Cammac

Hi, Please make sure you have your AI assits off as they can be set back to on and will trim the aircraft causing the issues you are seeing.

Engines can be started in the real aircraft with the IRS off as they play no part in engine start.

This issue seems to be related to the core FPS. If the FPS is as low as video the FCTL and FBW system will not be able to function. I would file a direct support request for this as it will be the root cause. Others are seeing good FPS in the 350 so they should be able to help narrow down what is going on. Thanks

Hi, thanks for taking the time to post I will go over each of your points as listed just to keep it becoming from a wall of text. 1) Do you have any specifics of when this happens? As many users are doing 15+ hour flights without issues, which is what we have seen during the testing phase of the aircraft as well. Any route or sequence of events that brought this on? Without the WASM running the effectiveness constants are now not limited by the code so yes the roll rate will be too high and pitch rate is too high this is also present on other aircraft in the sim and will not be adjusted. Comments on handling need to be undertaken in normal law or direct law with of course the code running. 2) Would you also happen to have repo steps for this one? As I have not seen it reported and just checking you are loading in the aircraft with the FUEL AND LOAD page filled as without it the manage modes can’t work as it needs ZFW etc. 3) The FM for both MSFS2020 and MSFS2024 use the new CFD style FM and will be more reactive to wind / weather if you find it too much you can select this setting down in the sim. But this gives more realistic handling across the board and with MSFS 2024 using the new fuselage technology to map that and the engines. The handing in terms of response is correct, the 350 is far more sensitive than other airbus family aircraft. You need almost no flare to land and very small inputs for roll. https://youtu.be/8JjuksTvMRg?t=197 Here you can see a bit of an over flare but still a tiny input https://youtu.be/I3Nnt2d3dt0?t=5115 the 350 is very easy to over control. But don’t take my word for it here is 330Driver saying the same thing as he spent time with a TRI on the 350 to check handling is as expected https://youtu.be/XNTuK-Bi6CY?t=5589 and the explanation check with Pablo about handling https://youtu.be/3cjLdfEfTow?t=5435 4) The cabin in MSFS 2020 was reduced to what you see now and was communicated on the store page under the features section. This is due to the fact the product was made with MSFS 2024 using the new LOD system so giving that level of cabin in 2020 is simply not possible. 5) I will pass this on for the team to check as I did see a logged report of the gear being too loud in MSFS 2020 only.

Hey, Thanks for the post. It should be correct yes we took the spool up and spool down values from reference videos we have of the CF6 engines. Many thanks

Hi, Thanks for your post. The A300 and A310 are using the CFD FM over both the wing and elevator it means that the aircraft will move around a fair bit more than a standard MSFS addon even when it seems like you have calm conditions as the overall FM is more reactive to the environment. You can normally see this at the higher levels more due to the fact MSFS is adding in higher levels on en-route turbulence than the lower FLs which can be quite reflective of real life. Here you can see the VSI going up and down a fair bit showing this can be quite normal. Many thanks, Cammac

I would have to double check this. But I would think so.

Hi, Thanks for your post. The A300's PROFILE mode will not respect CST in CLB only DES. It's a strange system but from what I understand the reason for this is the level off is not command in the same way. So when you are in LVL change you will get ALT* and then ALT. In P.CLB you have no transition mode and with the very high climb rates of the A300 it will bust the level-offs in P.CLB, so the system was never made to level off for CST in CLB. Many thanks,

Hi, Thanks for the post. We will look into this and check the calculation for GREEN DOT above 20,000ft. Many thanks,

Hi, Thanks for your post. -For your first point could you clarify the situation? If climbing in LVL change it would be expected to go ALT* ALT HLD and then selected speed on the FCU. If climbing in PROFILE would expect no transition mode it go directly into P.ALT and P.SPD with the speed coming from the FMS. -That seems like it might be a sound bug as I would expect it to stay rumbling all the time the speed brake is out. -I tried to replicate this but was not able to see the same cooling effect from the brake fans. I did an RTO brakes got up to 725c and I waited 5 minutes after brake application to set the brake fan and it took 6 more minutes to reach 345c. Many thanks,

Hi, Thanks for the post. As posted above the GD speed seems correct but the A300s wing is rather old so getting up to the higher FLs mean you can be very close to the GD speed margin. But in the picture you posted it's still safe to keep flying. Many thanks,

Hi, Thanks for you post. Just checking that you tried this with the IRS in ATT phase and the pitch trim switches on? As even with HYD on and PITCH TRIMS off the trim wheel will not move. Many thanks

Hi, I do but we can't share those documents the video linked are those SOPs but in video format. And for the RNAV approach into NZQN in the real aircraft you would not be allowed to fly the approach LNAV only. As it contains RF legs which the real A310 is not allowed to fly. So for a real pilot on the line flying into NZQN they would simply not be allowed / be able to select those complex circling approaches even if flown LNAV with FPA cage setup. And approaches with curved final approach tracks will be set as RNP (AR) approaches and they can't even be flown by most A320s that are currently flying so would be well outside the A310 using either LNAV only or LNAV/VNAV coupled. Thanks,

Hi, Thanks for the reply. From my understanding you are correct that Profile mode can't fly things like RF legs etc at NZQN but it can be used for guidance down to MDA. The QRH / FCOM you might be reading could be referenced to an aircraft without FINAL X.X mode. This was a customer option and did allow flight crews to fly in VNAV coupled down to MDA and was the SOP for airlines with this fitted.

Hi, Thanks for your post. We have not actually modeled this part of the AFS. You might ask why not and why leave the EFIS FPA knob working. Flight crews actually use the knob on taxi out as a reminder for the trim to set. So they put 1.4 in the FPA window to remind them to set 1.4 UP or DN trim. One of the reasons this feature is not as needed for the ini 310 is the fact we have the FINAL X.X mode. This was a customer option on the A300/A310 series but we did model it. What is it? This system allows VOR approaches and NDB approaches to be flown as an RNAV approach. The mode allows the VNAV to be coupled to the final descent path down to the runway so you then monitor the given altitude VS the approach plate. Please see below for a video of the system in action. Warning it's a bit complicated to setup. Many thanks,

Hi, Thanks for your post. The RAT system on the 310 is not quite like the A320 or newer family. This comes down the fact it's more conventional. If you need the RAT you have to physically pull the handle either side to get it to come out. Nothing will auto trigger it to deploy. If you have AC power. Which of course in your case you didn't the GREEN PUMP and PTUs can be used in flight to power the aircraft up. If you wish you could deploy the RAT before engine flameout then you would have had Yellow system pressure right away and would have no loss of HYD systems. But be warned the RAT will actually stall below 140kts and pressure will scale with airspeed and when you get close to 140kts you may get less HYD pressure than you are used.

Hi, Thank you for taking the time to write this post. Sorry that it took a while to get back to you on this one. I've just got a few follow up questions on some of the issues raised. I will list them in order below: - Maybe this is down to the FMS fit or software version but from the documents we have this field is not adjustable -This again maybe might be down to an FMS fit or software version or indeed an issue, but from the information we have the VDEV on the PROG page is based on total distance flown without correction for the FINALX. X mode whereas the VDEV on the approach page is taking this into account giving the accurate figure for the final descent segment. -For the auto throttle software version we based the 310 around auto retard only worked with an ILS approach as it's coupled with FLARE mode. I will link the references below. But I understand they adjusted this logic on later fits which matches what you reported is expected. From the later software fit: I can fully see why the newer software versions would have made this change, ha. -At this time we have not included the FPA cage display, but we can look to add this. We left the display working on the EFIS panels as I know some crew use it as a reminder of the takeoff trim setting. -For the aircraft breaks I did actually see another report of this but if you are on the latest Beta it should be 100% fixed if not please reply here to let me know and we can track it. -For the NAV track we should have modelled this but maybe it's not working as expected. I tried to take some images with an extremely long leg but it's possible the effect is not great enough or not working consistently. At the start of long leg. 600 miles later in NAV no DIR TO. All the other items will be added to our tracker thanks again for the report.

Hi, We have modeled all the textures and 3D from real pictures / references for the A310. You can see here the HYD gauges are painted with a very bright green in the real aircraft that are night time gets even more exaggerated. I can't find a good image of the real A310 at night time but the green gets quite a bit brighter with the back light. Hope this helps.

Hi, Thanks for your post did you have your ASU selected on the EFB from the ground options page. If so that might have caused this.

PMDG and other devs would be drawing from priority files that would not work on the Xbox / work as a core sim aircraft. At this time gumbyger statement is the position on this.

Hi, Thanks for your post. It might be tricky on this one as we would have the filter all the approaches to allow GPS approaches which might cause confusion for other airports with published GLS approaches that that 310 won't be able to fly. But we will keep this in mind thanks for posting.

Hi, Please check out the video below this shows you how to find runway length and also shows the auto populate.

Hi, Thanks for your post. You will need to put in the weather by hand but you can auto populate the TORA and QDM if you have the runway inserted into the FMS. Please check out the videos linked below that go over the FMS and EFB setup: Thanks.

Hi, When you have the runway inserted in the EFB click the TORA filed in the EFB and then go down to the keypad. Next to the number 1 should be a suggested length so something like 3210 meters just click that and it will populate. Same for the QDM. Thanks.

Hi. Please check the inner part of the wheel it shows 1 UP 1 DN and the green band is the takeoff range. The EFB will show you what value to set UP or DN on the weight and balance page. Hope this helps.