miss. Moreover, to be able to read the fuel amount and the trust rating panel, you have to copy the quartz ttf font (standing in a Quality Wings folder) to the main windows font folder.

== Exterior look

Stuning exterior aspect but performance-eating. Version n°1.1 should have reworked wheel chocks but it made them completely disappeared (on some computer only while on others it is fine). I turned on the red parking brake message and the chocks are seen again. The lightning is the best I have ever seen for my simulator (i.e. the more precise). Logo light, passengers cabins, cockpit lightning, instrument lightning are dissociated for instance.

Reducing the texture resolution form 1024*1024 to 512*512 has a dramatical impact on calculation time. So I manually resized every external day and night textures, and also resized non essential cockpit textures (seats, top of the cabin...) for a smoother flying experience. In doing so, I retain a nice-looking aircraft, without over-expensing time for graphical computation.

== Misc.

Automatic panel state saving upon flight saving is a good point.

Real documentation states that with a two class conformation, AVRO 70, 85 and 100 should board respectively 85, 100 and 112 pax. The dispatcher proposes only 70, 85 and 100 pax respectively. Surely our QualityWings© Avro seating configuration offers a nice space for passenger legs.

I succeed in using the dispatcher on a computer where .NET 4 wasn't installed when prompted by the QW installer. Give it a try before installing anything more on your PC. If it doesn't work, install .NET 4. But you could also choose to ignore the dispatcher and use the simulator-native menus to load the aircraft (as personnaly, I fill my weight sheet on my own). You can also rename a .qwl file to .zip in order to install manually an extra-livrery. This way you save hard-disk space.


== Conclusion

To sum-up, after some hours flying, I know I can trust this simulation of the Avro RJ. I will use it intensively, with the help of a good manual and a recent Navigraph database. The targeted people are not hardcore pilots (realistic FMC but with simplified coding, no complete performance data in the manual and so on...). But using my own briefing sheet and my own fuel planning methodology with the help of the real flight crew operating manual performance data, I can simulate a quite good pilot behavior. A behavior very near from the real one surely, which compensate for simplifications. Not so many simplifications by the way, as immersive feeling is at the meet (you see, hardcore pilots could appreciate it). For emergency procedures, it should be possible to use B737 checklits if you already own them. Last but not least, keep in mind that your QW Avro RJ will cost you a lot of computer ressource. Framerate will drop if you use it with a detailed add-on scenery for instance.

Subjective comment

It feels like a good simulation to me. I will use it as well as my previous Airbus© and Boeing© simulations. For casual sunday-pilot without time to make great legs, a regional jet is interresting. This one with a FMC is nice and can provide the commercial jet IFR training such a pilot is looking for. However, the commercial range of 1200 nautical miles (depends of the load though) does allow nice and not-so-short trips at 300 knots (M.73 in cruise against M.78 with a B737) at FL350. While the 2D flight deck instruments are zoomable, it lacks a real pop-up panel zoom to read it painless. Learning the Boeing/Avro logic with such a small font is not an easy task. Personnaly, I don't care to be forced by the import function bug to enter manually the flight plan in the FMC (I like doing it). Maybe a second service pack may be needed to adress the latest bugs. (EDITION 24OCT12 : a second service pack is released. It improves greatly the FMS and the MCP). In the end, reading an esthetically good manual is a pleasure.

Thank you very very much for your reading.

- Care as been done in providing an objective review but it stays a personnal review. Advantages and drawbacks reported here may be system-dependent and are representative of the author system only. The conclusions may not have been drawned in the same way if your own PC where to be used. Keep cool and polite in any circumstance if your write a commentary otherwise it will be discarded without warning. You are responsible for your own writtings. -

25/08/12, 1:07 am, Ajouter un commentaire

Suite du banc d'essai Ultimate 146 Collection


TransaTvia.com écrit :

Test de « The Ultimate 146 Collection© » de QualityWings Sim©.

Le coeffficient représente l'importance attachée à la réussite du test par domaine testé. Les scores ne sont valables que par rapport à l'AVRO RJ. Le test n'a pas été fait pour tester le TNG ou l'airbus évolution.
Cette table présente les points testés chez l'AVRO RJ et leur comparaison avec d'autres compléments. Cette table présente aussi un système de score. Une note comprise entre 0 et 1 a été adaptée en fonction de la réussite à chaque test.


Produit AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution
Coeff.

Date de sortie 2012
2004
2007/11
voir bilan.

Version 1,1
1,4
Evolution










PA Tous modes PA fonctionnels 1 fonctionnels 1 fonctionnels 1
pilote Circuit d'attente tenu ? oui 1 oui 1 oui 1
automatique Sortie de l'attente ? immédiate 0,5 armée 1 direct vers 1

APP efface le HOLD ? non (dépasse) 0,2 oui 1 non (dépasse) 0,2

AP : indépendance horizale versus latérale ? non 0 oui 1 airbus specif. 1

Le FD conditionne l'usage du PA ? non 0 non 0 limites FS 0,8 Modifiable : ds ODS



2,7
5
5 3











AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution

FMC Contraintes altitudes ? oui 1 oui 1 oui 1

Points personnalisés (par coord ou rad/dist) ajoutables ? oui 1 oui 1 non (sauf in fich. conf.) 0

Prévisualisation ND avant EXEC ? non 0 oui 1 oui (sauf mod directe) 1

Reparamétrisation FMC en courte finale ? laborieuse 0,5 facile 1 facile 1

Page FIX ? oui 1 oui 1 non (airbus) 1

Effacement des points survolés ? FMC seulem. 0,5 ND / FMC 1 ND / FMC 1

Effacement du plan de vol après atterrissage ? non 0 oui 1 oui 1

transférer un plan de vol depuis le simulateur ? Retour bureau 0 oui 1 oui 1



4
8
7 3











AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution

Carburant L'APU consomme du carburant ? non 0 non 0 oui 1

Prévisions de carburant calculées par l'avion ? excellente 1 oui 1 oui 1

Les moteurs tournent pompes carbu. éteintes oui (sol et altitude) 0,5 oui (sol) 1 oui (sol) 1



1,5
2
3 3











AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution

Pressurisation Pressurisation représentée ? oui 1 oui 1 oui 1

Pressurisation modélisée ? utilis. normale. 0,2 norm. et anorm. 0,8 norm. et anorm. 0,8

RAM AIR oui, sans impact 0 non 0 non simulé 0



1,2
1,8
1,8 1















AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution

Autres Ecouter les radios sur deux fréquences ? non 0 oui 1 oui 1 1

Présence de bogues oui 0 quasi nulle 1 quasi nulle 1 1

Présence de bogues pour l'utilisation normale en procédures non 1 non 1 non 1 3

Gestionnaire de chargement / configuration oui 1 oui 1 oui 1 1

Sauvegarde automatique du tableau de bord (manuelle) oui (oui) 1 non (non) 0 oui (oui) 1 1

Empreinte mémoire très élevée 0 normale 1 normale 1 2









Manuel
AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution


Rédaction ? grande qualité 1 bonne qualité 0,667 grande qualité 1

Tutoriel de prise en main ? oui 1 non 0 oui 1

tables de base (mases maximales, vitesses) oui 1 oui 1 oui 1

tables de planification / longueurs de pistes... non 0 oui 1 oui 1

Procédures d'urgences ? non 0 oui 1 non 0



3
3,667
4 2









Affichage
AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution


Lumières logo et cabine dissociées oui 1 non 0 non 0

cockpit 2D acceptable 0 ancien 0,667 bon 1

Flexibilité des ailes oui 1 non 0 non 0



2
0,667
1 1









Score, pondéré par le coefficient
AVRO RJ
TNG 1.4
Airbus évolution



38,8
60,8
62,8



2012
2004
2011



12
4
7

Indice de qualité de l'appareil Score / f(année) = 13
61
36

La date retenue pour l'Airbus est la date initiale (2007). Le rapport du score sur une fonction de l'année est meilleur avec un bon score et avec de l'ancienneté, comme le vin. Explication : un appareil modélisé très précisément en 2004 était plus rare qu'un appareil modélisé en 2012.

Picture. To be uploaded...

01/09/12, 3:08 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Météo globale avancée de l'Europe, du pourtour méditerranéen et du Proche-orient

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Bonjour,

je vous propose maintenant un vol enregistré pour FS2004. L'intérêt du vol enregistré est uniquement centré sur la météorologie qui y a été paramétrée à la main sur de grandes zones globales sur l'Europe occidentale et le pourtour méditerranéen. L'idée est de fournir un canevas général toujours disponible sur lequel vous pourriez y paramétrer au cas par cas vos conditions locales préférées, puis votre vol en choisissant votre appareil. Ce canevas est le vol par défaut de mon simulateur.

Source : des cartes de prévisions météorologiques indiquant notamment les pressions sur l'ensemble de l'Europe (en fin d'été) ont été utilisées. La météo reproduite ici est une combinaison de plusieurs de ces cartes, à laquelle des conditions météorologiques spécifiques de certaines localités ont été ajoutées. Quelques aéroports ont fait l'objet d'un traitement particulier pour paramétrer une condition plus intéressante, en phase avec les avertissements énoncés par les cartes du terrain.

Des mises à jour seront apportées : au fil du temps le paramétrage météorologique est susceptible d'être affiné en fonction des retours des utilisateurs, sans changer l'esprit du paramétrage global.
= === === === === === === ===
Version actuellement téléchargeable : consulter la page de téléchargement.
= === === === === === === ===

Paramètres réglés :
Les températures et les points de rosée (% d'humidité), la pression au niveau des stations météorologiques, les couches de vents et les transitions entre les couches de vent, les couches de nuages et dans quelques cas l'ajout d'une couche de visibilité réduite. (Utilisation systématique des paramètres avancés).

Description de la météo :
Au Nord, une dépression atmosphérique s'établira en Irlande. Un front nuageux particulièrement développé sur tout le Sud de l'Angleterre sera à l'origine de fortes pluies sur Londres et sa périphérie. En France, un vent du Nord très sensible balaiera la Normandie, véhiculant des cumulus de pluie sur toute la région. L'extension de cette nébulosité se poursuivra en région parisienne sans engendrer pour autant des précipitations, avec une température clémente. Un temps très légèrement couvert sur le reste du Nord de la France et de l'Allemagne. Dans la région alpine, la Suisse centrale connaitra un ciel dégagé et une masse d'air très calme tandis que la Savoie et la Haute savoie connaitront un ciel partiellement nuageux et entrecoupé d'éclaircies, la masse d'air y sera mouvante et turbulente. Du très beau temps sur le Sud de la France et l'ensemble de l'Espagne. En revanche la façade Nord des Pyrénnées sera sous les orages. Au Portugal, le temps sera clair, sauf sur la façade Atlantique. Lisbonne devrait connaître elle aussi une petite dépression orageuse localisée. A Madère, il y aura apparition locale de nuages bas et pluvieux tandis que les îles Canaries auront du ciel bleu. Le reste de l'océan atlantique sera beau, avec un anticyclone sur les Açores. En Méditerrannée, le pourtour de la mer ionnienne sera dégagé avec un anticyclone significatif sur les Balkans et le flanc oriental de l'Italie. Cependant le Sud de la Grèce connaitra un épisode de Melthem assez fort compliquant les approches en Crète et à Santorin. Dans les mondes arabes, les conditions de vol seront dans l'ensemble très satisfaisantes. Le vent sera très faible et les températures élevées à Rabat, Alger, Tunis et El Cairo. Au Proche-Orient, les températures resteront élevées et le ciel dégagé de Tel Aviv à Aqaba et Sharm el Sheih. Dans le reste du monde, des couches uniformes de stratus apparaitront en moyenne altitude, accompagnées des cirrus givrant à très haute altitude. La pression y sera proche de la pression barométrique de référence.

Thank you very much for your reading.

Add a comment / write on a topic - Back to the main English website -


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Bravo!!

F-PINO écrit :
Bravo, le pdf sur les procedures RNAV, avec des exemples tirés des add-ons les plus connus est un superbe travail de qualité !!!!
22/12/12, 8:22 am, Ajouter un commentaire

Re: Bravo !

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Merci beaucoup pour votre commentaire
22/12/12, 12:14 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Presenting YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !

TransaTvia.com écrit :
I am proud to present you YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool ! I have coded a web-based engine to convert graphical output from RouteFinderFree into a FS flight plan.

Find a route on RouteFinder, copy the details in YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !, then click on "SUBMIT". That's all ! You have weather and a route compiled in the FS format directly from RouteFinder website output !
Please bear in mind this is BETA work, with known limitations that still need work.

https://www.ssl-url.net/gf3.myriapyle.net/aero/transatvia_convertrfinder.php (lien externe)
03/03/13, 4:47 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

The idea behind YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !

TransaTvia.com écrit :
What's the idea behind YART ? "Why did he made YART ?" you may wonder. There are indeed a lot of flight planners out there. However, most are not freeware, you must pay for them. I don't want to pay for something I can do myself. The flight preparation can be done without paying ! For instance, you have the great (and free) NAVIGATION (by François Fouchet) program to plan a navigation.

So during my flight preparation I usually begin with a look at RouteFinderFree(c) ASA sarl 2005 to get an idea of which route could be followed. But, you know, if you are flying offline, there is little chance that the current AIRAC cycle would be recognized by FS and its ATC service. So I used to switch to Navigation, plot every waypoint on its interface and export an FS flight plan for FS9. Then, FS can be feed with the data. FS will only use the coordinates from the flight plan entered, so no need of its internal (and old) data base. You can follow the route within FS.
But that's long and sometimes, I'm kinda tired of launching Navigation and plot every waypoint along the route. While it is a nice way of reviewing carefully my route before my flight (actually I prefer preparing the flight than flying) sometimes I want to fire up the simulator quicker, while retaining the capacity to fly along a realistic route under ATC surveillance.

From this statement came the idea of an integrated "virtual dispatcher unit" which would produce for me the flight plan directly from RouteFinder output. I made the thing on my computer. Then I moved on and decided to put the thing online for other people. It' not a flight planner, rather an helper with the ability to switch from it to external flight sim websites to expand the preparation. I recommand for instance visiting The Owl's Nest, FSRealWSlite(c), RouteFinder(c) and SkyVectors.com(r) websites.

So I have built a parser for RouteFinder output and offered the possiblity to access to various external ressources (free or with limited free access at least) from a single page. I did that firstly to answer to my very needs. So I have now, from my own point of view, an integrated flight preparation interface. Of course, it may not correspond to your own habits, especially if you already use a flight planner for Microsoft Flight Simulator(r). It has been a full 5-days duty to accomplish the work, but now, I am satisfied and proud to annonce that

VERSION 1.0 of YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool ! is released today ! (FOR FLIGHT SIMULATION ONLY)


https://www.ssl-url.net/gf3.myriapyle.net/aero/transatvia_convertrfinder.php (lien externe)
06/03/13, 9:07 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Version 1.7 of YART is out !

TransaTvia.com écrit :
In this new version, reworked advanced tools, AIP and automatic cockpit briefing production.
30/06/13, 3:56 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

YART 2.0

TransTvia.com écrit :
YART 2.0 has been released on 8th September of 2013.

The new functionnality is the capability for the user to save a flight plan in the YART format. This file is named a "company route". It can be given as input to ConvertRfinder. Why is it usefull ? Imagine that you first use a RouteFinderFree output but that this route is not validated at Eurocontrol. You then may fine-tune your route by iterations, looking at an en-route chart, searching in RouteFinderFree the new waypoints coordinates, and composing manually a ConvertRfinder input in the adequate YART field until validation by Eurocontrol. From v2.0, you can save on your computer this personnalised input, and use it later again. At that time, the route may not be valid any more, for instance if an airway changed in the real world, but you can keep your previous route as a basis.

The plot of the flight plan on Skyvector.com has also been enhanced. The whole code was also adjusted and some functions optimised. A super-user mode has been created, to be accessed with a password, to expand some functions while keeping them lite for the normal user.

Before v2.0 the capability to produce an OFP document and retrieve NOTAMs had also been added.

To sum up, the original function of ConverRfinder was to produce a flight plan file for MSFS ATC, but the functionnality has now been extended to simulate a lite dispatcher. While other software available for flight simulation may be complete dispatcher simulation, ConvertRfinder and its interface YART is still mainly a simple workflow for flight preparation.
08/09/13, 4:49 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

A word on Embraer E-Jets v.2 Embraer 175 and 195

By TransaTvia.com, Paris, September 2013

I recently discovered the Embraer E-Jets v.2 Embraer 175 and 195 as simulated by Feelthere.

On stand at Paris Orly (click on the image to enlarge)

While the E-jets have already been covered by a detailed review at AVSIM (external link), the review lacks the indication of the accuracy of the simulated aircraft in regard to the flight pattern. Ray Marshall wrote a lot about flight dynamics and autoland capacity but I would have like to know if it is possible to follow a modern RNAV(GNSS) or RNAV(RNP) approach with the add-on. [RNP stands for required performance navigation, see my publication on RNP for more] This information is missing in almost every reviews, even in the most serious ones. (Indeed ILS approaches are the most practiced among the flight simulation community). This review will try to fill the gap.

(Click on the image to enlarge)

A review of the Feelthere E-Jets accuracy in regard to Feelthere A320, QWsim Avro and iFly 737

I have an interest on regional jets, as it allows short flights with all the interestings phases condensated in a short period of time (I mean departure and arrival). I have a few favorite routes in Western Europe that I fly under the fictionnal airline TransaTvia.com. I used to fly with the QWsim Avro RJ for FS9 as seen in Sevilla, Spain, below:

The AVRO-RJ85
Two were painted under TransaTvia.com colors (Ville de Paris, Ville de Chambéry)


The Avro has similar systems to the Boeing 737 (so it is easy to handle for a 737 driver) and graphics are really beautifull (in particular the virtual cockpit). So it coops particulary well with the regional flight thematic. Sometimes the LNAV shows a significant deviation to the defined path with crosswind but the next update (which will bring the BAE-146 to the current Avro RJ) should improve that, QWsim said. QWsim made a simplified simulation and I accept it, often flying it manually in approach to circonvent the simplification, as it is a small jet. However, I couldn't make it run under Windows 8, and this led me to find another plane for small hopping.

There is not so much planes that are able to do the job in FS9. As an iFly 737 driver, I want big systems, as real as the real thing, because I want to do serious simulation. Or, like with the Avro, a sufficient "being there" immersive feeling. Speaking of system fidelity, the iFly 737 is the only one in FS9 which is able to handle RF-leg, therefore providing the "RNP AR APCH with RF-leg" certification !

The iFly 737 NG, king of FS9, seen in Sevilla, Spain, handles RF-leg.
TransaTvia.com has 3 B737 painted under its colors (Ville de Caen, Ville de Besançon, Ville de Brest)


This 737 could easily handle the regional flights I make but sometimes it is nice to pilot a different aircraft than this 737. Moreover, I couldn't get it work under Windows 8 so far.

A set of clues led me to the E-Jets v2 by Feelthere. Firstly, the 2010 review at AVSIM was fairly good. User-comments across the Web were also very good.

Some examples :
  1. "There are some nice ERJs around from Feelthere. They may aim at the same point the Aerosoft Airbus does, no system failures but, still, system details to activate, watch and just use (in the sense of automation).
    They offer the ERJ Regional Jets (make sure you look at the V2 version, not the older one). And they also offer the E-Jets from Embraer, still being a highly automated plane but expanding on the ERJ's capabilities and systems. Means more stuff and buttons, lol. Same here, always look for the V2 version, not the older one.", relaxedstability said (summer 2013) in a topic named "How to get started with "serious" FSX flying ?".
  2. "I can't really say anything bad about the E-Jets v.2. It works well, behaves as expected, and is actually fun to fly.", Chris said (january 2011) at The Pretend Flyer (http://pretendflyer.blogspot.fr/2011/01/mini-review-feelthere-e-jets-v2.html)
  3. "The VC of the FT E-jet can evidently not compete with the newest realizations. I personnally generally use the 2d panel which is very NICE , clear and sharp. I also find the exterior model BEAUTIFUL. The very strong point is the GOOD simulation of the Honeywell PRIMUS Flight Guidance. Even if it uses the same elements Vnav/Lnav/Flch etc, the implementation is quite different from what we know from the Boeings, so there is some serious STUDY and learning needed ! ", said guy (June 2013).
  4. "As long as you dont expect a PMDG quality aircraft and systems depth you will be ok, Take time to learn the autopilot as it is a little different but once you get to know it its good. The E-Jet series is the E170/E190 variants. For a wilco/Feelthere product it is one of their better ones, especially of late.", Peter said (http://forum.avsim.net/topic/410765-need-your-opinion-on-e-jets-v2-embraer-175195-before-buying/)
  5. "- Systems are rather deep, actually, the FMC in particular.
    - 175/195 already include the Call! checklists and Map!; I think it's the better deal of the both.
    - There are no better EMBs around than Feelthere's: they love these birds and so do I.", Olli4740 also said.

The add-on was available in 2010 but there are still very good comments at the time of writing in 2013 !

The system features looked also very appealing on the Feelthere website. Here are some highlighted features :

This looks nice, and we can spot the Vertical Glide Path Mode ! For sure, the E-Jets are modern aircrafts and their simulation looks very promising.

I already owned some Feelthere products : their Embraer Phenom 100 and the Wilco/Feelthere Airbus (external link) (made under the direction of Victor Racz & Fred Goldman, 2007) I began with in serious system simulation, years ago. I know that they work well (even under Windows 8) and I find that their setup and payload editors are fine and cristal clear. Very easy to handle, so I was favorably minded into Feelthere simulations.

The Wilco/Feelthere Airbus 320-200
Two of them, the Ville de Strasbourg and the Ville de Mulhouse belonged to TransaTvia.com.

Embraer Phenom-100



So I decided to run my usual tests. Beyond standard tests (ILS, en-route LNAV, HOLD at a fix) which were passed, I am more interested in accuracy tests. One of the strongest tests being an RNAV(GNSS) approach in LNAV/VNAV (as LPV APV are forbidden with the E-jets). Another being the RNAV(RNP) for runway 26 at LOWI.

Start of the test for RNAV(RNP.3) RWY 26 LOWI

LNAV/VNAV APPR keep the aircraft on lateral and vertical paths (click on the image to enlarge)

We are on LNAV approach with a strong crosswind. The lateral path is kept without deviation (click on the image to enlarge)


Conclusion of the tests

I hardly see comments about it on the web so it has to be emphasised that it brillantly pass the RNP 0.3 test !

As the aircraft has been made in 2010 by Feelthere, it is able to handle different kind of approaches, in particular the modern ones (RNAV(GNSS) and RNAV(RNP)). In contrast, the Airbus Wilco/Feelthere, whose systems were written before 2007 by Eric Marciano, shares the same navigation database in Feelthere format but is only able to display and handle ILS approaches. It fails to keep a strong fidelity to the lateral path in LNAV and we have to apply some tricks and use FPA for the vertical path in an LNAV/VNAV approaches. In other words, the Airbus for FS9 is of an older design, its A/P accuracy is far less than the E-jets one, VNAV in final was hard if impossible to master precisely, the FMS doesn't have FINAL APPR mode for RNAV approaches but only ILS APPR. (For those reasons, I will withdraw the Airbus from my TransaTvia.com fleet, now that I found the E-jets).

The main drawback for the serious simmer is the lack of a fully detailled manual. The 128 pages manual is great, with checklists, but miss some performance figures. We only have the speeds for take-off and landing. So we cannot calculate the amount of fuel needed for the flight, unless using a cheat in the E-Jets FMS that load the adequate fuel for the flight automatically. (I'll have to make my own calculator from the official FCOM values for dispatch purpose, and that's not simple). The 326 pages QWsim colourfull manual (external link) is way better, with full system descriptions and full background information on the Avro RJ.

But in the Avro, while there is a lot of love from the developpers, some things are simplified that are not in the E-jets : look at the VOR 1 and VOR 2 for instance. In the E-jets you really have two sides (the Captain, the FO), while all those things have been reduced to "one side only" in the QWsim Avro. Also you have more things to do in the Avro, because it is an older airplane, the E-JEts is automated in depth, so there are little steps on the overhead to power it up for instance. The heaviest preflight load is the FMS, particulary if you are not familiar with Embraer Honeywell digital avionics, like me.

Let me add a small words on the missed approach. It is written in the Feelthere navigation database. We could not see it in the Airbus, but the E-JEts can display the missed approach procedure on the navigation display once an arrival procedure has been selected. On a missed approach, GA mode is simulated then LNAV can quickly be reengaged. I didn't test with VNAV, as I mainly select the more predictable FLCH in a go-around situation.

Flight dynamics are Rob Young and Alex Koshterek work, and it is a joy to handfly. There is no issue.

About radios, only one side was available at the same time in the Avro. Here you can listen to both radios (VHF1 and VHF2) in the mean time, and selection of the emission channel is independant of the selection of the reception channel ! That's very very good.

To me it is nice to fly a modern regional jet in FS. And it has 1900 nm of range. It is higher than the RJ 85 (1100 nm) with potentially a better occupancy rate (78 passengers in the E-175 against 85 pax in the RJ 85), so the aircraft will be full on every leg.

The installer for Flight Simulator is fine : we don't need to install extra libraries (like .NET framework, etc.). There isn't an Internet activation (only your personnal activation key), so it is easy to install and it is respectfull of the customer. Custumer-friendly in a word.

On stand S4 at LFLC (click on the image to enlarge)

Conclusion

To sum up, with the RNP capabilities it competes with the iFly navigation capabilities (yes, it does), the latter being of course better because of the subtilly fine-tuned RF-leg and VNAV implementations.
In a nutshell, in my fleet (under the virtual TransaTvia.com colors), I will definitely phase out the Airbus and their lack of accuracy, phase out the Avro RJ (to be reconsidered if I can get it working on windows 8 one day). My confidence in the simulated E-jets is big. I will definitely be able to do serious simming (if I can get a fuel planner working). It totaly meets the features granted on the Feelthere commercial website. We have a lot for the bucks.

See that flight-attendant blog about the EMB 175 (external link).
28/09/13, 9:46 am, Ajouter un commentaire

Comparison between the Avro RJ 85 and the Embraer 175

TransaTvia.com écrit :
If you have red the previous review, you know that here at TransaTvia.com ;-) we will replace 2 A320 and 2 Avro RJ with an homogeneised fleet of newest E-175 ! Let's let talk the numbers.

All AVRO RJ data are AVRO RJ 85 data.

Maximum speed
AVRO RJ : M0.73
EMBRAER 175 : M0.82
A320 : M0.82

Empy weight
AVRO RJ : 24 600 kg
EMBRAER 175 : 21 910 kg

Maximum Take-Off Weight
AVRO RJ : 43 998 kg
EMBRAER 175 : 38 790 kg
A320 : 73 500 kg

Maximum fuel
AVRO RJ : 10 298 kg
EMBRAER 175 : 9 335 kg
A320 : 23 600 liters

Range at maximum load
AVRO RJ : 1300 nautical miles
EMBRAER 175 :1900 nm
A320 : 2600 nm

Trust delivered by the power plant
AVRO RJ : 31kN * 4 Lycoming ALF507 = 124 kN (7 000 lb each)
EMBRAER 175 : 63kN * 2 CF34-8E General Electrics = 126 kN (14 200 lb each)
A320 : 111 kN * 2 CFM-56-5 = 222 kN (22 000 lb each)
Note : the CF34 engine is a derivative of combat proven TF34 military engine, which powers US Air Force A-10 and US Navy S-3 Viking, intended for regional jet aircraft. It has an outstanding reliability, durability and availability specially suited to high frequency routes. Moreover, the engine is considered environmentally safe due to its low noise and smoke emissions. (Source : www.deagel.com).

First flight
AVRO RJ : 1992 (from the BAE-146, 1981)
EMBRAER 175 : 2002

Maximum Flight Level
AVRO RJ : FL350
EMBRAER 175 : FL410

Passengers/Cargo maximum loads (as simulated)
AVRO RJ : 85 pax - 8103 kg / 3040 kg
EMBRAER 175 : 78 pax - 6722 kg / 3067 kg
A320 : 150 pax

Sources : QWsim Avro manual, Feelthere Manual, Embraer 170 official Operation Manual, www.deagel.com, aircraft-engines.findthebest.com.

More on RJ versus EMB (external link).

The EMB 175 does not compete in the A320 category that have a greater payload, however with the Boeing, I am able to operate charters flights or regular routes with high passengers load.

28/09/13, 10:42 am, Ajouter un commentaire

Fuel calculator for the Embraer 175

I have added a fuel spreadsheet for the E-jets in the following archive.

v1.0 on 28.9.2013. Based on an official Operations Manual and on the Feelthere simulated aircraft this file makes an automatic suggestion for the fuel. Some data are missing but will be completed soon (required length for takeoff runway and landing runway). The trip fuel and trip time are provided from the official Operations Manual (EMB 170). The automatic suggestion is an interpolation that approximate the values that you can find on the embbeded graphical charts. It also approximate the value that the "fuel cheat" (that is, the automatic fuel suggestion provided by Feelthere in the Embraer FMS) would provide. It is a little different (a little more fuel with my document than with the fuel cheat), but it isn't that different.

Download the document. Have a look at the readme in order to be aware of updates.

28/09/13 Ajouter un commentaire

The simulated Embraer 175, RF-legs and RNP AR procedures

In the real world the E-jets are certified to conduct RNP 0.3 approaches using LNAV and VNAV. They are not certified for LPV, but, I can't say if they are certfied for the use of RF-legs, as we can find some in RNP AR approaches. Did you look on some approaches charts ? At KSO, the RNAV(RNP) says : RF and GPS required. It means that some links between two waypoints are made with Radius-to-Fix legs, a special way of making a turn in the procedure. Not every aircraft have the capability to follow RF-leg. A few have, as an option. So, as I said, I don't know if the Embraer do in the real world. Anyway, I wanted to test those procedures in the simulator. I used a navigation database updated to AIRAC 1309 (September 2013).

RNAV(RNP) procedures with RF-legs are charted as RNP AR procedures (RNP ith Autorisation required).

Below you can see a test for a RNAV(RNP AR) in San Fransisco International (defaut FS2004 scenery). The result is that the turns are not very thight, not very precisely executed in regard to the RF-legs on the charts. The conclusion is that the precision of the Feelthere E-Jets is not good in every circonstances, and you shouldn't use it for RNAV(RNP AR) with RF.

We repeated the test in Sweden on another RNAV(RNP AR) approach. The aircraft struggles to be aligned in time on the final segment.

So far, the E-Jets by Feelthere can do some good RNAV(GNSS) approaches, as we already shown in a previous post (picture at LFLC, Clermont Ferrand) and some good RNAV(RNP) without RF-legs (pictures at LOWI). This is confirmed by the test of the RNAV(GNSS) for runways 04L/R at Nice.

But even for RNAV(GNSS), it sometimes fails as seen below. In the procedure below, in Friedrischshafen, Germany, the plane fails to be aligned on the final segment.

So in a Nnutshell, you can do RNAV(GNSS) and RNAV(RNP) if you have a final with several waypoints that give some time to the aircaft to be aligned (or realigned). If you have a turn in the procedure that is just before or a short time before the final segment, the aircraft may not turn in time, will overshoot the path of the next leg and need a time (that it doesn't have) to realign itself. At Nice, where the RNAV(GNSS) is a success, you have four aligned waypoints, but only two in EDNY (RUDSI and ARGEV). In San Fransisco you have only one waypoint before the runway (FABLA) in the RNAV(RNP AR). In LFLC, the RNAV(GNSS) 26 as two waypoint spaced by 5 nautical miles. The approach is a success because there is only one severe turn before them, whereas there are two in EDNY (so the potential drift is bigger in Germany from the start).

I used descent speeds comprised between 150 and 210 knots for the various approaches. Is it evident that with great speeds the plane will have great troubles to handle the 90° turns seen in the RNAV(GNSS) approaches.

The subject of this post was mainly the RNAV(RNP AR) approaches with RF-legs. To summarize, they are potentially a great challenge for the simulated Embraer, because there are great constraints applied to them. Those procedures are designed in order to make aircrafts follow a pinpoint path with a precise roll and bank angle. The challenge is to be at the correct position in the correct attitude at the beginning of the next leg, and it is not achieved in Fligt Simulator. Therefore, the accumulated drift won't place you in the correct alignment for landing. So from the moment you have RF-leg in an RNAV(RNP AR) I would preclude to make them. If you insist, in order to decided if you can make a RNAV(RNP AR) I would carefully review the procedure, and apply the same advice that related above for GNSS and simple RNP (several waypoints aligned at the end of the procedure which give some time to the aircaft to be correctly aligned).

I recommand the following performance of navigation for the Feelthere E-jets : PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S2 (click to see what it means).

A comment on old school navigation and modern airliners

VOR IMAGE
(Image of Yaoleilei from Wikipedia under CC licence).

TransaTvia.com écrit :
I recently discovered that old school navigation was not anymore possible with several modern airliners. By meaning old school navigation, I am speaking about NBD/VOR tracking for navigation. This is refered as NON-RNAV navigation.

In the good old times, there were airliners deprived of any computerised navigation tools, for instance the Boeing 727. In the Boeing 727, pilots had to manually set the radio to ground beacons frequencies. Then, tracking the relative positions they had to those beacons (i.e. on which radial they were), they were able to determine the position of the aircraft.
On top of this, the autopilot on the B727 was able to do VOR tracking. Set the frequency and the radial to be tracked, and the auto-pilot tuned in VOR mode was able to keep the aircraft on the radial.

I thought it was still available on any modern airliner. For instance, in the B737, there is a VOR/LOC mode. Upon activation on the Mode Control Panel, this mode is able to drive the 737 along an enroute-VOR radial.

My surprise was big to say the least when I saw that the Embraer 175 hasn't a VOR mode. While I am well aware that it is not the primary means of navigation in developped countries, I wanted to practice NON-RNAV skills. This lack of VOR mode is stated in the official operation manual by Embraer. If you pay attention to the Auto-Flight Lateral modes section in this manual, you'll see that there is no VOR mode. There is still a LOC mode, but that allow only the aircraft to track a localizer during a LLZ approach without glide-slope after arming the approach mode.

I saw various post on the web (mostly on www.pprune.org) confirming that on modern aircraft it is not possible anymore to give a VOR radial to the auto-flight system. If you want to do it the "raw data way", pilots are explaining that you have to use HDG select and manually track the radial from the signal displayed on the HSI. As we have to compensate for winds, it may produce a loss of precision during the radial tracking compared to the VOR mode.

Of course, you may know that VOR tracking is not used for a dozen of years in some GNSS-equipped aircraft and some airlines. Instead LNAV is used, even in a VOR approach. As long as the VOR approach is included in the database, those approaches are flown as an Flight Management System (FMS) overlay of the VOR approach.

Still, I was going on using VOR capture in Flight Simulator approaches, as LNAV is not very precise in every simulated aircraft. The Feelthere EMB 175 does have a precise LNAV behavior, therefore there is no problem doing the VOR approach with the FMS data instead.

With the developping Required Navigation Performance procedures, most of the routes and airways are not based on VOR anymore. Instead, fixes are described as geographic coordinates in the WGS-84 format. It seems that in the future of aviation, VOR beacons should be switch off one day. It is not without drawbacks. Because you have to have a great confidence in your IRS and GNSS signal. Ground beacons are a great way to improve the strengthness of your mean of navigation. They are still used for position updating by FMS but we can see that there is a global move to release ourselves from ground navaids, first with the RNAV and RNP approaches and now with the disparition of VOR tracking capability (and ADF sensors) from the aircraft, thus acknowledging a pilot practice but reducing the number of backup systems offered to the pilot (or the auto-pilot) and reducing his basical skills in conventional navigation.

The VOR page on Wikipedia (external link)

MAP vs Raw data (a discussion of interest on www.pprune.org) and another one here (www.pprune.org)

08/10/13, 4:01 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

YART 2.3

TransaTvia.com écrit :
YART 2.3 is out now.
New on 5th October 2013 : Embraer 175 OFP added (v2.2)
New on 12th October 2013 : MAP! by Feelthere now properly recognize the FS9 Flight Plan. (v2.3)
12/10/13, 4:36 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

The BAE-146 in the Ultimate 146 collection

TransaTvia.com écrit :
The Bae-146 in the Ultimate 146 collection is now published at QualityWings Simulation. This is the version 1.3 of the whole package. It adds the Bae-146 to the existing Avro RJ.
12/10/13, 10:42 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

TransaTvia.com écrit :
For further YART NEws, see the dedicated YART NEWS page.
13/10/13, 1:16 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

737 Service and Flight Interphones

TransaTvia.com écrit :
The 737 flight and service interphone were definitely a things I wanted to know more about.

This article is what I can share from my researches on this thema.

What we have from the Boeing documentation is :
ACP

Flight Interphone System

The flight interphone system is an independent communication network. Its primary purpose is to provide private communication between flight deck crewmembers without intrusion from the service interphone system. The ground crew may also use the flight interphone through a jack at the external power receptacle.

Service (Attendant) Interphone System

The service interphone system provides intercommunication between the flight deck, Flight Attendants, and ground personnel. Flight deck crewmembers communicate using either a separate handset (if installed) or their related ACP and any standard microphone.
The Flight Attendants communicate between flight attendant stations or with the flight deck using any of the attendant handsets. Anyone who picks up a handset/microphone is automatically connected to the system.
External jacks for use by maintenance or service personnel can be added to the system by use of the service interphone switch.

SERVICE INTERPHONE Switch

OFF –
• external jacks are deactivated
• communication between flight deck and flight attendants is still possible.
ON – adds external jacks to service interphone system


Another source says :
"There are 2 interphone systems on the 737. They are the flight interphone, and the service interphone. The flight interphone is for the flight crew to talk to each other. The flight interphone is isolated from the service interphone system. There is also a flight interphone jack on the external power receptacle. Ground personnel use this interphone jack to talk to the flight deck."
The service interphone can also be used for communication between the flight crew and the ground crew. In order to do so, the SERVICE INTERPHONE switch must be on the aft overhead panel. It connects all external service interphone jacks to the service interphone system. "Normally, the switch remains in the OFF position. It is not necessary to set the switch to ON to communicate between the flight deck and cabin."

Look at the photo of The External Power Hatch on www.b737.org.uk :
http://www.b737.org.uk/images/external_power_conn.jpg
http://www.b737.org.uk/communications.htm
"It is used by groundcrew to connect the Ground Power Unit and headset for pushback communications with Flight Interphone. The service interphone is used by engineers to communicate with the service interphone stations inside the aircraft."
On this picture, you can see both flight and service interphone jack, the one next to the other.

So in a nutshell I would state to use
- SER INT when you speak with the Flight Attendants ;
- FLT INT if you want to talk only with the flightdeck crew and with the ground service guy when he is plugged to make the push back ;
- PA for cabin announcement.

Of course, I guess that if the ground crew makes an error and connects itself to the service interphone and not to the flight interphone, it can still be heard if the pilot has the SERV INT receiver tuned. If not, the ground guy will see that nobody answer and may replug the jack into the FLT INT.

I grabed related checklists in the FCOM for reference.

Oxygen Mask Microphone Test

MASK-BOOM switch .................................................................. MASK
FLT INT ............................................................................................ Push
SPKR switch ........................................................................................On
RESET/TEST .................................................................... Push and hold
EMERGENCY/TEST selector .......................................... Push and hold
Push-to-Talk switch ........................................................................... INT
Simultaneously push the Push-to-Talk switch, EMERGENCY/TEST
selector and the RESET/TEST switch.
Verify oxygen flow sound is heard through the flight deck speaker.
Push-to-Talk switch ..................................................................... Release
EMERGENCY/TEST selector .................................................... Release
RESET/TEST .............................................................................. Release
SPKR switch ............................................................................ As needed
MASK-BOOM switch ..................................................................BOOM

The Push-to-talk switches

There are two Push-to-Talk switches located on the control column and the other one on the audio panel (labelled R/T (radio–transmit) / I/C (Intercom)). They are spring loaded to the OFF neutral position.
ACP
Push–To–Talk Switch
MIC (microphone) –
• selects the current microphone for transmission, as selected by ACP transmitter selector.
• same as using audio panel PTT switch in R/T position.
OFF – center position.
INT (interphone) –
• selects the current microphone for direct transmission over flight interphone
• bypasses ACP transmitter selector
• same as using audio panel PTT switch in I/C position

The current microphone is either the boom or the mask microphone, per ACP selection.

So if you want to transmit over the Flight Interphone, press the PTT switch in the INT position whatever the MIC selection is on the audio panel.

The "CREW COMMUNICATIONS .... ESTABLISH" item

Several non-normal checklists use the "CREW COMMUNICATIONS .... ESTABLISH" item. Now that we fully understand the FLT et SRV INT systems we can review them !
For instance the following one :
BIOLOGICAL OR CHEMICAL HAZARD / THREAT
Condition: suspected biological or chemical hazard / threat to the flight.
1. Oxygen Masks & Regulators (Smoke Goggles, If Required) ............................ ON, 100%
2. Crew Communications ............................................................................... ESTABLISH
Press crew interphone receiver down and set volume arrow at 12 o'clock or greater.
Set MASK/BOOM selector to MASK. Use I/C toggle on audio selector panel or bottom position on YOKE ROCKER switch when speaking to other pilot.
...

Another checklist with the Crew Communications item :
Window Damage - Window 3 Not Heated

That's all folks ! Thank you for reading.

10/12/13, 11:08 am, Ajouter un commentaire

QualityWings Ultimate 146 Collection

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Hi, let me start 2014 by wishing you an happy new hear :


And now, I would like to write a new comment on the Ultimate 146 Collection by QualityWings Simulation. It has been a while that I fly around with the Avro RJ form QualityWings. I conducted one year ago an in-depth test of the Avro systems. It was at that time an early service pack of the bird, since new ones have been published since.

One the one hand, the support is good, because the simulation is corrected and bugs are not left behind. The dev team does have a presence on their forum and do answer to people. We should note that their support is correct, given that it is only a part-time dev team.

However, now that time has past, how unprofessionnaly the developement seems to me ! We can cleary see how much their development lacks of quality as a consequence of being this part-time team.
Each release of a new SP to correct some bugs has included new bugs. Still, in the latest SP4, you are not as a pilot able to engage the LOC MCP mode and then the Glide Slope APP mode on the MCP if you want to capture the localizer of an ILS approach. The auto flight system simply does not capture the G/S if you previousely selected LOC ! So After SP3, we had to apply some hotfixes because the aircraft were causing Crash to desktop on some computers, making the whole collection unusable. And again, after SP4, which follow SP3 only a few weeks later to correct SP3 bugs, we have again to apply a hotfix (http://qwsim.flight1.net/forums/service-pack-4-hotfix-available_topic3210&FID=3&PR=3.html) to correct things as basic as "FMS EXEC Light does not light up" and "Nosedive after glideslope capture (or glideslope capture not working)". Come on ! That's not serious. For a serious simmer used to premium add-on, it's a total NO-GO.

A lot of people are really amazed about the QW realisation. Yes, it is a great product and the best Cockpit I have ever seen. It is simply the best virtual cockpit for FS2004. I remember of the Russians of CaptainSim. They made also wonderfull detailed cockpits but their system were very weak and the flight model a disaster on FS2004 on the computer I had at this time. So QW still stands well in comparison, with a great flight model, very handy to fly with and a usable auto-flight department.

Remember my study above ? I attributed a quality note which was not the best one, despite all the great features of the simulated Avro.

I would also like to emphazise that something is not optimised with the procedure selection in the DEP/ARR page of the FMC in the Avro RJ.

In other simulation under FS2004, often selection of an arrival routing in the FMS from the DEP/ARR page is a non-event. I noticed that it takes time in the QW simulation to load the procedure. That's a revelator that might indicates that the structure of the navigation databank used by the QW is not optimised. The virtual FMC has to search before displaying the selected procedure. On an old computer, it leads to Sim pause, while the FMS was searching... never occured with another simulation with a detailed FMS. With a better computer, this is almost not noticeable, but it has always seems to me that the way the system is designed and coded could really be optimised under the hood.

To conclude, there is a number of things that lead me to fly less and less with this simulation and I tend to prefer the incredible accuracy of the iFly 737. Man ! This one is a simulation !

:-)

HAPPY NEW YEAR !!
08/01/14, 8:01 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Spotlight on...

The spotlight today is on the Syrian Sim team, for its two airports of Latakia (OSLK) and Damascus (OSDI). Both are high quality add-ons for FSX and FS9. A lot of details are included, including static aircrafts, 3D grass, and photographic pictures as scenery basis.

http://www.syriasim.org

Syriam Sim Video on YouTube.com
Clicking on the image above will direct to an external website (youtube.com)

Le coup de projecteur du 15 Janvier 2014 porte sur l'équipe de Syrian Sim, pour ses deux aéroports de Latakia (OSLK) et de Damascus (OSDI) gratuits pour FSX et FS9. Les scènes d'aéroports sont très précises, avec de l'herbe 3D, des avions syriens statiques (Il-76 et Tupolev, hélicoptères militaires) et des textures photographiques comme base de chaque scène. A tester absolument.

15/01/14, 8:01 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Spotlight on...

The spotlight today is on the Thessaloniki airport LGTS located in northern Greece.

Ο προβολέας είναι σήμερα στις LGTS αεροδρόμιο της Θεσσαλονίκης βρίσκεται στη βόρεια Ελλάδα.

Γεια σας, είμαι ένας Γάλλος ακόλουθος στην Ελλάδα. Ασκώ πτήσης προσομοίωσης Αιγαίου καιρό. Η Αθήνα είναι κύρια στάση μου από το οποίο θα χρησιμεύσει για τη Μέση Ανατολή (Τελ Αβίβ, Χουργκάντα​​, Eilat) και την Κρήτη (Σητεία, Ηράκλειο, Χανιά), την οποία γνωρίζω καλά, Λάρνακα Κύπρος, κυρίως από τα αεροδρόμια του Παρισιού στη Γαλλία . Μπήκα πριν από ένα χρόνο και IVAO Προορίζεται να ζητήσει από το ελληνικό τμήμα για τον έλεγχο αεροδρομίου LGIR με την έγκριση του πελάτη, αλλά μέχρι στιγμής δεν είχα χρόνο για να το συνειδητοποιήσει και είμαι ακόμα AS3 ATC.

For FSX and P3D

FSDG has released in the past few days a new scenery of the Thessaloniki airport, for FSX and published by Aerosoft Gmbh. The scenery does not only cover the airport but also recreates the whole town. AES 2.34 fully covers this airport (one credit). Here is the external link to Aerosoft if you wish to take a look at that scenery . The commercial representative of Aerosoft Gmbh. said in the Aerosoft forum that it might be the finnest scenery ever released for FSX per Aerosoft.

I don't like to make free add for a commercial company here, but it seems that there is no dedicated LGTS detailled freeware scenery for FSX. There is however a photorealistic scenery of the airport with repositionned objects on the AVSIM library . The description follows : AS REAL AS IT GETS. This is a highly detailed photorealistic scenery of Thessaloniki and the surrounding area. Default FSX airports of Makedonia (LGTS), Alexadreia (LGAX) and Sedes (LGSD) were redone, positioned to their exact location and buildings were added in the airport compounds. Aprons were added along with plenty of parking spots, aircraft traffic and airport vehicle traffic.

You might also use the wonderful freeware per GAP for FS2004 (see below) with the FSX fix from Olmpic Air Virtual (link provided for the Thessaloniki 9th february event)

For FS2004

There is a very nice scenery with photorealistic background and detailled airport buildings for FS2004. In addition this scenery is fully covered by AES (0 credit). It has been done in 2006 by GAP (Greek Airport Project) which website is unfortunately down at the moment. This scenery is highly recommanded by TransaTvia.com !

Download it from DropBox , as provided in february 2014 by Antony Manalis on behalf of GAP.

If the link above is dead, please contact me using the link "Contacter le webmestre" or leave a comment. I will provide you the scenery.

This scenery also works without problem on FSX with the FSX fix from Olympic Air Virtual

Updated charts

You may dowload updated charts on the greek division of VATSIM. There are not vectored however. But they are accurate and kept updated by the VATSIM team and this is the best solution if you don't want to pay Navigraph charts. Greece is a notorious destination for being hard to legally find up-to-date charts.

Μπορείτε να το κατεβάσετε τους χάρτες από VATSIM. Δεν υπάρχουν αριθμητικά. Αλλά είναι ακριβή και ενημερωμένα από την VATSIM. Αυτή είναι η καλύτερη λύση, αν δεν θέλετε να πληρώσετε διαγράμματα Navigraph. Η ελληνική διοίκηση δεν πεθαίνει παρέχουν επίσημα διαγράμματα για το κοινό.

VATSIM charts for Thessalonoki LGTS

You will find all the other greek charts from VATSIM by clicking this external link. This adress is the reference for greek charts.

Αυτό το ρεπερτόριο VATSIM είναι το σημείο αναφοράς για νομικά charts σε όλη την Ελλάδα.

Ajouter un commentaire

New scenery / Nouvelle scène de Lognes Emerainville 2014 (FS9,FSX,P3D)

TransaTvia.com écrit :
Lognes - Émerainville airfield (IATA: XLG • ICAO code: LFPL) is a French civil airfield open to public air traffic (CAP) 1, settled in cities of Lognes and Émerainville in the « departement de Seine-et-Marne » in Île-de-France. It is located 1.5 km south of Lognes, 28 km east of Paris.

This civil controlled airfield usually hosts general aviation's traffic under visual flight rules (VFR) and only allows daytime operations. It sometimes hosts international traffic, on particular demand. It is also used for the practice of leisure and tourism (light aircrafts and helicopters). It is operated by Aéroports de Paris.

This scenery contains all main buildings of the airfield and many realistic objects and details.

We, at TransaTvia.com, tested the scenery, installed over a France VFR Paris layer. We recommand it for all people knowing Lognes in real life, at it is fully immersive.

The scenery is a welcome addition to the FS2004 world and is available at SimMarket.

However, we had to mannually edit the AFCAD file with ADE, because runways 26 and 08 are inverted in the naming. So the FS9 ATC clears you to land on what he thinks is R26, however it is R08 from your plane. Open ADE, select each runway and invert primary and secondary numbers. Then compile the airport.

http://www.libertysim.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=39276
12/03/14, 5:07 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Spotlight on...

26th of March, 2014. The spotlight today is on the Thessaloniki airport LGTS located in northern Greece.

After a first spolight published a few weeks ago on LGTS, we are doing another spotlight on the same airport, because a new scenery was released 6 days ago by GAP (Greek Airport Scenery).

Ο προβολέας είναι σήμερα στις LGTS αεροδρόμιο της Θεσσαλονίκης βρίσκεται στη βόρεια Ελλάδα.

For FSX and P3D

You might use the new freeware LGTS-2014 per GAP for FSX available on AVSIM via their new website .

You might also use the wonderful freeware LGTS-2006 per GAP for FS2004 (see below in the FS2004 section) with the FSX fix from Olympic Air Virtual (link provided for the Thessaloniki 9th february event)

For FS2004

There is a very nice scenery with photorealistic background and detailled airport buildings for FS2004. In addition this scenery is fully covered by AES (0 credit). It has been done in 2006 by GAP (Greek Airport Project) which original website is down. This scenery is highly recommanded by TransaTvia.com ! Download it from DropBox , as provided in february 2014 by Antony Manalis on behalf of GAP. If this link happen to be dead, please contact me using the link "Contacter le webmestre" or leave a comment. I will provide you the scenery.

However, there is a new version published by GAP in March 2014, LGTS 2014 currently the recommanded scenery !

Charts

You may dowload updated charts on the greek division of VATSIM. There are not vectored however. But they are accurate and kept updated by the VATSIM team

You will find all the other greek charts from VATSIM by clicking this external link.

Αυτό το ρεπερτόριο VATSIM είναι το σημείο αναφοράς για νομικά charts σε όλη την Ελλάδα.

Otherwise, you might try the Official AIP website .

26/03/14, 5:07 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

LFMT Montpellier airport or the death of FS2004 announced

TransaTvia.com écrit :
It's been a few days since I have the idea to write about the "death" of FS2004, the simulator published 10 years ago.

Have a look at the comment here.

27/04/14, 7:00 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

iFly 3.2.1

TransaTvia.com écrit :

published picture

12/06/14, 7:02 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Heringsdorf Airport on AVSIM

TransaTvia.com écrit :

From a report in the french flight simulation magazine MicroSimulateur, we discovered a nice freeware scenery for FSX but also for FS2004 on AVSIM. This German airport is located in the vincinity of the Baltic Sea, Northen Germany.

published picture

12/06/14, 7:02 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Coup de projecteur sur... / Spotlight on

... la nouvelle version du document de préparation des vols sur 737 NG, qui incorpore le calcul du N1 au décollage pour le CFM56. A découvrir sur YART ! (19/04/2014)

12/06/14, 7:02 pm, Ajouter un commentaire

Transatvia.com Spotlight on... (monthly edition, July 2014)

The spotlight of the month will this time deals with the engine manufacturer CFM website. Have a look at those stunning videos that explain how a CFM56 works !

How does a CFM56 work ? (read the videos directly)

How does a CFM56 work ?

www.cfmaeroengines.com CFM56-7B

www.cfmaeroengines.com CFM56-5B

Transatvia.com Spotlight on... (monthly edition, August 2014)

The spotlight of the month will this time deals the entry into active service of the runway 21 at Ben Gurion Tel Aviv International airport.
Transatvia.com

You can download my unofficial patch in the scenery section. LLBG Ben Gurion 9 for FS9 update

Version 3.60 of YART is out !

TransaTvia.com écrit :

Hi, this is an update news for YART, Yet Another Route Tool.

In this version 3.60 we have :

- slightly reworked the library style.
- deeply remade the module which looks for suitable alternate airports in the vincinity. [4 major improvements]

In the older version, the module was looking for airports in the vincinity and then expanded at a fixed distance rate the search area to display enough airports in Yart Yet Another Route Tool.

In the newer module, [1] the geographic area is dynamically updated to look for the 10 nearest airports, no matter the size of the search area. [2] The presentation is also redone. The potential alternates airports are now displayed in a table, with the relevant distances to the right of the table. [3] The table can be sorted by airport name or by distance by clicking on the table header. [4] In the end, if the default looktable of 10 airports is not enough to display some relevant airports for your next flight, using the advanced mode you can change the number of airports to be added to the list. If you tick the option "Advanced mode" in Yart, the advanced panel will be displayed as usual. From now on this setting can be changed at the bottom of the advanced panel.

That's all for today ! Thank you for your reading.

09/09/14, 9:48 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Euroairport Basisszenerie LFSB 1.01 (FS9)

TransaTvia.com écrit :

It seems there is some changes on the EAP-szenerie website. Harry "the Poly-wrestler" and Othmar "Buddy Canadien" have released a long time ago the Euroairport LFSB freeware scenery for FSX. It seems now that a first version for FS9, namely the "Basisszenerie", is about to be released.

"Veröffentlichung / release: ca. 10.09.2014"

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/707615tu134interflug.jpg (lien externe)

This scenery has a long-term competitor : the France VFR Euroairport .
http://content.dbalternative.fr/products/LFSB9/LFSB9_13.jpg (lien externe)

If the freeware scenery is released we will be able to compare the quality of the two competitors. I feel perfectly fine with the FVFR scenery. I modified it by hand to add the new AMAC aviation area. However, AES is only supporting the freeware scenery (with 0 credits) since Oliver Pabst never adapted the FVFR one.
http://www.aerosoft2.de/downloads/aes/aesairports.html (lien externe)
http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&fromMainBar=1 (lien externe)

Euroairport Basisszenerie LFSB 1.01 (FS9) home page :

http://www.euroairport2011.homepage.t-online.de/Home (lien externe)

10/09/14, 7:31 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


The greek carrier AEGEAN named the Best Regional Airline in Europe

TransaTvia.com écrit :

The greek carrier AEGEAN named the Best Regional Airline in Europe at the 2014 World Airline Awards for the foutrh year !

http://el.aegeanair.com//files/1/Content/Newsletter/180914/indexEN.html (lien externe)

19/09/14, 1:02 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Le blog de f52cr

"J'ai attendu longtemps avant de me décider.
Partagé entre la volonté de créer un site web pour transmettre un peu de mon expérience, et ma satiété des langages informatiques (pour lesquels j'ai beaucoup donné, sauf le html...). Il me fallait une solution avec laquelle je puisse n'avoir à faire qu'une chose : Ecrire, rien que cela, et tout de suite !
Avec l'aide de ma fille aînée c'est vers ce blog que j'ai atterri."

C'est avec ces mots que l'auteur du blog f52cr.canalblog.com nous acceuille. D'un niveau technique appréciable, bien rédigé et bien tenu, la lecture de ce blog orienté vers la simulation de vol est recommandée ! Voir le lien ci-dessous.


http://f52cr.canalblog.com/ (lien externe)

28/09/14, 11:49 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Le blog de f52cr

TransaTvia.com écrit :

Bonjour,

Lire (lien externe)

28/09/14, 11:49 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Airlines using the b747

TransaTvia.com écrit :

Good day.

I write here a list of current operators of the B747.

Airline // Number of the type // +extra boeing types

In the extra boeing types column a 5 means 757 also in service in thi airline.
A 6 means also 767 in service, 7 for 777, 8 for 787.

So if you read :
Kam Air 1 +6
it means that Kam Air has 1 747 in its fleet, plus one or more aircraft of the type 767.
If you read :
iFly 8 +56
it means that an airline called iFly has height 747 in its fleet plus one or more 757 and one or more 767.

____________________________________________________
Airline // Number of the type // +extra boeing types

==== Afghanistan ====
Kam Air 1 +6
==== Armenia ====
Vertir Airlines 1
Veteran Avia 1
==== Australia ====
Qantas Airways 13 +6
==== Azerbaijan ====
Silk Way Airlines 3 +6
==== Belgium ====
TNT Airways 4 +57
==== China ====
Air China 7 +57
Air China Cargo 7 +57
China CArgo Airlines 5 +57
Uni-Top Airline 3
Yangtze River Express 3
==== France ====
Air France 9 + 7
Corsair International 3
==== Georgia ====
The Cargo Airlines 1
==== Germany ====
Lufthansa 32
==== Greece ====
Aerospace One 2
Hellenic Imperial Airways 3
==== Hong Kong ====
Air Hong Kong 3
Cathay Pacific 33 +7
==== India ====
Air India 5 +78
==== Indonesia ====
Garuda Indonesia 2 +7
Lion Air 2
==== Iran ====
Caspian Airlines 2
Iran Air 3
Mahan Air 2
==== Iraq ====
Iraqi Airways 1
==== Israel ====
C.A.L. Cargo Airlines 2
El Al 7 + 67
==== Italy ====
Cargolux Italia 1
==== Japan ====
Nippon Cargo Airlines 12
==== Luxembourg ====
Cargolux Airlines International 19
==== Malaysia ====
Eaglexpress 3
Malaysia Airlines 2 +7
==== Morocco ====
Royal Air Maroc 1 +6
==== Netherlands ====
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines 25 +7
Martinair 2
==== New Zealand ====
Air New Zealand 2 +67
==== Nigeria ====
Kabo Air 3
Max Air 5
==== Pakistan ====
Pakistan International Airlines 3 +7
Rayyan Air 2
Vision Air International 1
==== Philippines ====
Philippine Airlines 2 +7
==== Russia ====
Air Bridge Cargo 12
Transaero Airlines 20 +67
____________________________________________________
Source : fleet data from CAPA - correct at the beginning of June 2014


While the airlines of countries from A... to R... have been reviewed from the CAPA survey for June 2014, the following entries (from S... to Z...) have been added for each airlines from planespotter.net or from the airline website. The data is less accurate than the one from the CAPA survey.
On www.planespotters.net stored and active have been both accounted.
Websites consulted on October 27, 2014.

==== Saudi Arabia ====
Saudia 4
==== Singapore ====
Singapore Airlines Cargo ( )
==== Slovakia ====
Air Cargo Global 1
==== Spain ====
Pullmantur Air 4
==== Switzerland ====
Panalpina (wet leased from Atlas Air Cargo)
==== Taiwan ====
EVA Airlines 14
==== Thailand ====
Orient Thai Airlines 6
Thai Airways International 13
==== Turkey ====
MyCargo 4
==== United Arab Emirates ====
Abu Dhabi Amiri Flight 3
Dubai Air Wing 4
Emirates SkyCargo 2
Midex Airlines 2
==== United Kingdom ====
British Airways 46
Virgin Atlantic Airways 12
==== United States ====
Atlas Air 31
Centurion Air Cargo 4
Delta Air Lines 4 (and 12 leased)
Ernest Angley Ministries 1
Kalitta Air 19
Las Vegas Sands 2
Polar Air Cargo 8
Southern Air 3
United Airlines 24
UPS Airlines 13

=============================
What could be the acquisition price of a 747-400 today ?
One of the offers listed in this page (http://www.globalplanesearch.com/search?mk=205®ion=Worldwide&cntry=Any&st=Any&syr=1&eyr=2019&spr=0&epr=999999999999&at=Any<filt=1&ut=&mf=3060|747&sort=default&shw=15&cur=1&lsl=4&hsl=7&rs=0) brings an order of size :

FOR SALE
1992 Boeing 747-400-4056
$26,000,000
TTAF: 66,000 Hrs.

Location: CA, US
PW-4056 Engines
347 seats

Gears Due 2014
Recent C Check
HMV Due May 2010
875,000 MGTOW

In constrast, a 2001 Boeing 777-200ER (300 to 400 pax, max range 5,240 nautical miles or 9,700 km, MTOW 545,000 lbs, 2 * 77,000 lb of thrust, CRZ M.84) is sold at $49,000,000.
(the unitary price for a new 777-200 ER is reported at $ 269.5 millions)
(the unitary price for a new 747-8 is reported at $ 367.8 millions)

Some facts about the B744 :
April 29, 1988 First flight of the first 747-400.
416 to 524 passengers.
Max range : 7,260 nautical miles (13,450 km)
MTOW : 875,000 lbs
Thrust : 2 * 60 000 lb
CRZ : M.85
At the end of 2002, Boeing incorporated new Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs) on all new 747-400s.


===========================
Continuing the 744/777 comparative, this time about freighter variants :


____ B744 ____

Total volume : 27 467 cu ft
Main Deck:
21,347 cu ft (605 cu m)
30 pallets, 96 in x125 in (244 cm x 318 cm)

Lower Deck:
5,600 cu ft (159 cu m)
32 LD-1 containers

Bulk Cargo:
520 cu ft (15 cu m)

Maximum Payload (2 options):
248,300 lbs (112,630 kg)
Optional 273,300 lbs (123,970 kg) available with maximum takeoff-weight limitation

____ 777 ____
Total volume:
23,051 cu ft (653 cu m)

Volume, Main Deck:
18,301 cu ft (518 cu m)
27 pallets, 96 in. x 125 in. (244 cm x 318 cm)

Volume, Lower Deck:
4,150 cu ft (117.5 cu m)
10 pallets, 96 in. x 125 in. (244 cm x 318 cm)
Bulk cargo: 600 cu ft (17.0 cu m )

Maximum Revenue Payload:
112 tons (102 metric tons)


===============================
Continuing this first review of the type 747, we will have a short review about fuel requirement and fuel costs.

Basis from a review of :
http://airwaysnews.com/blog/2014/04/15/analysis-of-deltas-widebody-replacement-options-for-767-300er-and-747-400/
This paper offers trip costs evaluations based on a 5500 nm flight.

= = =
Boeing 747-400 Fuel Planner

London to VVDN EGGW-VVDN (5303 NM)
Total Fuel: 302808 POUNDS
Fuel Time
Fuel Usage 276872 13:20
Reserve Fuel 25936 01:15
Fuel on Board 302808 14:35
Luton to Danang Intl
All weights in POUNDS
////////////
Price of FOB : 10 926 061 cts* ($ 109 260)
This is a cross-check of the evaluation of airwaysnews.com which states a $116 000 fuel cost for the 5500 nm trip in a 744.
Cross-check successfull.
////////////


= = =
Boeing 777-200 Fuel Planner

London to VVDN EGGW-VVDN (5303 NM)
Total Fuel: 244141 POUNDS
Fuel Time
Fuel Usage 223230 13:20
Reserve Fuel 20911 01:15
Fuel on Board 244141 14:35
Luton to Danang Intl
All weights in POUNDS
////////////
Price of FOB : 8 809 211 cts* ($ 88 092)
This is a cross-check of the evaluation of airwaysnews.com which states a $96 000 fuel cost for the 5500 nm trip in a 773.
Cross-check quite successfull.
////////////

= = =
Boeing 757-200 Fuel Planner

London to VVDN EGGW-VVDN (5303 NM)
Total Fuel: 119991 POUNDS
Fuel Time
Fuel Usage 109713 13:20 (83 400 lbs from my own interpolation of the 757 FCOM)
Reserve Fuel 10278 01:15
Fuel on Board 119991 14:35 (91 000lbs from my own interpolation of the 757 FCOM)
Luton to Danang Intl
All weights in POUNDS
////////////
Price of FOB : 4 329 572 cts* ($ 43 295) (3 283 505 cts based on my interpolation or $ 32 835)
////////////

=================================
* Data collected from http://fuelplanner.com/index.php
As a simplification fuelplanner.com as been used instead of FCOM figures for fuel.
(London to VVDN EGGW-VVDN (5303 NM))

Fuel Price October 17, 2014 : http://www.iata.org/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/Pages/price-analysis.aspx
About : 245 cts/gal

Using 6.79 lbs/gal.
then
the fuel price is 245 cts for 6,79 lbs.

Also using 1 U.S. cent => 0.01 U.S. dollars.

30/10/14, 6:51 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


FullHDcaptain YouTube channel

transaTvia.com écrit :

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzePCTGUIE8vNlNMvAwgMCg (lien externe)

17/11/14, 9:00 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Transatvia.com Spotlight on (September issue)......

This time the spotlight is focussed on a video from the Youtube channel 'askcaptainscott' with some pretty interesting live explications about transoceanic procedures in a 747.

askcaptainscott


Carenado pour X-plane 10.30

TransaTvia.com écrit :


Carenado met à jour ses appareils pour X-Plane 10.30.

New aircraft versions for X-Plane 10.30
With the last X-Plane update (to10.30) new features are now possible in our aircraft.

One of the most important new feature is related to the incorporation of the GNS 430 and GNS530.

We decided to update all our fleet to 10.30 (or higher).
We are calling this new version: version 3 (v3).

Most important features of this fleet update are:

-Aircraft will only be for X-Plane 10.30 (or higher).
-Those aircraft with an old default GPS will be updated to the new GNS430 or GNS530.
-Plugin-enhanced (SASL, 32-bit and 64-bit).
-FPS-optimized models.
-NEW! Scroll wheel support.

We will be updating by groups of 4 or 5 aircraft every 3 weeks.

Customers just have to re download their aircraft from Carenado´s site or from the site they bought it from.

These are the aircraft updated in this batch:

Carenado C340 HD Series X-Plane
Carenado C90 King Air HD Series X-Plane
Carenado PA46 Malibu Mirage 350P HD Series X-Plane
Carenado B200 King Air HD Series X-Plane
Carenado CT206H Stationair HD Series X-Plane

24/01/15, 9:03 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Projets à surveiller pour X-Plane 10

TransaTvia.com écrit :


Au nombre des projets à surveiller pour X-Plane 10

Le MD-80 de ROTATE SIM.
http://rotatesim.com/

Le 737-300 de IXEG.
http://ixeg.net/

S'il est certain que ce dernier projet sera d'une qualité technique inégalée, apportant dans X-Plane un cocpkpit et des systèmes identiques àn l'appareil réel, le niveau de spécificité technique (modélisation des pannes ? Degré de profondeur des systèmes électriques AC et DC ?) de la simulation du MD-80 est encore moins clair. Il a maintenant fallu presque 5 ans de développement pour le groupe IXEG, constitué de plusieurs ingénieurs, alors que le MD-80, produit par un développeur assisté de deux conseillers techniques semble être développé plus rapidement.

Quoiqu'il en soit, les deux appareils apportent un FMS avec SID et STAR, permettant la navigation RNAV. DU point de vue réel, ces deux appareils sont cependant un peu anciens pour respecter les spécifications RNP, qui sont l'autre série de certifications aux côtés du RNAV dans le schéma des certifications basées sur la performance de navigation. Par conséquent, il faudra attendre la modélisation d'appareils plus modernes pour suivre des approches RNAV-GNSS. Cependant, dans quelques années, les appareils de PMDG seront adaptés à X-Plane 10 (c'est PMDG qui l'annonce, dans la mesure de la demande et de la faisabilité technique actuellement en cours d'évaluation). Nous avons donc l'espoir de voir à moyen terme un 737NG hyper réaliste.

24/01/15, 9:16 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Un site sur le MD-80

TransaTvia.com écrit :

Potentiellement utile pour accompagner la découverte du MD-80, quand la verstion de ROTATE sortira pour x-plane :

http://www.hilmerby.com/

http://www.hilmerby.com/ (lien externe)

25/01/15, 11:55 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


The winter link

Publication de plans de vols EGLL - LFLB et retour LFLB - EGLL dans la librairie de YART Yet Another Route Tool !

25/01/15, 21:55 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


New in YART 4.4

TransaTvia.com écrit :

OFP for the 737 (full METAR added, waypoints coordinates included) and OFP for the 727 updated (INS data added).

27/01/15, 7:36 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


CREATION/ EDITION/ CONVERSION de scènes sous X-Plane

CREATION/ EDITION/ CONVERSION de scènes sous X-Plane

1- Convertir avec FS2X-Plane

- Lors de la conversion d'une scene avec FS2Xplane (http://marginal.org.uk/x-planescenery/tools.html), utiliser le répertoire racine de FS2004 ou FSX comme source de librairie supplémentaire. Cela a pour effet de démultiplier le temps nécessaire à la compilation d'une scène mais permet de convertir tous les objets présents dans la scène, même ceux qui sont référencés dans des librairies extérieures aux librairies présentes dans le dossier de scène.

2- Modifier la distance de visibilité de certain objet (.obj), par exemple des fichiers HR à haute résolution (s'ils ne sont visibles que de très près dans le simulateur)

// ATTR_LOD
// LOD indique le début d'une nouvelle LOD, qui devrait être utilisé pour représenter l'objet lorsque le spectateur est entre = proche (inclusif) et = loin(exclusif), en mètres.

// ATTR_layer_group
// [Nouveauté 8.50:] X-Plane dessine les scènes par "groupes de couches" - tous les éléments du même groupe de couches sont dessinés avant tous les autres groupes, mais dans un groupe de couches, l'ordre de dessin peut être optimisé par X-Plane. Normalement, les groupes de couches sont déterminés par X-Plane en fonction du type de dessin. Les objets ont toujours eu leur propre groupe de couche.

// Lorsque le ATTR_layer_group est inclus quelque part dans un objet (il ne doit être utilisé qu'une fois, même si vous avez plusieurs LODs), ce dernier est dessiné dans un groupe de couches différent. Le décalage est utilisé pour augmenter la priorité - par exemple. est dessiné après , et est dessiné deux couches avant . Vous pouvez utiliser un décalage de -5 à + 5.

= Application

ATTR_LOD_draped 880
ATTR_draped
ATTR_layer_group_draped objects -1
TRIS 0 6

deviendra :

ATTR_LOD_draped 0 5000
ATTR_draped
ATTR_layer_group_draped objects -1
TRIS 0 6

3- Traiter le problème des fichiers aboutissant à une texture photoréaliste brouillée alors que la priorité doit être donnée aux objets HR (haute résolution) (à dessiner au-dessus)

4- Ajout d'effets d'éclairage : ajouter les lignes de paramètres dans le fichier objet désiré, sauvegarder l'objet.

Par exemple, pour les lampadaires d'aire de trafic utilisé dans les scènes FVFR (objets "lightpoletex") :

# Lights added per editor from default X-plane object apron_light.obj
# Emetteurs de lumiere a 20 metres du sol
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard 1.2513 20.0000 -1.2513 0.150 -0.455 -0.150 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard 1.2513 20.0000 1.2513 0.150 -0.455 0.150 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard -1.2513 20.0000 1.2513 -0.150 -0.455 0.150 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard -1.2513 20.0000 -1.2513 -0.150 -0.455 -0.150 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard 0.0000 20.0000 1.7696 -0.0 -0.455 0.210 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard 1.7696 20.0000 -0.0000 0.210 -0.455 0.000 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard 0.0000 20.0000 -1.7696 0.0 -0.455 -0.210 0.5 6.0
LIGHT_PARAM apron_light_billboard -1.7696 20.0000 -0.0000 -0.210 -0.455 0.000 0.5 6.0
# Autres effets de lumiere depuis environ 20 metres du sol
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_N 0.0000 20.5208 -1.7700
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_E 1.7696 20.5208 -0.0000
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_S 0.0000 20.5208 1.7696
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_W -1.7696 20.5208 -0.0000
LIGHT_CUSTOM 1.2513 20.5208 -1.2513 0.150 -0.455 -0.150 0.5 6.0 0.628 0.506 0.856 0.734
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_N 0.0000 20.5208 -1.7700
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_E 1.7696 20.5208 -0.0000
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_S 0.0000 20.5208 1.7696
LIGHT_NAMED apron_light_W -1.7696 20.5208 -0.0000

Ressource sur le sujet

http://wiki.x-plane.fr/index.php?title=.obj (lien externe)
How To Convert MSFS Scenery to X-Plane (lien externe)
Marginal → X-Plane Scenery → Tools (lien externe)

30/04/15, 2:08 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Night Environment - France - Preview

See the video


A History of AVSIM : Thomas Verne Allensworth

TransaTvia.com écrit :

A History of AVSIM

=By the Staff of AVSIM Online=
=Revision Date: April 24, 2009=

Tom Allensworth had operated a Bulletin Board System from 1983 until approximately the fall of 1995. The BBS had started as the CAPENET while he lived on Cape Cod during the early ‘80’s, and was renamed THE VINE (The Virginia Information Network Exchange), when he moved to central Virginia in 1987. By the middle of 1995, the Internet was taking hold and the BBS concept seemed limited at best, when compared to the then international potential of the Internet.

Tom became a flight simulation enthusiast when he purchased his first computer, an Apple IIc in 1983 and had happened to purchase BAO’s Flight Simulator to go with it. He had taken flight lessons in the early ‘70’s for his PPL and had to drop out of active flying for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the lack of funds as a poor former sailor back at college using the G.I. Bill to get through. So, with the discovery of Bruce Artwick’s wonderful Flight Simulator 1, he was back in to aviation no matter the tenuousness of the connection.

Closing the VINE BBS was one of the toughest decisions he had to make. After 12 years of operation in one form or another, it was difficult to shut down. As time past however, Tom felt the need to get back into the online world in some fashion. In the closing months of 1996, the concept of AVSIM was born.

The initial concept for AVSIM was pretty straight forward. Write articles and capture images of the Flight Simulation genre, put it all into a neat HTML magazine format and a well packaged zip file, and make it available for download among the major library servers on the Internet (notably, the file library system run and maintained at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania – one of the first major file libraries for flight simulation). The first issue was uploaded to IUP and elsewhere on March 1st of 1997. Tom's original intent was for it to be a monthly magazine. That did not last long.

It became rapidly apparent that the flight simulation community was growing by leaps and bounds. Add-on releases, Freeware and other important growth enablers were happening at a blinding pace. A monthly magazine was not going to be adequate to report news that was indeed happening multiple times a day. Since the magazine was published in HTML, the answer was obvious. In April of 1997 AVSIM went online with its own, fledgling, web site.

Tom Allensworth departed on his angel flight at 0530 on the morning of the 4th of April 2015.

http://www.avsim.com/history/ (lien externe)

11/05/15, 10:49 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Putting into active service the "Thomas Verne Allensworth"

TransaTvia.com écrit :

The iFly 747 v2 might be the best airplane I have ever flown with in FS2004.It would be unfair not to see all the incredible work that has been done. Also about the lightining. I love how is the dome light in the current version (not too bright) and backlighting is clearly a compromise resulting from a developpment choice (We are not in X-Plane with every and each light). In my medium configuration I achieve average to low average FPS in the VC, but for IFR for me that's fine enough since I can actually enjoy flying between two heavily modelled airports with a high resolution virtual cockpit, sufficient fluidity and very reasonnable VAS usage (just a little more VAS that the 737, so I guess it was tooken care of). Good job ! And if I need more for visuals I can switch to the wonderfull 2D for 25 FPS. The transformation from the 737, provided you follow the operation manual, is straightforward. Except for the high point of view which made me do a couple of go arounds in my first visual circuits (never been so high in a cockpit !). Last week I saw the B747-400 F-GITE in actual flight and a few days later I was able to fly this very immatriculation thanks to the Colin repaint for this very aircraft ! Woww !

I have made a couple of hand-made texture modifications : changing the chinese crew (the iFly team I guess) by diversity in the cockpit including occidental faces, changing the windows texture to get it smoother, changing the books covers in the cockpit storages for my airline SOP .

I also acquired FSUIPC. The total sounds a little expansive however the results are better with a registered version : longer than default battery life is required for startup, it's handy to assign axis for the spoiler accurately and the throttle is better handled by the autothrottle when the axis are set through FSUIPC than directly into FS. Also the 747 is a four engine aircraft (not easy to support on everyone desk - think to int 6 axis needed including spoilers and flaps !), so FSUIPC offers you to assign one axis for Engine 1 and 2 and one other axis for engine 3 and 4. Convenient. Of course officially the developper can't force you to buy an external product so fsuipc free also appears in the System Requirements.

I yet have to confirm the judment on this simulation in exploring the deepness of the systems and their accuracy of modellisation.

So now the time has come to put into service the Boeing 747-400 "Thomas V. Allensworth" under TransaTvia.com colors.

This bird flies at M.90, FL450 !

The transaTvia.com fleet (lien externe)

11/05/15, 12:59 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Lido at navigraph.com

(external link)

Navtech charts are removed from the Navigraph offer for flight simulation charts. The new provider is Lufthansa Systems. You can take a look at navigraph, but take care : the pricing conditions and technical limitations of the offer have evolved !

15/05/15, 9:32 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


A new Hellenic aeronautical information publication website.

The Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority (HCAA) website (external link) and in particular the Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority (HCAA) / Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) / Aeronautical Information Services Division (AIS) pages aims to provide information regarding the aeronautical publications of Greece. The new website has been put into service on the 10th of July 2014 (source : http://www.ypa.gr/en/news/welcome).

The picture below shows the new access to the aerodrome charts. While charts prior to 2013 are still old pixellised and scanned pictures (sometimes hand edited), new vectored charts are progressively released.
(external link)

The following picture shows the differences between providers in the depiction of the Thessaloniki airport in Greece. Those pictures are only very small extracts from the charts so, please do not use the pictures below for flight.

Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


X-Plane 10.40 is comming !

TransaTvia.com écrit :

"X-Plane 10.40 is a major feature release that includes changes to how DSFs are loaded, anonymous usage data tracking, and new ATC functionality". (Source : www.x-plane.com).

http://www.x-plane.com/search/page/3/ (lien externe)

03/07/15, 4:27 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Flight Sim Con 2015

Transatvia.com écrit :


An interesting video from froogle sim !

https://youtu.be/x27rGI3vtuc (lien externe)

03/07/15, 4:36 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


The AMX International Jet for X-Plane 10


The AMX International Jet for X-Plane 10, seen over the Santorini Island, is one of the best jet available for X-Plane.

At the bottom of this post you will find a link to a video that demonstrate the use of Bliss Back cables (arresting gear) at the military airports in X-Plane with the AMX from Filipo and Alberto. (The cables are located in X-Plane on airport with a colocated TACAN, the military VOR-DME).

Among other features you will find:

3d cockpit and fps-friendly 2d panel
Fully custom HUD, complete with a working CCIP for free-fall bombs
Detailed warning display
Working GPS guided bombs (JDAM), CANON, free-fall bombs (in CCIP mode)
Custom air-to-air refueling mode with an included B767 tanker
Working TACAN navigation system (both "air to ground" and "air to air")
Radar Warning Receiver
Bomb craters
Advanced flight model and tested by real pilots
Support for win, mac and linux
A 102 pages USER GUIDE with checklists.
A 5 pages quick guide.

Source forums.x-plane.org

Some user report some problem with the use of the default X-Plane FMS :

" The FMS, being basically vanilla X-Plane, doesn't really work for this aircraft. When flying low amongst mountains, I need to be able to switch back and forth between waypoints with instant bearings shown in the HUD along with waypoint number/ID, so I can a) plan how I'm going to stay unseen whilst getting to the next waypoint, and b ) know which waypoint I'm currently flying towards.
At present the FMS assumes that you will fly in a straight line to within a certain distance of waypoint N, and then automatically want to fly in a straight line to waypoint N+1, and there is no HUD indication of which waypoint is currently selected. Confusion reigns..."

Source : forums.x-plane.org

But so far we have not reproduced the problem.

The use of Bliss Back cables (arresting gear) at the military airports in X-Plane

Have a look at the video : https://youtu.be/1lbvK_z4a6o (lien externe)

07/07/15, 10:05 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


The Ryan Navion for X-Plane 10 : a great tool for the beginner simpilot

We, at TransaTvia.com, recently discovered the advantages of the simulated Ryan Navion (as simulated by VFlyteAir) for the beginner in flight simulation.

This plane is a great plane for beginners because :
systems and lights are easily switched ON or OFF using large buttons in the cockpit ;

the instrumentation is made of a glass cockpit. That's a great panel if you intend to transition to heavier airplane later or if you want to train to modern instrumentations ;

Navigation tools and systems are very clean : the COM panel is clear, so does the AUTOPILOT panel (with large button for NAV or ALT mode), the transponder panel is of a modern design so it is easy to squawk a code by typing it on the panel. You also have the GNS 430 and an integrated display for the engine and aircraft parameters
.
The general layout is very clear and easy to understand because it is very integrative compared to analog gauges which would be spread all over the front panel.
You also have the virtual vision system available on the PFD and the clouds depicted on the ND. Note the TRIM indicator to the right of the ND and the backup instrumentation.

More over, it is easy to fly and a powerfull aircraft so pushing the throttle forward can save you from a bad situation.


YART 4.9 : the 732 and the A300 !

TransaTvia écrit :

Hi, we have just published the version 4.9 of YART !

A lot of work has been done to provide the data for two additional aircraft. Now the Boeing 737-200 Original and the Airbus A300 operational flight plans are avalable when YART is used in advanced mode !

23/09/15, 3:53 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Simulating the B737 : PMDG versus iFly

TransaTvia écrit :


Here is my factual assessment of the PMDG NGX versus the iFly NG

http://gf3.myriapyle.net/aero/Fichiers/737-iFly-vs-PMDG.pdf (lien externe)

03/11/15, 2:50 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Captain Sim's sales

TransaTvia écrit :

Hi,

I usually try not to make any statements on publishers of payware products for the flight simulation, as I mind not doing free add for any developper or publisher.

This time will be the exception. There was a sales day yesterday on Captain Sim store. Everything at 9,99 €, as they are used to do once or twice a year.

Well as a former FS2004 user, I did try in the past some CS products. As a 757-fan I installed a long time ago their FS9 B757 simulation and I also had their early B727 simulation.

The B727 had a somewhat particular flight model, in particular if you deployed the Flaps to the fully extended position (it's true that on real 727 this position was sometimes mechanically inhibited). However I liked a lot the ambiance and the environement which was greatly emerging from the graphic art (of the period), the flight engineer station, the magic of an old jet aircraft and the availability of a freighter variant. I tuned the 2D panel a lot in order to have the TCAS, two DME receivers and the CIVA INS to upgrade the performance of navigation. I was quite happy with that. With the time going on I switched to more evolved add-ons.

The CS757 was the first simulation I used to perform a full flight, real time, from Paris to New-York around 2011 - 2012 if I recall well. I liked the graphic art, the freighter version (which I used mainly), the performances of the "insect", this strange-looking aircraft with its long legs.

I spotted however how the behavior of the airplane was linked to the frame rate. This particularity was clear with the CS757, and as you didn't have sufficient frame rate to handle the calculations, the simulation started the now famous violent bank from one side to another. It was an interesting flight to make a few flights but as other add-ons were better I did not fly this a lot. If I had had a great 757 simulation, no doubt the type would have been my favourite and main aircraft in fleet.

Recently I have made the move from FS2004 to Prepar3d v2.5. While I had decided that it was hard to trust CS on doing flyable aircraft and therefore, not buy anything more from them, I found the sales day was convenient enough to give it a try at a moderate price - ie a moderate risk.

I bought two simulations : the CS732 for P3D and the CS777 1.6 for P3D.
In my quest for the mighty cargo simulation that I never found so far (except the little Q400F), I liked the fact that both aircraft had cargo variants available.

I flown the 777 simulation from Budapest F. Lizt Airport. I immediately found the frame rates very very low. The aircraft, still, was flying at a reasonable rate of bank and manual handling was found to be credible and interesting. However as soon as I tried to use LNAV and VNAV, it showed significant deviations from the theoretical path. While LNAV was engaged, the aircraft was unable to turn to the selected waypoint after executing a DCT TO on the CDU Legs page on my approach phase. Disconnecting LNAV to the profit of HDG SEL proved very difficult because turning the heading selector knob was affected in accuracy by the low frame rate issued from the CS gauges. Disconnecting the A/P and flying manually proved to be the safest way of following the lateral path. Also the Auto-throttle was reacting rather than anticipating required changes in the thrust to maintain the MCP selected speed. Disconnecting the A/T appeared to be the safest way to control the speed smoothly and with anticipation.

So the programming method did not frankly evovled from previous products, with a calculation very linked to the frame rate, but a very low frame rate in the mean time. That incuracy in the system programmation confirms the fact that CS makes better analogic aircraft simulations than RNP-capable aircraft simulations.

Ok, so far that was not a good experience. I switched to the B732 that I immediately liked a lot on the graphical side and the 3D reconstruction, as well as the analogic instrumentation. I would have prefered something like the Milviz B732 however, with a MCP / FMS retrofit, or a GPS figured on the 3D flight deck, as we can seen on real life old flight deck where a GPS unit is mounted on top of the MCP in front of the window.

Some inconsistencies are the fact that the CS732 has some circuit-breakers, and information stickers all around in the cabin evocating a late integration of an independant GPS unit in the cockpit, but it does not appear. You only have a default 2D GPS.

Then I tried to change the radio tuning and use the auto-pilot but it first seemed to be impossible to activate, change or use them. I had to search over the official CS forum that we have to use a P3D or FSX command to switch ON the avionics (the avionics master switch). Come on ! This limitation was already found in the early B727 FS9 depiction. I was ok with that on FS9 years ago, but don't tell me I have to use something like an avionic master switch that of course is totally unreasllistic in a B732 and for which it does not exist any knob in the real cockpit. In a 737, you have a battery switch. Dot. You should be able to tune the radios after that. That's quite crippling for the trust in this simulation, to have to tune with the keyboard a non-existent switch in the real aircraft. Every other developpers know how to handle the FSX/P3D electrical schematics.
Finally I tried to shut off all hydraulic pumps and still I was able to drop the trailing edge flaps with the main flaps handle in the cockpit. Try it in the PMDG/iFly 737 with HYD SYS B disabled : not possible.
Ok, I will not use that one.

Strictly speaking of big jet airliners, to me it appears that only one developer reaches my desired level of complexity, simulation, fidelity to real aircraft and procedures, while being enjoyable to handle on middle-size configuration, with a acquisition price very in accordance with the product. This developer has only made a 737 and a 747. I can tell the P3D 747 runs smoothly on my computer and has no faults in contrast to the above mentioned failures to make a pinpoint simulation of a complex airliner.

The other famous developer that has a 777, a 737 and soon a new version of a 747 produce also the finest airliners even if I dislike the programation of the lateral path (ND drawings sometimes inaccurates, RF-legs interpolated in a clever way but with a noticeable difference to the reality). (I published in a recent blog entry the pros and cons of the two developers and showed the one of the two was better on the technical side, especially in regard to the price at which it is sold).

To conclude I can tell that it is pretty hard to find a decently simulated airliner for P3D. I want an airplane that I can trust and rely on during difficult situations were the mental load is high (approaches in bad weather, emergency situations, late runways reconfigurations and so on). In those situations I don't want to deal with the eventual limitations of the simulation. It does totally break the immersion and the very nature of simulating an airliner. I prefer to deal with the real limitations of the real aircraft.

I don't want a simulation with a replicated side (ie the same HSI replicated for the captain and the first officer), with stuff like a GPS-to-NAV switch (what an horror, in a simulation of an airliner), with the non-availaibility of CATIIIa when the real aircraft is supposed to be, with the incapacity of the programmer to program a stable and trusty LNAV or VNAV. I wasted a lot of money on aircraft in thinking I could find a system simulation with some depth, but appeared latter they were only superficially simulated. A lot of products looked like toys instead of something I could use as a technical test bench and go study. I often find the reviewers very complaisants with commercial products in these matters.

I know only one or two developers who reach my level of satisfaction in regard to the complexity of the systems. I think this is due to the fact that if you are a developer for MFS/P3D, you have to deal with the simulator limitations. Nowadays, you might have to program outside the simulator the aircraft to overcome the simulator limitations which, I think, have been reached. I guess the situation is different in X-Plane, where we don't have the classical limitations of the MFS/P3D engine. What I wait for now is the IXEG 737 for X-Plane and the FSL 320, even if I am not an Airbus guy nowadays and have already a lot to do with my 737s.


A former Europe Airpost B734 now ASL Airline

13/01/16, 5:08 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Valencia X Elevation Issue

TransaTvia.com écrit :

If you just purchased Valencia X and are having some elevation issues with it and have UTX installed in the mean time, check this :

1/ go to scenery/wolrd/scenery.

2/ rename the file "UTX_LEVC_EUR.bgl" to "UTX_LEVC_EUR.BGL.off".

Do not touch the file "LEVC_ALT.bgl" which is part of Valencia X.

02/02/16, 9:32 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


New routes from Lyon, Paris, Clermont, Nice to Valencia then Sevilla and the way back.

Highlight : we just made it, we opened a new destination ! This time, we continue to expand our spanish network and on top of the current services to Sevilla and Granada we are very pleased to introduce a new all-year-round service to Valencia.


The Boeing 737-800 "Ville de Caen" parked on stand at Valencia airport.

03/03/16, 10:00 am


The Winter link 2016

February 2016


During the Winter season, our special service from London Heathrow and London Luton to the ski resorts is back ! Fly with us to the French and Austrian Alps !


Our Boeing 737-800 "Ville de Caen" parked on stand at Chambéry airport.


Problem with Budapest in P3D v3

TransaTvia écrit :

Beware of a problem with Budapest in P3D v3 !


Problem:
After installing Budapest_LHBP_v13_FSX_P3D_P3Dv2_Build9 , P3D v3 crashs with fatal error.

http://lhsimulations.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=070ae04aa9b613172deb2ba19b89ae60&topic=617.15

http://lhsimulations.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=070ae04aa9b613172deb2ba19b89ae60&topic=617.15 (lien externe)

14/02/16, 9:14 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Settings for the MJC84 : how to ?

TransaTvia écrit :


The best method to set up the 125 MHz controls that the MJC84 simulation provides it to look for the usb game controllers box of Windows.

In the picture below, we start the USB game controller dialog box

In the picture below we show the Game controller as well as an extract of the mjc84.ini file

In the example above, each device has been identified from bottom to top in the game controller box. This order has been kept to set up the mjc84.ini file located in SimObjects/Airplanes/Q400/ini.

As the Flight sim Yoke is in position #4 (starting with zero), it becomes J4 in the INI file.

To determine if an axis is "X", "Y" or is named "R", start the registred version of FSUIPC if you have it. Moving the selected axis in FSPUIC interface will present you the name of the axis, either X, Y or R. In the example above, the rudder axis of the Combat Rudder Pedals was found to be the axis "R" in FSUIPC. By trials and errors (to discriminate between Rx, Ry and Rz), this could then be set to Rz in the INI file.


YART Version 5.3

TransaTvia.com écrit :

Hello, this is an update report for YART.

- We have added links to brasilian Aeronautical Information Publication and Brasilian aviation weather data ! [Internal update]
- We have produced a new interface fresh, crisp and clear. The main text now stands on the whole width of the page for instance. [Artistic update]

17/06/16, 3:16 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


De Sao Paulo à Rio de Janeiro

Le visionnage des vidéos YouTube de Rodrigo David (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mug2fJd3vmc (lien externe)), mises en lien par Jean-MIchel Hirson sur le forum du réseau de pilote virtuels IVAO et qui met en scène un Airbus 320 de la compagnie Avianca à Rio de Janeiro et Sao Paulo m'a amené à découvrir la terre du Brézil ! Pour moi, qui écume la méditerranée (lien externe), c'est une première, je suis donc allé voler virtuellement sous les cieux de Rio et de Sao Paulo sous Prepar3D.

Les routes sont accessibles en NON-RNAV - ie. les routes sont ouvertes aux anciens appareils dotés de tableaux de bord à cadrans à aiguilles dans lequel le pilote fait la navigation en se calant sur des radiophares émettant depuis le sol sur des fréquences définies et pas sur des points virtuels de l'espace. Pour faire le pont aérien entre Sao Paulo et Rio de Janeiro, il est possible de sélectionner des routes basées sur des NDB (à savoir les premières radio-balises utilisées dans l'histoire de l'aviation) ! Aucun problème donc pour suivre ces routes et approches en navigation conventionnelle. (Pas question de faire du "RNP AR + RF" en RNP 0.1 avec le Fokker 27).
Ca fait du bien parfois de repasser en navigation conventionnelle sur un tromblon à cadrans analogiques, et de suivre des routes NDB (même pas basées sur des VOR - ie. des radiobalises inventées plus tardivement et ayant pris majoritairement le pas sur les NDB -, les VOR ne sont qu'en flanquement) comme dans les années 50, aux aiguilles qui plus est. Tout en restant réaliste : ces routes sont en vigueur aujourd'hui ! Rien à voir avec la programmation d'un ordinateur de bord en phase de prévol, qui est la normale aujourd'hui sur des appareils modernes ou rétro-usinés avec des systèmes de navigation intégrateurs.

Particulièrement,je souligne la combinaison :
- d'une approche NDB avec des minimas de l'ordre du millier de pieds à Santos Dumont/Rio !
- du brouillard (première fois que je doute de pouvoir me poser, à cause de la MDA élevée d'une approche NDB, et des conditions qui régnaient au moment de faire l'approche) : ça fout la frousse, ou plutôt, pour rester modéré, le suspens, alors qu'en RNP APCH, avec ces minimas de l'ordre de 200 pieds, on n'en a plus bcp, de ce suspens, en B738 sur une destination européenne lambda...
- du relief !
- de la densité de population extrême !
- des pistes très courtes !

Ouaou !!

Sao Paulo -> Rio sur Skyvector :


Extrait de la procéure d'approche NDB sur les piste 02/20 de SBRJ Santos Dumont (Source : Ministry of Defense, Brazil) :


En approchant de Rio, le brouillard s'installe :


Et les reliefs sont présents :


Arrivée à la MDA, ouf, on a 'visuel' :






Et on coupe tout chez TAM Cargo :


Le Fokker Friendship est le Fokker 27 de Just Flight (lien externe), modifiée par mes soins en version cargo. Voir aussi ici (lien externe).

La scène de Santos Dumont est de Tropical Sim (lien externe).


Au fait, j'en ai profité pour mettre à jour YART ¡ Yet Another Route Tool !© avec l'AIS/AIP brésilien.

18/06/16, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Departure Date

Departure Date by "Virgin America Produced" (lien externe)

19/06/16, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


18/06/16, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Actualités

Dans les actualités de la rentrée de Septembre 2016, la publication (enfin !) d'une superbe scène de l'aéroport de Cilipi, qui dessert la capitale dalmate qu'est Dubrovnik.

Dubrovnik, autrefois connue sous le nom de Raguse, la perle de l'Adriatique, concurrente de Venise, à la croisée des influences musulmanes (mais synchrétiques dans la région) de l'empire ottoman et de l'empire austro-hongrois dont la République de Raguse fût la vassale, assiégée dès le 7ème siècle par les navires du califat établi sur la côte Sud de la méditerranée, province française de l'empire de Napoléon au 19ème siècle qui construisit un fort sur ses hauteurs, assiégée par les Serbes en 1993, restaurée par l'UNESCO après les bombardements.

Dubrovnik, donc, est disponible pour FSX et P3D.

L'aéroport de Dubrovnik est situé sur la commune de Cilipi, proche de l'habitat originel de Caveat, dont on trouve des traces datant de l'empire romain et des provinces hyliriennes auxquelles la dalmatie fut rattachée. Son code OACI est LDDU.

C'est ORBX qui le vend. N'oubliez pas d'installer les librairies ORBX FTX Global, disponibles en téléchargement séparé.

Et puis, avec l'aéroport de Split (LDSP), également disponible pour FSX et P3D, il n'y a plus de raisons de ne pas avoir exploré la côte croate au simulateur avec le nouvel airbus 320 de FlightSimLabs ! Et c'est tellement proche en avion de la métropole française !

13/09/16, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


PMDG NGX and Windows updates

TransaTvia.com écrit :


Recen tly I was forced to update Windows 10 64-bits to its 1607 version, the so-called Anniversary update. But afterwards, it was impossible to use the PMDG NGX on Prepar3d 3 anymore. I tried to resintall theNGX but with no results. It appears that the problem was the missing MSVCR100.dll.

Maybe it was removed by the Anniversary update. So to solve the problem and be able to use the NGX again, I had to reinstall the following softwares :

Package redistribuable Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 (x86)
http://www.microsoft.com/fr-fr/download/details.aspx?id=5555 (lien externe)

Package redistribuable Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 (x64)
http://www.microsoft.com/fr-fr/download/details.aspx?id=14632 (lien externe)

Both needed to be installed as P3D and pending softwares are 32 bits.

09/10/16, 2:05 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Ditch point for the FSL320-X cfg

Transatvia écrit :


// ditching
point.13=3, -80.0000000, -5.00, -8.0, 2200, 0, 0.00, 0.00, 1.0, 1.0, 0.2, 0.0, 0.0, 5, 0.0, 0.0 //Left Wing Scrape

point.14=3, -80.0000000, 5.00, -8.0, 2200, 0, 0.00, 0.00, 1.0, 1.0, 0.2, 0.0, 0.0, 6, 0.0, 0.0 //Right Wing Scrape

point.15=3, -20.0000000, 00.00, -7.0, 2200, 0, 0.00, 0.00, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.0, 0.0, 4, 0.0, 0.0 //Fuselage Scrape

point.16=3, -80.0000000, 00.00, -7.0, 2200, 0, 0.00, 0.00, 1.0, 1.0, 0.2, 0.0, 0.0, 9, 0.0, 0.0 // Tail Scrape

11/11/16, 10:10 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


After Navtech and LIDO, Navigraphs goes Jeppesen

After Navtech and LIDO, Navigraphs goe Jeppesen and offers night mode, geolocalisation of your plane on the map

In the animation below, we see the Jeppesen thumbnail for some VHHH SID, in regular and new enhanced format, as well as a part of the LIDO layout for the same departure. It seems Jeppesen and it's new geolocalised format is catching up LIDO layout in term of environnemental awarness and also draws more attention to altitude and speed limits, now in colors.



27/04/17, 10:10 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Updating P3D default navigation data is now possible

Updating P3D default navigation data is now possible since a company has now translated the Jeppesen data from Navigraph into BGL files for FSX and P3D. We wanted to provide an insight on this new service and went to a 3 months subscriptions for a small fee. (You also need a valid Navigraph subscription, which is checked during the activation process to unlock the download of the BGLs).

The update brings three new directories. Per default, they are stored in your Document directory, which I dislike and I moved them later to my scenery directory. The activation of the new data is a matter of adding those folders into scenery.cfg, on top of your other sceneries.

The original data is kept untouched in Scenery / World / scenery and are just taken over by the new files due to their higher priority.

Here are the results.

In the pictures below, we show the communication frequencies available at LFLC Clermont-Ferrand airport in France before (first picture) and after (second picture) the update with the BGLs from fsAerodata. You can see an increase in available frequencies. A crosscheck with the AIP confirms they are now up to date.

Then below, we show the airpace around LFLC Clermont-Ferrand airport before (first picture) and after (second picture) the update with the BGLs from fsAerodata. You can see an increase in depicted volumes ith accurate (not shown) vertical limits. A crosscheck with the AIP confirms they are now up to date.

In the next panel below, we show the improved airspace around LGSA airport, as well as added IFR procedures for LGIR including the very new RNP APCH for runway 27. We show the default location of the BGLs in the Documents folder as well as a screenshot of the fsAerodata automated tool to download and activate the scenery. But we also show that approaches with RF-legs are not fully supported.

Also the default GPS has been updated in P3D (the new p3dgps.gau) to be able to read SID and STAR, ATC will not recognised them, and will vector you to the IAF or you can ask an approch with the correct transition (since approaches are now updated). So you'll have to fly SID and STAR on your own, as shown on the fsAerodata forum below.

In the end, this is a fresh start for the simulator and for add-ons that use the default FS or P3D navigation databank. For people using liners with their own databank, then it will be usefull to gather the recent Navaids. If you use the default ATC, it will be also usefull rather than cheat the software and ask the ATC for the old approaches when you will be in fact flying the recent approaches from your FMS. I don't think it is usefull to update on a monthly basis however. Getting fresh 2017 data today (and keep it for a few months without updating at each AIRAC) seems fair enough. Since we did learn how to fly in a very outadated simulator since today we might afford that compromise.

29/04/17, 12:47 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Lu sur le web

TransaTvia écrit :

"my favourite after getting off an aircraft is to type in:

I.SAID.INVALID.ENTRY.YOU.IDIOT

and then line select that to any field e.g. ZFW so you get the

INVALID ENTRY msg

so when the next guy comes along, he/she sees INVALID ENTRY, they clear the message and then see I.SAID.INVALID.ENTRY.YOU.IDIOT"

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-267759.html (lien externe)

11/05/17, 12:09 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Creator update

J'avais déjà eû le problème avec Windows 10 Anniversary Update.

J'avais réinstallé Visual 2010 pour rétablir la fonctionnalité perdue des PMDG et Ivap.

Cette fois-ci, voici le chemin que j'ai dû faire pour que l'installateur de Visual 2010 me laisse le droit de le réinstaller, après Windows 10 Creator Update :

Code: [Select]
- désintallation de Microsoft Visual C++ 2015, 2013 et 2010 en x86 sans toucher aux versions x64...
- réinstallation de MV2010_x86 (uniquement la version x86)

j'ai donc au final :
Code: [Select]
MV 2005 x86
MV 2005 x64
MV 2008 x86
MV 2008 x64
MV 2010 x86
MV 2010 x64
Mv 2013 x64
Mv 2015 x64

-> Ivap_config.exe peut à nouveau se lancer.  :D

puis en ajoutant
Code: [Select]
  <Launch.Addon>
    <Name>IvAp</Name>
    <Disabled>False</Disabled>
    <Path>C:\Program Files (x86)\IVAO\IvAp v2\ivap_fsx_bootstrap.dll</Path>
    <Commandline>
    </Commandline>
  </Launch.Addon>
dans C:\ProgramData\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3D v3\dll.xml qui y avait disparu

-> je récupère la possibillité de lancer Ivap depuis le menu Add-ons à l'intérieur du simulateur.


A lire aussi :
Quote
Microsoft Visuals are another story. They are not backward compatible  (...)Recently, Orbx/FTX, ASN, and PMDG upgraded their software to MSV 2010 so that version is required (as well as a requirement for P3D). If the proper version is not installed, the product will not even start up.

FSX also needs dotnet 2.0 to run. (...) I saw that Orbx/FTX, who required 3.5, upgraded their products for dotnet 4.0 or 4.5
Source : www.avsim.com/forums/

Fichiers :
Package redistribuable Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 (x86)
http://www.microsoft.com/fr-fr/download/details.aspx?id=5555

Package redistribuable Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 (x64)
http://www.microsoft.com/fr-fr/download/details.aspx?id=14632

11/05/17, 12:09 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Quick tool box !

TransaTvia écrit :

Charts :
https://navdatapro.aerosoft.com/ or https://beta.charts.navigraph.com/#/login.

Transatvia.comTutorial : How to invert screen colours at night ? (17th nov. 2017). Transatvia.com

Negative Screen :
http://arcanesanctum.net/other/NegativeScreen-custom-multi-monitor.exe

18/10/17, 9:36 am, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)


Embraer forP3D4

Transatvia écrit :

ReadontheFeelthere forum today:


Dear Folks,

Please let me give you an update about the development and release of the EMB v2 for P3D4.
Yes, the development is over and even the testing is over. The product will be released in around middle of December (this year) if everything is goes as planned.

It's a purely compatibility update and there will be no new functions. In fact during night time you need to turn Dynamic Lighting OFF to have a proper night texture in the VC. This is a limitation we will clearly indicate on the product page. We understand the visual model is behind some today's standard and the price will reflect it. Currently we are looking for the price range at around $24.99

Based on your feedback we consider bringing the rest of the Embraer fleets into P3D4 too in the future.



Thank you



Vic

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/84505-emb-v2-for-p3d4/ (lien externe)

22/11/17, 3:19 pm, Ajouter un commentaire (Add a comment)



Retour

Transatvia.com
Go to the latest article

Transatvia.comChaque auteur reste pleinement responsable de ses propos. L'auteur du site dénie toute responsabilité. Pour retirer un de vos commentaires ou demander une modération, utilisez le formulaire de contact du site et attendez. Une réponse vous sera rapidement apportée. TransaTvia.com n'est pas une compagnie aérienne virtuelle, les destinations affichées sont les missions favorites du propriétaire de la page.