Starship

@SadBucket I do fly predominantly without the 430, however if I am flying a rnav departure or arrival, it comes in handy. Especially an intercept of a radial of a waypoint.

I'm mainly flying the Baron Pro, but have had the same problems, especially on short final and if the wind speed is 10kts+. I actually found the plane uncontrollable and nothing could stop it rolling over and crashing inverted. This happened with some other aircraft, but not all. I tried to use the MSFS2024 turbulence settings to fix it, but I found that setting it to Low or Medium resulted in no turbulence at all, so quite boring. Then I discovered and installed ActiveSky. I have set the Turbulence Effect Scale to 50% (the default) and then reduced overall wind turbulence from 100% to 50%. This results in there still being turbulence on the plane in the air, and some more turbulence on short final still, but now it's manageable. And what a great weather synthesis! Much more realistic looking skies, and more closely aligned to Windy.com's winds. Give it a go!

It was hot starting as if the engine covers were still in place despite not visably being in place. I did a restart of the sim, un install, re install of SU5 beta and it seems to work correctly now. Shhhhhh dont wake the copilot troll :p

The Navigraph survey is out too, put Starship down as a vote there as well. For anticipated releases it was "Anything by Black Square and the PMDG 737-700", I really like the BBJ. https://navigraph.surveysparrow.com/s/navigraph-flightsim-community-survey-2026/tt-DfDJ6

@Black-Square said in Copilot and passengers not visible: @qqwertzde When payloads are adjusted via the native payload interface in MSFS 2024, it causes Canard aircraft to flip over backwards. Thanks for the feedback, I really appreciate it. Pity that we can't have pax in the Starship then.

@MD82 Feel free to use it a lot and let me know if you find any issues or inconsistencies. I moved away from the landing page look to give it more of a 'calculator' feel.

@jmarkows Thanks!

@Black-Square said in Can't Toggle Wheel Chocks via LVar: I don't think there is any reason you shouldn't be able to do exactly what it does in my code. All you should need is K:TOGGLE_ALTERNATOR1, K:TOGGLE_ALTERNATOR2, L:var_GeneratorReset_L, and L:var_GeneratorReset_R. Just set the latter two to 1 for the reset switch position. Setting L:var_GeneratorReset_L to 1 leaves it stuck in the Reset position, it doesn't do the momentary toggle back to the On position. I tried setting 0 afterwards, but then the switch in the cockpit is not able to be switched back to off until I scroll it up into Reset again.

Have you found out something about the issue?

@jmarkows said in Repeated NAV mode disconnects while VFR hopping: are you reverting to roll mode when you're still receiving the tuned VOR? Yes. In the most recent case, the FMS / VOR Status page showed the VOR in all three slots plus the DME. It was listed with a 130 nm range, the dropouts occurred on inbound and outbound legs beyond 50 nm. Inside 50 nm it's generally been fine. @DrZGard said in Repeated NAV mode disconnects while VFR hopping: we would much more often utilize the OMNI needle for verification of being on course and heading mode Thanks for the tip, I will give that a shot.

Digging up an old thread because I got back into the Starship after a few months. I was busy going over the equipment requirements again, to update my SimBrief profile. In short, if you're not using the GNS 430, but you accept the fact that your Starship has ONE GPS receiver: You are not capable of RNAV10 or RNP4 remote or oceanic as this requires two independent Long Range Navigation Systems. The Starship has 2 FMC's, but they are linked to only ONE receiver. Hence, they are not independent. (There is a designated area where only one LRNS is sufficient) Even though you meet all requirements for Terminal RNAV 1 SID's and STAR's, you can't accept one because it is not line-selectable from your FMS (FAA AC 90-100A 10. b. (3) "General Operating Procedures" pg. 13 You can fly an RNAV GPS approach down to LNAV minima, because you have a GPS receiver and the approach IS line-selectable from the database. Due to having only one GPS receiver, NAT HLA is also not approved. (Except for the fact that you're not RNP4/RNAV10 qualified anyways). Cheers,

@Black-Square did you ever have any luck with this? I dusted off Starship tonight to help someone learn how to program the FMS and very quickly rediscovered the joy. I had the same issue reported above though. I tried dialing in a speed on the ASI and then activating IAS PROF, and it didn't do anything. I cleared the setting on the ASI and tried IAS PROF again and it immediately picked up my current airspeed and started climbing.

Damn! Found them. Hahahaha, thanks

SimBrief has performance built-in. Even takeoff performance. Which I have checked is spot on!

Hello, I had the same on the TFDi MD-11. And I believe that if the aircraft is coded a certain way using MSFS's icing model and loading, you will notice the ice weight on your payload manager. On the MD-11 you will see the extra weight on the FMC's payload page as a higher gross weight than the sum of your airplane weight and fuel weight. This one I am not sure about. All I can think of is that maybe your intakes were clogged with and ice/or your inertial separators were closed. Leading to engines being chocked for air.

@SadBucket I think the option (and I'm a great believer in options!) to simply remove by tablet is great for those that maybe think they have a ground crew for doing those things. That actually brings up something I don't know: do biz jet pilots remove the covers and things? How deep a preflight do they do? I had a buddy who flew in east Africa for the Red Cross for years and he told me about the flying but never once mentioned doing a preflight. I drove school bus for 30 years and my stories never mention the 10 minutes doing the pretrip inspection that we all had to do every morning. @Black-Square I guess I'm missing something when setting the park brake - I'll try that ASAP. edit: Got it!! A small possible wrinkle would be having to be within a certain radius of a removable element; it would lend more credence to walking around doing the preflight. Why be able to reach 20' to remove a cover? Okay, we can't jump up on the wing (can we?!) to remove the intake covers so there has to be a compromise. Have a great day. Bob