cavok84

This is simply a speed additive to VAPP. VAPP is computed by the FMS to be VREF + an assumed 10kt headwind. The FM recommends a speed additive of 1/2 the steady state wind or all of the gust, whichever is greater, up to 15 kts. Hence, 1/2 of 10kts is 5kts +VREF = VAPP default Let's say you have a 15 kt headwind, half of that is 7.5, so round up and add 8 to VREF (calculated from perf software or QRH/manuals). In this situation, you would only add 3 kts to VAPP. Winds are 10 gusting 25: 15 kt gust factor. Add the entire 15 to VREF. Which would be 10kts in wind correction. (You've already got the 5 kts added) To summarize, VREF is 1.3Vso, VAPP is actually what you're going to fly on final, and its value with respect to VREF will change depending on wind and configuration corrections (stuck slats/flaps, floating spoiler, etc.) An important note: the hook, the amber line above the red Stick Shaker bar (zipper) on the PFD, displays 1.2Vs in actual configuration for takeoff and it displays 1.3Vs of actual landing configuration. It does this based off of AOA, and in normal circumstances, this will always be what you base your approach speed on. The FMC computes approach speed on its own, but it does so based off of weight and configuration input. It gets pretty close (if your weight inputs are right), but for predictable handling during landing and the flare, the hook is what is used as a VAPP reference. So, assuming calm winds, fly hook +5kts. 15 kts wind, fly hook plus 8, etc. Under normal circumstances (no flight control malfunctions), even if you are allowing the FMS to control speed using the VAPP window (during an RNAV), you still honor hook. Add to the wind correction window, or take away, so that your VAPP is referencing AOA.

No problem. Happy to help! I've been quite busy as well, and I apologize if I'm wasting time by comparing your model to newer software, but my intention was to enumerate issues that I thought would apply to older systems as well. It's interesting to see what might have changed. For clarity's sake, in addition to my airline's flight manuals and experience with the jet, I also have access to Honeywell's FMS manual Rev 1 pub. Dec '93. Are your reference manuals older than this? I'll make sure to consult both before posting anything. One thing that comes to mind is the Honeywell manual (1993) is pre-GPS, and after comparing the manual to our current system manuals, it does look like this (VAPP) has changed. I could be mistaken but it doesn't appear that the FMC software of this vintage allowed the aircraft to fly VNAV approaches past the final approach fix. Hence, the VAPP window (only controlling speed with profile engaged) would not be used after GS intercept or vertical speed selected. This seems relevant to a few things I mentioned in my original post. Did the above citation come from a pre-GPS manual? At least some of your references must be post-GPS, given your model flies RNAV approaches with VNAV guidance, and the model's FMS has GPS functionality. It may very well be a software change. My initial thought was that this was a result of combining information between manual revisions (e.g., FMS software allowing VNAV and older ones), but if your information explicitly says they are separate in "final approach mode" then I can't argue. I'll just add that once 'final approach' is activated (with the current software), the approach page, PROG page, and ND scale VDEV all show deviation from the final approach segment. If for some reason you want manual references for my claims let me know, but it must be that these things changed over the years. Interesting! Interestingly, this relates to my next item "50ft below MDA, autopilot disconnects as it should on an RNAV/VNAV approach. However, the FMAs should take a snapshot of SPD, heading hold, and vertical speed. The sim incorrectly remains in PSPD PDES all the way down, and autothrottles fail to retard at 30ft when this happens." When conducting a VNAV approach, P.SPD reverts to SPD 50ft below MDA, which allows the ATS to retard at 30ft. Oddly enough, my manual doesn't include the "newer' software information you provided! It makes me wonder if once VNAV approaches became available, there was still a time in which only ILS approaches allowed auto-retardation, or we are simply seeing an issue between the description of software generations. It would be interesting to find out. Thanks for providing the pictures! I'm impressed y'all modeled such an annoying feature of the airplane! I'll try again in-game and see if I can replicate itn Again, thanks for all of your hard work, and I apologize for sending you on a wild goose chase by referencing newer manuals.

NAV The white course line displayed on the ND does not depict great circle route in the plane, it's essentially a rhumb line. If you have a fairly distant TO fix, the aircraft symbol will drift laterally until it appears you a far off course. The lateral deviation (1.5L) is the value that actually tells you if you're on course. This has significant implications when given a crossing restriction (e.g., cross 100nm east of LAX at FL250, distance TO LAX is 1000nm, you've been flying for an hour and the white line is miles south of you). In this case, the correct answer is to initiate a new Direct TO to KLAX prior to inputting the place/distance fix, or else you will take a hard left turn to go get the fix that has been painted along your unreliable white line. The new direct re-centers the line, then you must quickly input the P/D fix. Crews have been violated because of this bizarre quirk.

I apologize if these have been brought to your attention already. ILS/ VNAV approach/ profile issues: Cannot edit VAPP speed on approach page while conducting VNAV approach (should be able to type and drop it on FMC computed value) Vertical Deviation on Prog page mismatched (1,000ft-2000ft) with Approach page deviation, while conducting VNAV approach Frequently, 'Vertical Deviation' will display on ND (map mode) while ILS is selected and no VNAV (RNAV/LOC/VOR) loaded in FMS, appears to mimic glideslope when it does this. This is different from G/S in arc mode which should be on the ND. 50ft below MDA, autopilot disconnects as it should on an RNAV/VNAV approach. However, the FMAs should take a snapshot of SPD, heading hold, and vertical speed. The sim incorrectly remains in PSPD PDES all the way down, and autothrottles fail to retard at 30ft when this happens. Misc I can't seem to get flight path angle to display on the PFD while using Flight Path vector, same with the 'blue heading line' that should be displayed. Deselecting altitude hold should activate the vertical speed window. "Norm Cancel Switch" should silence Autopilot Issues that might just be transient and need a reload Aircraft Brakes: Unable to operate right brakes without left brake pedal first having been depressed. The left brake pedal works correctly, but the right brakes fail to operate independently, only working while the left pedal is also being pressed. I verified that this occurs in all anti-skid modes and using the yellow hydraulic system as well. I placed the brake anti-skid selector switch to ALTN ON and ALTN OFF, and brake pressure indicators confirmed what I observed with the system in NORM ON This feels like it could certainly be a 'me' problem, but so far, the 310 is the only plane I've seen this on. Fuel: Unable to crossfeed fuel to APU. Unable to feed APU out of CTR tank. Unless I close the fuel isolation valve to the left outer (just to test it), it always grabs left outer fuel. This holds true to attempts with the Left Inner tank, right inner tank, and Center. ECAM displays the appropriate tank feeding, but in actuality it grabs from Left Outer only. With the aircraft on ground and in-flight, Manual Fuel Feed conditions don't always display quite correctly on the ECAM (Oftentimes, the jet is still behaving as if it is in auto-fuel feed (auto managed pump status and tank selection). Sar far, this hasn't happened during every flight, oddly enough. *This issue appears to have resolved itself. Haven't confirmed I can feed the APU from other tanks, but the fuel synoptic appears to be very well done and working (now that I restarted a few times).

Correct, it is a press and hold to recharge

Disregard, I just pulled it up and it appears the FMS does have GPS. Any plans to release FedEx livery for MSFS?

Yeah, I figured! I heard about the release way too late to be of any use but given that models like these are probably subject to patches and revisions, I thought it might be worth putting the offer on the table. Absolutely awesome job! What impressed me right away was that the plane actually feels like a 310 (in the context of how MSFS flies), especially compared to the other airliners. The cockpit and overhead are beautiful, the switch functionality and ECAM logic are great, and the model is gorgeous. I still have a lot to figure out with the control side of the model, as I'm far from an MSFS pro (just play for fun occasionally and have a pretty basic stick/throttle/rudder setup), but I have noticed a handful of issues/errors (mostly how the automation/FMS/switch & systems logic interrelate). Nothing more than nitpicking given the enormity of the challenge. In reality, from an automation and systems perspective, the 300/310 is a very quirky airplane. Manuals are often incomplete or misleading when it comes to certain behaviors. The jet is not only within the lineage of Airbus's first jet, but it's also a hybrid cockpit (glass/dial and FMS) that removed the engineer (further increasing the complexity of systems' interrelation) -- all while running on the equivalent of a Commodore 64 processor! Are you interested in detailed feedback? If so, I'm happy to go through everything and pass along what I see. Can you tell me what ECAM version the team used? I don't have the sim in front of me at the moment, but it's also pre-GPS and non-FADEC engines, correct?

I recently became aware of the upcoming A310 model for MSFS, and while it appears iniBuilds has plenty of A310/300 model experience, I figured I'd at least offer my assistance. I've flown the A310 (-200 and -300) and the A300-600F for around 11 years, and I'm currently flying the A300-600f as captain. If any assistance is needed in making the model as faithful as possible, I'd be happy to help (e.g., review the model, answer questions regarding aircraft behavior not found in the manuals, etc.) I know I'm late to the party, but it can't hurt to ask. cavok