F70 & F100 Professional

Thank you for the feedback. We have logged this on our internal trackers, and we'll look into this for a future update. Mark - Just Flight

I’m a bit at a loss with PRF not engaging. My present route is MDPC-TAPA and whilst PRF was initially enabled somehow it switched to FLC and I could not re-engage it (maybe at CLB call-out). My selected FL is within the MCDU max (FL310 vs. FL350) and I’ve tried different routes between the airports. BATC is clearing me to climb through SID constraints, which I’m happy to do (though I wonder if this has something to do with it?). PRF has been OK up until now in my other flights but then I didn’t chop and change CLB modes. Has anyone found a workaround to allow PRF to be re-engaged?

In real life, the difference between FCC and speed card would be up to 5 kt. [image: 000b6ae4-0b47-4115-9085-8c8821ea609c.png]

It makes sense, but in any case, the manual doesn't explain it well; it was a copy-paste from the original manual, and they didn't even notice that this version has "auto" instead of "cont1." Another thing is that there's no information on the MFDU indicating that the ignition is on, as the manual also states.

Had a vAPP of 121kn today and I didn't manage to perform a stable approach. Aircraft accelerated to 160kn and even higher as you can see on this screenshot (wasn't able to record a video quickly enough): [image: e023f5a4-4d6b-4ba0-82ef-566b4995e945.png]

It's not so much a question of "do we have failures or don't we", but rather how deep the system simulation is. To me, deep system simulation means the systems need to behave realistically when things go wrong or when a pilot mistake is made. Like others have said above, what's the point of coding deep system fidelity if nothing is ever out of the ordinary. And by that I don't just mean catastrophic events that force you to land immediately. It's more like the little things that happen on a daily basis in airline operations. Chances for a hot start, HYD pressure that can drop for whatever reason, INS issues, a pack that runs hot... just things so that system monitoring and checklists have meaning. Without that, it's hard to enjoy deep system simulation, because there's no reason for it to exist when no parameter can ever go out of line. So yes, please, add system failures, errors, acting up, randomness. I have no problem with paying extra for this. It's just that flying with knowing nothing can ever go wrong is, how should I say, not very fulfilling.

We intentionally link the brightness of the forward galley lights to the cockpit door position to prevent light from bleeding into the cockpit when the cockpit door is closed. Therefore, with the cockpit door closed, the forward galley lighting controls will not have any effect. When the cockpit door is open, the cabin lighting controls will all be fully functional. Mark - Just Flight

yes that's my confusion sorry

@Merikeri I am not so sure many have been upgraded much. Possibly just Australian ones because it's not really economic. Planes like that usually end up in countries not requiring such upgrades, which also makes them more affordable.

@Swisspilot1986 Every aircraft that has them does.

On the plane irl, it is the same

@knollo thanks a lot, works as intended!

Thank you very much

Great idea!

@Lerno1 Oh ok, I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about the FPL equipment list Then, I don't know either. I'm surprised that it was not RVSM approved in US. Bunch of old aircraft of this era are approved (ERJ-145 for exemple).

Thanks, I just couldn’t remember if the INIT page was accessible. Anyway, my subsequent flight in the F100 had no spurious AFCAS messages.

I.. hmm. I was like 99% sure I was in Normal mode, but I did take screenshots... and I was indeed in V2 mode. So chalk this one up to operator error.

Same thing also happens on takeoff, the call "thrust set" is already heard about 0.2 EPR below target TO thrust (about 1-2 seconds early).