Starship

Thanks i hear it now. I wasn't slow enough.

Marty and I have this sorted out. The uppercase characters from the Star Trek BT font are acceptable for the registration number.

@Black-Square It would indeed be a huge amount of work, but it doesn't interfere with the simulation in any way. For me, the Starship is the best aircraft in the simulator that I've ever been able to purchase and study. I hope you'll continue to support it by implementing improvements and fixing bugs over time. Thank you!

@ErnieBall Glad to hear you're enjoying it! It's a very special aircraft for me too. I'm always here if you have any more questions!

I have the same question myself. In the flight_model.cfg file this damaging speed 190 is under the "flaps" section, which makes sense since the max flaps extended speed is 180. Should this really apply to the landing gear as well?

Re: the original post (VOR tracking goes from NAV to ROL spontaneously), I created a bug in the FS2024 Official forum. Feel free to add to that discussion. One important piece of info is that it seems only to happen when one is using an external control mapper like Spad.Next or FSUIPC. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/bug-multiple-planes-change-from-nav-to-rol-hdg-mode-when-tracking-vor/762974

@alanfernandes said in Bug? Fuel Burn.: Although fuel flows by gravity from the forward to the aft compartment within the main system during refueling, there is no gravity transfer between the auxiliary and main tanks. In flight, this transfer relies exclusively on jet pumps operated by engine motive flow, which renders the fuel in the auxiliary tanks unusable should the pump system fail. I recall discussing this in one of my videos. Here is what I said in the manual: "Most of the fuel in the aft tanks will transfer to the main tanks by gravity, and the rest can be transferred by the aft tank transfer jet pumps. Should the aft tank transfer jet pumps fail, the total usable fuel may be reduced." Here is what the Flight Safety manual says: "Although a small amount of fuel may gravity-feed from the aft tank without the motive-flow system, the pilot should consider all fuel in the aft tank as unusable and plan the flight accordingly." Without looking right now (sorry, I'm leaving to record sound from the Twin Commanders in a few hours), I recall that I assumed this statement was made out of abundance of caution, and implemented the system such that it would slowly equalize to a certain point, so long as the jet pumps had not failed (emulating a blockage). Given the arrangement of the jet pumps and their no-moving-part nature, I assumed that there would be flow through them, so long as the pressure on the auxiliary tank side is high enough.

that looks like a perfect inclusion, thanks for the link!

@C-FJDH said in 13,450lbs - Significance on CG display?: Interesting! But it leads to a question on the implementation of the marker in the tablet. As I read it, the full aft limit is available at all weights. The forward limit is what changes at higher weights. 307 inches aft of datum (farther forward) at lighter weights, but the forward limits is pushed rearward 3 inches for weights above 13,450. I think the marker in the tablet should be near the forward CG limit, not the rear. Old thread, but since Nick may have missed this, I wanted to comment that it appears you're correct. This image is from section 6-27 of the flight manual. The forward CG limit evenly moves rearward after 13,450 lbs. Tablet mistake, indeed. [image: 29297225-5e96-40bc-94e0-76f772417adf.png]

Alright, I need that livery.

Any news about this? Having lights visible from a distance in the LOD would really help. Thanks.

Brilliant, thanks Mark!

@Tadeus72 said in Your favorite medium-long range cruise altitude: Thank you, often when crossing the States I actually look for a scenic route, this might be a great inspiration, will check it out. If you fly it, please let me know how you like it. I think there's one small "error" in it near the Grand Canyon, one airfield you can get into but the runway might be too short to get out of again. Of course, if you're not flying it for the VA you can skip it no problem. I've yet to fly it myself.

That may be true. I just completed a flight using VORs only, and the FD/AP behaved the same way. Hunting for center. More of a concern though, was the AP dropping out of NAV mode to ROLL several times throughout the flight, even when close (20nm) from the VOR. And once from APP mode within 10nm of approach it dropped back into ROLL again.

H:ALT_AltitudeSelectKnob_Dec_1 and H:ALT_AltitudeSelectKnob_Inc_1 are the events for the reference altitude.

@Black-Square No problem! My friend owns the Caravan and he also confirmed that this is happening, so this is probably affecting all Black Square products.

@SadBucket Great! Tks!

I have started to notice it in other planes as well now. Thanks for your effort but this seems something that Asobo needs to address. In comparison, the Starship isn't the worst affected.

Not sure you read the thread (particularly Nick's responses rather than my drivel), but those vars aren't (or weren't) being exposed, they're only internal. So AAO/SPAD/Mobiflight can't see them, at least not until you make the changes to expose them that Nick and I talk though up above. All sorted now though!