zbrainlezz

Figured I'd poke my head in here and say that, per this screenshot I just took, the main panel instruments do have glass, so the devs probably just need to tweak the reflectivity.

Just got a marketing email that included v1.0.8 of the TriStar having been submitted to the Marketplace, and I figured I'd ask one question: when will the flight model be among the fixes? I've been waiting for certain aspects of the flight model to be made more realistic for a couple of months. I've seen posts saying that, among other things, it shouldn't be able to climb at 1,500fpm above FL300 and the deck angle on approach is several degrees too low, and those things now greatly annoy me every time I try to fly it, to the point where the only times I've flown the aircraft have been to test it after an update. So with every update since probably v1.0.3, I've been hoping to see those aspects of the flight model be modified based on that feedback, and I've been sorely disappointed each time so far. I still hold out hope that v1.0.9 will include this, but I'm starting to really wonder. To be clear, I think I speak for everyone when I say I very much appreciate all of the systems fixes that have been done so far, but I just really hope the team doesn't neglect other important areas such as this.

Very strange. I haven't had any problems in that regard.

I do all the aircraft setup myself, and turning these to Auto is part of my routine. If you turn them to Auto and this issue doesn't continue to happen, there's your answer.

Thanks. Shame that's my only recourse, but I guess it'll have to do for now.

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.

I decided to try setting up controls for the TriStar using my Honeycomb Bravo in SPAD.neXt instead of using the sim's built-in bindings, and I've run into a bit of a problem: the throttle lever in the TriStar's cockpit resets to zero (idle thrust) when the physical lever on my Bravo isn't actively moving. See this video: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U7UFaQO1-VXJzfFhl_SA5pK43_ZUKs3R/view?usp=drive_link This is basically the last obstacle I have to cross in order to have all my controls for this aircraft in SPAD instead of the sim settings (I don't like needing to have settings for the same thing in two different places at the same time). I don't know if this is an aircraft bug or a skill issue on my part, but I'm leaning toward the former, as I've tried all the SPAD thrust lever bindings I can find, and they either don't work at all or exhibit the above behavior. If there's any other information I'd need to provide in order to troubleshoot this, please let me know.

I have a Honeycomb Bravo, and I do prefer to be able to have independent reverse thrust settings for each lever. Unfortunately, as of yet, I haven't been able to find a way to set up a reverse thrust toggle input that works at all in SPAD.next, even for all three levers at once. The bindings that usually work with other aircraft simply don't work with the TriStar. I've had similar problems with a couple of other iniBuilds aircraft, where the thrust reversers and a few other controls only work using MSFS' built-in bindings and can't be made to work using any of the common bindings in SPAD.next. Super annoying, because I'd love to be able to make all the controls work exclusively through SPAD, but iniBuilds apparently doesn't allow that at the moment.

Have you turned on the tank 2L and/or 2R fuel pumps? If I'm remembering correctly, that's a required step to start the APU.

Any further progress update on fixing the flight model issues mentioned briefly in the original post of this thread and in at least one other post? (Deck angle on approach several degrees too low, achievable vertical speed in the climb above ~FL280 much too high) Or should I create another thread about this? On an unrelated note, why does there appear to be no way to delete posts if a user wants to?

I can confirm this issue is finally fixed in 1.0.5. To the dev team: thank you very much. One more major issue fixed.

I recently discovered rzjets.net myself and it's been invaluable for finding real SELCALs and occasionally Mode-S codes to put in my SimBrief airframes. It's how I found N765BE's SELCAL (JQ-BE).

The majority of the liveries in the iniManager seem to have that problem. Been hoping for some livery updates to address that for a while.

This issue is still present in 1.0.4. It's seriously beginning to get on my nerves, especially since the IAS and MACH modes also still don't work properly.

This issue (VNAV mode transitioning from IAS to Mach too early in the climb, and vice versa too late in the descent) is unfortunately still present in 1.0.3. Another issue that has still not been corrected is that the autopilot's actuation of the stabilizer trim is too slow when in IAS and MACH vertical modes, causing constantly alternating overshoot and undershoot of the target speeds and therefore slow vertical oscillations. This means I have to use VS mode to correct when the aforementioned VNAV problem occurs. I hope these issues will be fixed in 1.0.4, as again, they are the last major problems that prevent me from fully enjoying the plane.

Interesting. I wonder why I've not been able to get some SPAD bindings to work with any of iniBuilds' aircraft then... At this point, though, I'm tired of messing with different bindings trying to get them all working in SPAD, so I'm going to stick with what I've found that works, which in this case is a mix of SPAD and MSFS bindings.

I've found that using only SPAD control bindings doesn't work with any of the three iniBuilds aircraft in my library (A300-600R, A340-300, TriStar). There are some controls, such as thrust, spoiler, and flap levers, that either only work with MSFS' built-in bindings, or I somehow haven't found the correct bindings in SPAD (I've tried several possibilities for each, none worked). My best guess at the moment is that iniBuilds just hasn't built proper support into any of their aircraft for any control binding system other than MSFS' built-in one. Because of this, I've had to use some SPAD bindings and some of MSFS' built-in bindings with all these aircraft.

The problem I've had with IAS and MACH modes so far is that the autopilot doesn't change the stabilizer trim quickly enough in those modes, so the aircraft can't hold a speed or Mach reliably. There was a similar issue with VNAV mode when the plane first released, but that's since been mostly fixed. Apart from that and a couple of other known issues, the other vertical modes, such as ALT capture, are working decently now on my end.

I very much hope so, as right now that's one of the last major issues that's preventing me from making a fully satisfactory flight with the TriStar. Thanks 👍

I previously reported it here: That topic was locked as a fix is supposedly already in progress. Hopefully the changelog for the next update will have a fix for this issue in it...

Alright, but what about when switching from MIN to NORM or vice versa? Would there be no difference in APU gauge readings between those two modes?

Good to know. What I meant by that second sentence in my original reply, though, is that turning the APU mode knob appears to have absolutely no effect at all. Yes, the knob can be moved, but it doesn't seem to actually trigger any change in the APU's operation. Therefore, I think iniBuilds should add the necessary code to make the knob actually change whatever APU parameters it's supposed to change before worrying about how the knob itself behaves, if that makes any sense.

Can confirm this is still an issue with v1.0.1.

Can confirm, the autopilot's action on the pitch trim is still too slow to properly hold speed constraints in the climb, among other things. With the recent update, I can also confirm it seems a bit underpowered at normal EPR for most of the climb, but then it feels like it might be able to climb too quickly when holding Mach above ~30k feet. Do note I have no clue how the real L1011 would've handled, but compared to other sim airliners I've flown (MD-11 my beloved), it seems like there's definitely still some improvement yet to be had. The 1.0.1 update still fixed/improved a lot though. Just a bit of autopilot and flight model work yet to be done before I feel I can add it to my regular rotation. One major suggestion for iniBuilds: if you haven't already, perhaps try bringing in some help from pilots who flew the real L1011-500 in terms of getting the flight dynamics right. I'm no developer, but I've seen from the results of other airliner projects that it helps a lot to have input from those who really know how the real thing flies.

Can confirm. I encountered the same issue, tried reinstalling the liveries and that didn't have any effect, then uninstalled and reinstalled the plane and it was all fine.