All Activity

Using ZSAM DOVP7Y departure, the AM401 should be flyover point as displayed on MCDU, but the path on ND passes abeam of this point rather than overflying it.

Hello team. I noticed a small texture issue on the Inibuilds A321LR NEO. The decal from landing gear is incorrectly reads A320 mtow 79 t. A321 neo has different mtow around 93+. Please update this decal in future patch. Thanks!

Did you reinstall everything from the previous of version of windows or did you format and cleanly reinstall everything from scratch?

v1.0.3 of iniBuilds Larnaca (LCLK) for MSFS 2024 has been released. This update fixes some missing jetways at gate 47, adds the Revolut branding to jetways and adds A/B gates to 11-13. This update can be downloaded via the iniManager. v1.0.3Added missing jetway at 47 Added A/B gates to 11-13 Added Revolut branding to jetways

I am unable to connect the bridge at D1 and D1X using GSX or default method.

Has happened a few times now, line up and start thundering down the runway. Some distance down the runway the rudder will go to neutral position and stop responding to joystick inputs. If you're lucky and near/past VR you can pull back and use ailerons to correct the issue. Eventually the rudder comes back into operation. My theory is the hydraulic system. Using brakes or tiller/rudder will deplete the hydraulic pressure very quickly. The plane has 4 systems and when you dab the brakes you can see a noticeable drop in system pressure. Usually A and B, then they are slow to recover. I let the FE sort the panel out but from past experience I turn on the PTU B-A system ON as A system will deplete quickly without the help, you will also get warning messages flash up briefly about system pressure. Should he put B2 and C2 to AUTO instead of leaving them in the off position?

Can we adjust the Z please? Have a 1604nm cruise and I keep seeing the Z bleed off screen.

Got it, thanks. I'll pass this along to the team.

I’m not entirely sure how it works on the 350, but I imagine it’s the same as generic Airbus logic. FLS is a system which allows rnav approaches to b be flown with the same indications as ILS approaches. It’s often an option rather than default, and can only be used on rnav approaches with a straight approach. If you activate the LS push button and there is a straight in approach with FLS available, the final approach modes will be F-G/S and F-LOC. But for any rnav approach if you don’t activate LS you should get FINAL, APP NAV and then FINAL APP when both are captured. Similarly if you try to use LS but it’s a curved approach and FLS is not available it still should be FINAL, APP NAV, and then FINAL APP. But the a350 is currently treating all rnav approaches as FLS an it seems to be impossible to get the standard FINAL, APP NAV, and FINAL APP.

I tried to delete the streamedpackages folder but it doesn't solve the problem, at this point I hope that inibuilds will find the solution to this problem, since it is only on their airports

I don't have any other device/axis bound to the throttles as far as I know, but I'll double-check. What's even more odd is, if I bind the throttles in the sim instead of in SPAD, they work fine. Edit: Just checked and nope, no conflicting bindings.

Assuming your programming IS correct, then should you not tone down the figures of the thrust settings in the configuration file. To climb to FL 350 at MTOW with a residual vertical speed of about 1000 fpm at CL2 seems way off. AT weights of 475 000lb, the N1 cruise value @ M.84 should be in the 80's (80-85%) and NOT in the 70's. Is it not possible to choose between CL 1 and CL2 and select only 1 (eg,CL2 for the whole climb)?

This is a fantastic explanation and most probably the solution too. I'll setup accordingly and try. Thank you so much for taking the time !!

v1.0.5 of iniBuilds Southampton (EGHI) for MSFS 2024 has been released. This update addresses the runway lead-in arrow and centreline misalignment as well as adjusts some GP colouring and grass aprons. It also fixes an issue with missing grass and more. v1.0.5Fixed minor runway lead-in arrow and centreline misalignment Adjusted some GP colouring and updated grass aprons Fixed issue with missing grass Terminal and main carpark updated to SPCs with adjusted lighting for FS24

v1.2.3 of iniBuilds Honolulu (PHNL) for MSFS 20/24 has been released. This update focuses on visual and ground environment refinements, bringing improved interior rendering behaviour alongside updated clutter placement, terrain blending, markings, and jetway adjustments for a more polished airport experience. Please note: Users will need to uninstall the existing PHNL install to avoid the detail/parallax interior conflict on reinstall This update can be downloaded via the iniManager. v1.2.3Fixed issue with parallax and detail interior showing at the same time All GSE/clutter/veg placements updated Flattened road bridge on TIN to blend with model Various GP markings fixes Various jetway fixes iniBuilds Team ❤️

Hey @zbrainlezz That is odd, I do have both and I'll check as well. I've been using mine bound via FSUIPC7 at the moment so I do know it can be controlled externally, but will see if can reproduce the above issue via SPAD specifically. Based on video alone seems like while Bravo is active, its sending commands but once it stops giving commands, another device thats still at idle is then taking over perhaps? Can you confirm there isn't another connected device that is being read by the sim (or SPAD) also sending thrust commands, thereby creating a conflict with each other? Thanks!

Hi, are you able to record a video adding the issue, I am not as familiar with SLS/FLS unless I'm just mis-remembering. Thank you

Quoting you above "The way its modelled now is it will try to use calculated CL2 table values for your weight, temperature and altitude ranges. If outside the tabled parameters, it will instead use the calculated CL1 values for your current weight, temperature and altitude. It will transition back to CL2 if within tabled parameters at the next update point." Are you 100% sure this is correct?

Hello, My question is simple but there is any plan to separate the installation addon between the compatible one (so should be Community) and for the native one (then the Community2024). Because on the sim path its only for community one. Thank for your reply

Thank you for your quick responses, but the problem remains unresolved despite all your advice.

Are you referencing the EPR target set on the glareshield in TM Mode specifically? If so, observe on the PMS when you're seeing this behaviour, and you'll note whats happening when it "drops again" is its shifting from MAX CL (CL1) to NORM CL EPR (CL2) values as the target. The way its modelled now is it will try to use calculated CL2 table values for your weight, temperature and altitude ranges. If outside the tabled parameters, it will instead use the calculated CL1 values for your current weight, temperature and altitude. It will transition back to CL2 if within tabled parameters at the next update point. Using this image example from above again, the calculated CL2 and CL1 values at the moment are .573 and .630 respectively. It will command only either of those (+- 0.001 EPR) in TM mode. Yes, the IRL counterpart behaves the same way automatically modulating between the CL modes - except - there is more specificity in the logic for conditions that must be met before the switch happens. That additional conditional specificity as well as manual mode selection is not currently simulated. We have it on our wishlist for systems we'd love to add depth to given the development time, but it is beyond the initial scope set for the product. What is simulated is the essence of how the actual unit works - i.e that it references current conditions against MAX CLB EPR (CL1) and NORM CLB EPR (CL2) performance tables for -500 stored within the PMS database AND automatically modulates commanded EPR between CL1 and CL2 based on periodic data-comparison to obtain the nominal climb rate. Yes according to the team what we have currently is set based on the -500 performance data available to us. For all parameters such as EPR, N1, Fuel Flow etc. For the sluggish climb rate you are expecting - try manually controlling your throttles exactly per the NORM CL values shown on the PMS at various stages and see if you still have the issue. If so, please advise with screenshots or video reference of exactly what you're seeing in sim vs roughly what you'd expect at the various stages so we can investigate further. Yes you don't have -500 specific data but if you make an estimation of the expected result based on your -100 data, we can run a comparison against the data we have and verify if the sim is exhibiting that or not to determine any adjustments required. We also appreciate your reporting, and are not trying to be dismissive of it but random image comparisons such as that provided are also not conclusive in establishing tangible data for resolution/adjustment without also equally full knowledge of all the parameters such weight or atmospheric conditions as you mentioned.

Thank you for your help

I have flown the approach, the plane just fly follow the path on ND. I calculated the deviation compare to the RF leg, it's about 1.6nm, that's far from 0.3nm. Anyway, just making a RF leg into a direct leg is not acceptable for any RNP (AR) approach The database is from navigraph. That's just a part of the database, I think the problem comes to the waypoint_description_code, when the second line of KT530 is "E I", the path is a RF leg, when not, is a direct leg. But navigraph's database is right, Accroding to the ARINC 424, the second line of KT530 can't be "E I", should be 'E F'. So I think there is something wrong when the aircraft processing the path. Thank you for your patience.

Yes I will do a clean Re-install - it might be good if I could get instructions to fully remove all the files associated with this plane Thanks JC

You guys are still not getting it correct. In Version 1.0.6 the EPR begins to steadily increase in the climb and then drops sharply and once again begins to increase. This is NOT how the real plane behaved. Once CLB thrust is set, there should be a gradual and steady increase in the EPR (not up and down). Firstly do you have access to L1011-500 performance manuals? This is important - I only have access to -100 manuals (different engines). You need to get the EPR values correctly entered into your mathematical programming (taking temperature and altitude into account). Then the EPR and N1 values need to be synchronized. Then, and only then, do you begin adjusting the thrust numbers in the configuration file. Please don't take my remarks the wrong way - I am only trying to help. I modified the Captain Sim L1011 .air file some years ago to get the thrust settings as close to correct as possible. There must be a smooth and steady increase in EPR - not jumpy. The cruise N1 values are also lower than they should be. I will later attach a photo of the real plane in a FL350 cruise so you can see the engine readouts. I understand that weather and gross weight will affect these values somewhat.