albertom

My personal opinion - I find it bizarre that you decided to release the scenery with this known behavior. It's one thing to say "we only support multi-jetways on Ini aircraft" ... that's your right, if you want to try and push people to buy your planes. Even then, the multi-jetway FAQ page on this forum promises it could work with other vendor's present and future aircraft, but hey... But that even the MSFS stock, single-jetway behavior is broken for all non-ini planes is just wrong. So if I arrive in an iFly 73M, or a PMDG 773, both realistic planes for this airport and neither available in your catalog, then I don't even deserve a stock MSFS jetty? To me this should be clearly disclosed in the product page. Please, please: either make 50% of the gates behave the "old way" (no multi-jetty code) or provide a config switch / swappable BGLs so the user can choose which version to load. The current situation stinks of MS trying to force people to use Internet Explorer ... if you know what I mean. For the rest, congrats on a fantastic airport - it is really beautifully modelled. DWC next?

Hi, MSFS base navdata updated to 2405

I think I found my own answer. There are two fixes called OTMOT. One is on the approach shown above after MNOLO, the other is significantly to the South. I think the A300 is having trouble resolving this ambiguity. What's interesting is the map on the ND clearly shows which fix is the problem. The FPLN page on the other hand seems to get it right (segment TO and FROM OTMOT have correct enroute times) but then the last leg is completely off.

LFPG - TNCM Route: N0448F360 LGL5A LGL UT176 ROLEN UZ15 DIDAK DCT AKEMO DCT RIVAK DCT SIVIR DCT PASAS DCT 44N015W 42N020W DCT VFL DCT 38N030W 35N040W 33N045W 31N050W 27N055W DCT RKDIA M576 MNOLO ULUBA1 Cost index 15, passengers 221, cargo 770, fuel 45500kg Before loading the STAR and approach for TNCM (FMC route loaded up to MNOLO) the estimated times on the FPLN page were correct, including the last estimate for TNCM. The fuel prediction page also showed a plausible value for fuel remaining at destination (2.5) After loading the STAR and approach, all time estimates seem correct up until short final, but for some reason the very last little segment from 700ft to the airport has an estimate of 3 hours! Consequently, the fuel prediction page also shows a big negative value for fuel at destination, based on this erroneous time. Despite this I'm having a blast with the A300. Many thanks for the work done so far -- I post this more out of curiosity than for actual need of a fix.

Unfortunately not. After about an hour at FL320 and some alt-tabbing, camera switching, my cabin alt shot up to 312K, with a V/S of -995 correcting it. It eventually worked its way down to 7K. I cancelled the ECAM and put it down to a faulty sensor 😉

Just completed an 8h flight with the new build. Couple of directs, no issues. @iniBuilds I'm really impressed with how fast you fixed this. Your engagement on this and other threads is top-notch. Good job 👍👍

I made a short test flight with the dev console open and was unable to reproduce the issue, despite several DIR inputs. However I did see something weird in the console, maybe it helps, maybe not. Cargo aircraft EGPF/EGPH FL150 CI 11 WX : surface temp +01, pressure 29.50 Cargo 6167/6167/6167 fuel 50 000 Route : RW23 CLYD3A CLYDE DCT MAC DCT TRN DCT AGPED AGPED1E Spawn on runway 23, EFB > load panel state Ready for takeoff At 70NM from AGPED > Direct HAVEN In the console, among other things: SLOPE: 108.239 SLOPE: -nan SLOPE: 101.896 SLOPE: 108.239 SLOPE: 98.9952 SLOPE: -nan SLOPE: -0 SLOPE: -nan SLOPE: -0 SLOPE: -nan SLOPE: 263.438 SLOPE: -nan SLOPE: 98.9952 SLOPE: -nan Are those NaN supposed to be there? I note that, earlier in the flight, immediately after the turn MAC > TRN I tried a Direct TRN , and all SLOPE messages in the console had a number (float). Only after the second Direct did I see this weird stuff in the console.

https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/20452-throttle-keeps-moving-past-idle-to-reverse-thrust/ Note cleptric's suggestion to have the levers slightly in reverse when calibrating the IDLE position. This will make the "normal" idle detent look like a slightly positive offset.

If it helps you in the meantime: It seems there is a bit of a step to walk out of the cockpit. I found that by raising the viewpoint to almost the top ledge of the door, I was then able to continue backwards along the cabin. Probably a side effect of the Captain's default viewpoint being very low, as mentioned in another thread.

I was going to add this to the other Navi graph thread but I see it's closed now. Something about route N97 that the MCDU doesn't like. As you can see, no points displayed. Upon clicking any other airway ONCE, also no points are displayed, however clicking that other airway again fixes the issue. Selecting N97 again leads to the same problem, and again the airway selection immediately after that will also fail.

Just some extra info to try and narrow it down: I had the same, but WITHOUT any interaction with the MCDU. I was cruising at FL320 somewhere in this segment: NATEB DCT TLA DCT NIBOG DCT RESNO I stepped away for a coffee, and heard the autopilot disconnect sound. Came back to find the afore-mentioned spiral dive. It's possible, but I cannot guarantee, that I was passing a waypoint when this happened ( possibly TLA ?? ). So maybe something related to calculation of DCT segment?