RJ Professional

This is expected behavior as the TOC calculations are essentially the predicated TOC calculated by the data entered in the FMS. Therefore, the TOC point calculations are only re-calculated once something has been executed in the FMS. Note that although these calculations will never be perfectly accurate due to external factors such as temperature and wind, etc, the TOC calculations are something we have logged internally as something to potentially look into improving in the future. Mark - Just Flight

This is expected behavior as the altitude fixes are fixed points derived from the navdata. It is something we have logged internally as something to potentially look into improving in the future. Mark - Just Flight

Hi all, Based on comments on the FSDT forums, it looks like a fix for this was included in the latest GSX update (v3.4.5): https://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,33033.0.html Mark - Just Flight

I believe there were a few attempts at an RJ freighter, but the market just wasn't there for it. The most recent attempt appears to have concluded in 2017 when the market was saturated with 146 freighters: https://www.aircargonews.net/bae-postpones-plans-for-avro-rj100-freighter-conversion/19943.article A sizeable number of the active 146 freighters have been modernised with EFIS cockpits, so the operators may feel like there aren't enough benefits to investing in what would likely be a niche, low production program. Mark - Just Flight

Wow, didn't even realize an audio panel was hiding under the EFB. Thanks, got it working!

The RJ already uses 8K textures as standard for larger panel areas such as the main instrument panel. The difference between the RJ and F28 is the size of the texture sheets based on our artist's different techniques. The F28 has smaller texture sheets and therefore has a higher pixel density, the RJ has larger texture sheets and lower pixel density. In order to have the same effect as the F28 optional 8K texture pack, the RJ would require an extensive rework of all the cockpit textures. A significant undertaking which wouldn't be feasible for us at the moment. Never say never, but we're very happy with the quality of the current RJ textures when viewed from the standard pilot position. Mark - Just Flight

To the best of my knowledge, Swiss used that option as well. For nostalgic reasons, I'd kindly like to concur with Mac's request.

Thanks for getting back so quickly on this. Your suggestion worked perfectly! The "new" audio tracks now play as boarding music.

Just had a successful flight after updating the GTN. Thanks again!

I agree with the comments made by Mark and A Former User. I can add a little from the real aircraft perspective. The altimeter system (unlike that of the RJ) is obviously more prone to variations of holding altitude with speed changes/temperature and power changes. The research aircraft at Cranfield has, as I understand it, undergone been modification to use the RJ sensors to allow RVSM operations- but I doubt that was cheap to do! I guess they can get up above 146 operating altitudes as it’s not carrying 112 pax. 146 type: Having captured (say) FL 280, the ability to maintain it varies with change of speed; slow down a few knots/M and it will descend slightly; increase speed and it will climb slightly. Speed changes may be the result of warmer/colder airmass and subsequent N1 increase or decrease, as well as fuel burn and a reduction in a/c mass. How much climb or descent? Some a/c were better than others, but typically 50’ to 80’ from required altitude. We had a form to fill in an advise the engineers if we thought it excessive. We would record parameters such as OAT (or was it TAT?), Fl, speed/mach, N1 and captured altitude and variance. They had a BAe doc to compare to and decided if it was acceptable or not. To recapture the assigned FL, most pilots used the sync button. Very few used the pitch UP/DOWN on the rear of the centre console and ALT capture - it was so prone to under/overshoot. I’m happy when I have the time to answer other 146/RJ questions if I can. But, we will fall out if you keep calling the thrust levers ‘throttles’. Cessna like to use ‘throttle’ for their jet - but BAe do not.

Both YELLOW and GREEN can supply an anti skid function to the single set of brakes on each main wheel. The yellow system also has an EMGY brake function and BAT selection that have no anti skid function. A few things could be wrong. If hydraulic pressure is OK, check that the ANTI SKID switch is selected ON (not BATT). Also, try selecting the other brake system to that in use. If the INOP indication still remains lit I would suspect a software error or a selection within the EFB. The EMGY Brake switch (on the centre console) in EMGY Yellow position or ANTI SKID switch in the BATT position would not be expected to cause either a FAULT or INOP indication, but it would cause cause a loss of ANT SKID function.

It has been logged on our internal trackers but there is no progress to share at the moment. It is something we will be discussing with our sound developer ahead of the next update to the RJ. Mark - Just Flight

Sounds like a controller conflict to me. Have you turned rudder axis steering off in the EFB / Settings menu?

OK. There is a second switch at the starboard side of the cockpit entrance. This switch, in conjunction with the cockpit entry light switch that you refer to, operates as a two-way switch - that’s why the switch you refer to is not mark ON/OFF. I suspect that is why you are seeing the behaviour that you are. FYI: The power for these entry lights can be drawn through; External AC, AC Bus 2, or Ground Services Bus.

The funny thing is, this just happened to me again today - noticed my fuel wasn't decreasing during a flight in the Duke, realized there was a SU1 beta update when I first started the sim yesterday. It doesn't change settings for everybody, I wish I knew why it did it for me.

@RPGamerous thanks. I initially used the ap disengage and when that disable AP but I still had the issue, then I used the disengage bar. But I do have honeycomb bravo assignments. Your comment has made me think about removing them all and trying again.

That’s the way I see it on the sim.

Hi, Well unfortunately there is not a lot of performance data available now. I will try to attaché what I have. Just Flight wont permit me to copy files, but here is a link to one set of data. There are still operators of the 146/RJ, you could try contacting them, I'm sure they would help with a university project. You could also try contacting BAE Systems. i must admit from the point of view of the Spreadsheet I have been testing the performance calculations against the Just Flight aircraft as that is the only option I have. but I'm pretty confident, based on the historical routes operated that Just Flight have done an excellent job. If the link doesn't work try searching for "RJ Technical Data at a glance". chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.aviation-broker.com/fileadmin/user_upload/jetxchange/flugzeugmodelle/general/RJ_Tech_data_at_a_glance__April_2004.pdf Good Luck