I agree it would be great to remove the KNS81... I get your point, but in reality no one I could think of would keep a KNS81 when fitting e.g. a GTN750. Also, you can easily check your navigation with your Navigation Software like Navigraph. That all being said, could you maybe explain how to remove the KNS "with the gap"? I figured with my avionics layout it wouldn't hurt too much. Also, is it possible to remove the MD41-328? Not that helpful with a GTN xD Kind Regards, Jannik S.

Thank you for your willingness to resolve any issues we report to you.

I suspect it’s a problem in Wwise where the position is set wrong for certain objects which Windows spatial doesn't use.

@Black-Square, FYI, I sent the Dev for Pilot Edge a link to this thread. If he pursues this idea, then I'm sure he will reach out if he needs any help.

Around 2.5 years later, and the landscape for Diesel 9 enjoyers remains bleak. The old Coolsky website is completely shut down, as are the old FlightOne forums where you could ask about it. The Sky Simulations DC-9 hasn't been updated in 9 months and the updates it received previously have failed to elevate it even above a default aircraft in terms of systems depth and accurate functionality, not to mention the whacky and inaccurate flight model. It does not seem like this is a viable project for anyone who wants a 'study level' DC-9 in the MSFS era. JustFlight's successes with aircraft like the F28 and BAE 146 continue to position them as the top choice to produce a top quality DC-9. I don't expect anything more from the JF staff beyond a boilerplate "thanks for the feedback, we're not in a position to comment on future projects" response, or none at all, but I'm still out here tilting at windmills hoping this aircraft is perhaps on their minds as a future project. The DC-9 was the mainstay of so many fleets for such a long time. We have the fantastic Leonardo MD-82/83/88, but no DC-9, and that is such a huge gap in aviation history to be lacking.

Yep - it's real taxiways. First pic is real taxiways on and 2nd pic is with it off. I've noticed this at a few other airports too - just kept forgetting to report it. Hopefully it's a code fix and not just one off fixes. It's always the sign that's wrong. [image: 93b6eb0d-5023-4f78-b50b-54601c0868ec.jpg] [image: a004a75d-9ee3-47e0-a88c-8dd65ea043c5.jpg]

Just a reminder that this was announced. I'm practicing my dual engine failure, tea pouring 1G barrel roll in the Barron. https://fselite.net/content/black-square-reveals-previously-unannounced-twin-in-development/

I think that behavior might actually be expected. The continuous-flow masks are only effective up to about FL250. As you approach that altitude the oxygen partial pressure becomes too low for the mask to maintain normal blood oxygen saturation, so the SPO2 reading starts to drop. The FL250 ceiling is basically the altitude where the system can still keep the pilot functional, not necessarily at 90% saturation. For extended flight, most guidance recommends keeping SPO2 around 90%, and increasing oxygen flow or descending if it starts dropping into the high-80s.

@Black-Square from my understanding talking to A2A, they use their own flight model and the turbulence is somehow interpolated by them before effecting the aircraft. I was really hoping since they claim their flight model is so accurate (and to their claim, their aircraft do fly better than anything I have flown in a sim...), that they would make it available for other developers to license and utilize. I would love to see how their model would handle canard aircraft for instance... I have tried both Active Sky and RealTurb and can say both work far better as a substitute for turbulence injection. I would love to see weather get a big makeover from Asobo.

@alanfernandes Ok, I did some digging. The Starship was originally designed in the 1980s and produced between 1989 and 1995. The original Collins AMS-850 had no GPS capability; it relied primarily on dual IRS with DME/DME and VOR/DME updating. However, the avionics suite was designed so that GPS sensors could be integrated later. During the aircraft’s production run, many were equipped with dual Collins GPS-4000 LRUs feeding the FMS, likely in the early–mid 1990s. This allowed the system to fly basic LNAV GPS approaches, though the GPS was mainly used to improve long-term inertial navigation accuracy by providing position updates to the FMS. The newer GPS-4000S units are generally backward-compatible replacements with higher precision and WAAS/SBAS capability, and they’re easier to source today since the GPS-4000/4000A units are no longer produced. Some Starships may have been upgraded to the 4000S, but since the AMS-850 predates many of the 4000S capabilities, it cannot use vertical guidance from WAAS approaches and would only benefit from improved integrity and lateral accuracy.

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!

@hunterdouglas I think this is something that Just Flight support would be best placed to help with. See: https://community.justflight.com/topic/2/product-support

As long as it's an option - and not forced upon the user -, it's fine. I personally don't want anything turning red, blue, etc.

shouldn't even have that performance lightly loaded.

I think my issue was just related to X-Plane 12 and specifically the Dash8 as I have been flying in MSFS with PMDG 737 and I haven't had a corrupted flight yet (4 flights).

It's like this IRL with nav lights during the daylight. You can argue its a little bit to dark but its still perfectly within range. There are other areas where lights are to dark.