@RealPax I actually got "Hangar Control", but unrelated to the Caravan, I then got other problems going that way. Until now MSFS2024 Controller system has worked mostly flawless, not quite as easy as Hangar Control and also not as powerfull.

Missing textures would typically indicate an installation issue, or possibly another mod/product causing a conflict. As a first step, we would recommend reinstalling the latest version of the Vulcan (MSFS 2020: v0.1.3, MSFS 2024: v0.1.4) and then checking if any change is observed with the missing textures and the aileron trim. If either behaviour persists after a reinstall, could I kindly ask you to raise a ticket with Just Flight Support via the following link: https://www.justflight.com/support Our support team will be best positioned to be able to further assist with this. Mark - Just Flight

If this occurs again, could I kindly ask you to raise a ticket with Just Flight Support via the following link: https://www.justflight.com/support In the ticket, if you could provide further details for how our support team can replicate this behaviour (which 146 variant, airport, fuel, payload, weather conditions, etc.), as well as a video if possible, then our support team will be best positioned to be able to further assist with this. Mark - Just Flight

Thank you for the feedback. Could I kindly ask you to raise a ticket with Just Flight Support via the following link, and one of our support team will be able to assist with this and log it on our internal trackers if required: https://www.justflight.com/support Mark - Just Flight

I am unable to replicate this on my side, so could I kindly ask you to contact Just Flight Support via the following link, and our support team will be able to further assist with this: https://www.justflight.com/support Mark - Just Flight

We aren't able to replicate any differences in roll rate in the Vulcan, and we aren't aware of there being any means to set up different roll rates in each direction in the flight model. The videos you have posted show a different behaviour compared to the thread you linked in your original post. In your videos, the control stick isn't moving linearly in either direction, which would suggest a controller sensitivity issue. We would recommend ensuring that your controller sensitivities for pitch, roll and yaw are set to linear (straight lines). I have attached a screenshot below for reference. [image: dd4cb379-6037-49a8-9210-011745f5e944.png] If you continue to experience a difference in roll rate after ensuring your controller sensitivities are linear, we would kindly recommend contacting Just Flight Support for further assistance: https://www.justflight.com/support Mark - Just Flight

The Vulcan was the second aircraft we developed into an MSFS 2024 native product, and therefore, it was developed around the time when we were still learning how to develop products for the new simulator. For that reason, it doesn't make use of as many MSFS 2024 features as our more recent MSFS 2024 native products. All of the MSFS 2024 elements that we have intentionally included with the product are working as intended, and additional items, such as MSFS 2024 walkaround mode, are items we would like to include in a future update, but due to the development time involved in adding those, we wouldn't be able to commit to a timeframe for when those may be added. Mark - Just Flight

I hope you guys don't think I've been ignoring you. Unfortunately, I wish I had better advice to offer. The code in the Caravan that might have anything remotely capable of producing a CTD is identical to my other aircraft, and the Caravan has even less in the way of avionics than most of my other aircraft. I know several of you are seeing symptoms that appear limited to the Caravan, but I have also seen similarly limited behavior with my other aircraft in the past that resolved themselves in various different ways. Luckily, I haven't had any consistent and persistent CTD reports (other than v1.0 Starship) with my aircraft over the years, largely in part to their architecture, which avoids WASM, where CTD's are most likely to happen. I would encourage you to keep looking for outside applications or system-level issues that might be causing this, but in the meantime, I will be watching this thread closed to see if there is anything I can learn, or anything I can suggest for testing. Sorry that you're dealing with this right now. I just wish I had more to offer.

Left over from the Duke manual. I've fixed it. Thanks.

I just reviewed the code to see what I could find here. I've only seen a handful of reports about this, while it seems to be working for most users. My immediate thought was the usual hardware bindings. After my code review, I'm sill inclined to believe that is where the issue lies. The light will illuminate only when... The standby alternator bus is connected to the main bus (will happen when the switch is thrown) The main bus is at at least 16V (should always be the case during normal operation) When the alternator is energized. This last point is likely where the issue is. This can happen in two ways... When hardware/software is sending the associated alternator event to activate the alternator. When correctly set by the code in the aircraft, when... a. The main generator is off. b. The main generator is on, but the battery is discharging at more than 5A. If you cannot find any type of hardware or software input that might be affecting any of the conditions listed above, then the best thing to do would be to sent me screenshots of everything you can think of. This would include the tablet's live schematic, the multi-meter, the whole panel with all the annunciators and engine instruments, and if anyone is ambitious, perhaps some of the underlying variables discussed above, if you're familiar with reading them in 3rd party applications. Thanks for any help!

Thanks for the comment. Indeed, I've already done the work for all my other aircraft. There is actually yet another step I could take to make the flares really bright (hyper-realistic, shall we call it) during the day, but this would take much more work, so I wanted to see what my users thought of this change first. I think the results are definitely acceptable now, and anymore would be (probably less realistic) eye-candy.

Hey Nick, same as the guy above me, I'm using the WT GNS 530/430 combo and I'm seeing the KAP140 baro setting having no effect and the main altimeter setting controlling the AP. Currently flying the Cargomaster in MSFS 2024, Caravan v1.1. Edit: removing the ping, as based on the comment re: WT update cycle I suspect you're aware of this. I thought it worked in the Analog Caravan in 2020 though? I was using WT avionics back then, as well.

The best plane in X-Plane is the AFL King Air 350. It would be nice to have a competitor in MSFS2024.

@Mustang I just checked the model and the configurations, and the correct thrust centerline distance should be 6.8ft, whereas it's currently 6.0ft. It's not a holdover from the piston engines, which have the same centerlines, so I'm not sure where that came from. I've fixed it for the next version, but I suspect the change in performance will be pretty minimal. You're welcome to test it yourself. Look for the Engine.0, and Engine.1 lines near the top of the engines.cfg, and replace them with the following lines: Engine.0 = 6.9, -6.8, 0.7 Engine.1 = 6.9, 6.8, 0.7

@Galf Do you have v1.1 of the Caravan? There was an issue in v1.0 that prevented those items from saving, but only for the Cargomaster.

@scanham That's a very interesting combination of things. Looking at the code, both cannot be true at the same time. The red chip detector on the tablet visualizer and the engine health bar read the exact same variable in the same block of code, and depend on no other variables. Can you provide some screenshots or video to help troubleshoot this? A picture is always worth a thousand words.

@ksmith Wonderful! Thanks for the feedback. Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you guys!

@Black-Square Sorry about that one - for some reason I thought real taxiways changed the pavement markers too. Here's another one today: CYHZ Runway 32/14 - all of the signs say 23-05. Runway 23-05 is correctly marked. Let me know if you want me to continue to tag you on these - or just post and let you get to them when you can.

Yup, that works for the 650, but not for the 750 which was what was confusing me.