Starship

Should be able to remove through User Options in main menu under character customization. Go to co-pilot tab and select none. May work...

@KAPA-Flyer said in Marketplace and Xbox: At the end of the day, I guess all we can do is wait and twiddle our thumbs. Welcome to my world...

Hi. This is a known issue which will hopefully be fixed soon. FYI: https://community.justflight.com/topic/9382/question-about-glass-gauge-reflections-in-cockpit Cheers.

Sorry it wasted your time! It's a miracle that I can remember some of these things I notice once about the code left over from 30 years ago...

I've had this type of behavior on many coupled approaches with a large number of aircraft in FS2020 (still getting 2024 set up). In all cases the "aggressive pitch-down" occurred when I released the AP. For instance, if I maintain coupling all the way to the MAP, the aircraft (could be any of them) will immediately go out-of-trim with a pitch-down (even though it should maintain the trim that was there). I've resolved this for the most part by simply uncoupling at least 100' above the MAP - this usually results in a stable glide path and the trim being spot-on. I've always attributed this to a fault in the MSFS AP though maybe it's an issue with my stick (Thrustmaster T.16000M). I've never had this happen with the Starship, though that may be due to my early AP release procedure.

@AlphaEcho ah, okay. That is what I thought as I could have sworn that I had looked for something to disable the registration all togther. Its not deal breaker for me just can make the photos I take from time to time look a bit goofy.

@MarkS said in Possible GTN650 integration?: @Rhinozherous said in Possible GTN650 integration?: Soooo, is a GTN650 integration still a thing? Unfortunately, no, at least not by me. Roger!

Sunset flight Dubai to Abu Dhabi [image: 53bcfad6-48ec-4586-9309-13eb6c88e5db.jpg] [image: c8c79fff-7e0b-4444-aac4-17e59e3010a7.jpg] [image: ac843f41-1021-4025-8073-2d810f6941a9.jpg] [image: bbef4dae-1ec1-4ae0-abfd-670771c94481.jpg] [image: c3826248-b0c6-49cd-b406-840775d3f382.jpg] [image: 0ad25897-2077-41c0-9eb6-77766a3c3171.jpg] [image: f91ee82d-5930-4c12-892b-1c8bae67b523.jpg] [image: e9a4836d-a051-41b5-8f4b-7c58c1611ace.jpg] [image: 727acdc8-9023-450a-948e-783a5eeed3e1.jpg] [image: c592d63a-bfba-418a-acef-08b0bb541976.jpg]

To confirm, yes it works very well.

Congratulations on the upgrade! When I get into the systems (particularly power and prop control), I will know who to get in touch with for testing! In the meantime, I have a friend who is looking to upgrade from a previous piston twin to Commander 500, so perhaps you will have some advice on Commander airframes for him.

@MiRexer ahhh okay, thank you for the link.

Some results from experimenting at KSMO... The FMC won't allow you to have a single waypoint flight plan. It requires at least two waypoints. You cannot repeat the same waypoint twice in a row, but you can have a waypoint twice in a flight plan as long as there's a different waypoint in between. i.e. KSMO - SMO - KSMO. Starting the flight plan from a non-airport waypoint is permissible. i.e. SMO-KSMO or DARTS-KSMO. The second allowed me to load the RNAV 21 approach from DARTS iaf without duplicating the DARTS waypoint. Probably the better option if you know in advance which approach you want to load. However... The DIRECT page will allow you to select a close by airport even with an empty flight plan. Selecting KSMO from the DIRECT page generates a flight plan ----/KSMO, which then does allow you to load any approach without needing a "junk" starting waypoint. This might actually be my preferred way of doing it now.

@Black-Square - I'm working on a cockpit build of the Baron 58P - any chance I could get your MIP for that? Have a huge pile of switches and encoders here and a 3d printer on the way . . . . .

When turns amber

I see. I'm actually among those (highly!) grateful for your implementation of the door behavior. The forced entry/exit is certainly not desired, to say the least.