It's not something that we can commit to or provide a timescale for at the moment, but it's certainly something that we'd like to include in a future update. Given the complexity of supporting lateral offsets for all the different leg types, we'd probably support it initially for just straight/enroute legs.

The current plan is for v1.2 to release on Thursday. That is subject to the final testing that is currently underway.

In addition to refinements to all areas of the AFCAS and ATS logic, the v1.2 update will include a reworked auto-trim system, which should fix the issue with the aircraft not being trimmed when disengaging the autopilot.

Support for the reverse thrust toggle assignment has already been added for the upcoming v1.2 update.

Apologies _ I should have read the EFB documents More carefully! There's a CFG button to press on the A/C page, Del

Hello, I think I have them but I am in vacations so I don't have them here. But do something (by memory... :-): In MSFS2024 Select Fokker 100 or 70 and place it on the ramp. Go to Settings in MSFS 2024 and turn "Developers" on. After, In Spad.next UPDATE all LVARS (always do this, many desapear after closing everything and are impossible to find) In MSFS2024, in the little menu that the "Developers" open on top, check in "tools" and drop "Behaviour". (i think is in "tools"). Find "Behaviour" anyway. "Behaviour" opens a window, in the little menu of that window, in the middle drop menu (don't remember the name" drop it, and you'll see "interaction". select. Find "Interaction" anyway Now if you hover the buttons you will see the name of the function/LVAR title over the buttons. Explore a little. Hope it helps!

@Black-Square said in Aileron trim precision - possible to mod?: I actually reviewed this today, and both the Baron and Bonanza will have values of 0.25 in the next update. I changed it to .1 Otherwise, when using the mouse, I could nerver get the plane perfectly trimmed out. Anybody here using the Brunner yoke? I am working on a profile already quite a long time, but still not 100% happy.

I switched from using (H:) events to the Input Events (IE:) for the GNS430, GNS530 and the GNS 530 Dual. Not familiar with Hanger Control however you or others may find this useful. Examples in Axis and Ohs for DirectTo: 1 1 (>IE:2:AS430_DIRECTTO) 1 1 (>IE:2:AS530_DIRECTTO) If Dual GNS 530's 1 1 (>IE:2:AS530_1_DIRECTTO) 1 1 (>IE:2:AS530_2_DIRECTTO) Perhaps Hanger Control also utilizes Input Events (IE:)

Whilst we haven't been able to reproduce this issue yet, the v1.2 update, due for release this week, will include a lot of AFCAS and ATS fixes and improvements. Please let us know if you still encounter this issue after installing v1.2.

Thanks for the suggestion. We are looking into that now.

Your wish has been granted. [image: 77fef1b1-daac-4bce-9e2c-b092e54a979a.png] [image: 547b70dd-b6f6-441f-8e7f-cccbfff234bb.png]

@Black-Square Thank you for the quick reply, and for trying to fix this quickly... Bug happens and it's alright, the frustrating part is that they have the fix already, and don't release it....

@Morten I wish it were so easy, unfortunately. Deciding whether to intercept and intervene in hardware input events is not something you can turn on/off on the fly. I appreciate the thought, though. As is often the case, the method I'm thinking of would actually be more realistic, with a real additional hopper tank that's fed from the main tanks. The only reason I didn't do this in the first place was because I thought it would be confusing for users looking at the native payload interface and wondering what this third fuel tank was for.

@Martyn said in engines fire discharge bottles: looks like there's an interaction clickspot issue preventing the OVRD button from being used. We are investigating that now. Other planes from other devs have had clickspot issues since SU5 and from what I am hearing it has been fixed in SU6 beta. May be worth testing in SU6 beta first to see if that is the case with this plane too before going on a wild goose chase.

When all else fails: Roll your own I dug into the Dev mode, found the B codes to send, tested them in SpadNext and then wrote my own bridge. I'd still prefer a native solution, but I didn't see a possibility of that. At least this way I control my own code.

I agree with the above mentioned points. I must say, i usually just excused the erratic AP behavior to it being so old and therefore less accurate but i believe thats something only a real world F28 pilot could comment on. With that being said, i have also noticed that in some occasions (maybe 40% of the time) the G/S of the ILS also oscillates and the AP has difficulty following it especially the closer you get to the runway. Again, i just excused this as the AP being old and less accurate since the margin of error gets smaller the closer you get to the runway it would make sense that a old AP would have difficulty following the GS. Maybe its intentional by JF or a bug. Regarding the speed, i set the power to HP RPM to 80% and let it descend at a speed of 280-300 and pull it idle around 12000 feet to let it slow to 250kts or less. I usually descend at 2000fpm. After 250kts its a bit more tricky to get the aircraft within the 200kts range to drop the flaps. Either i reduce the V/S to 1200-1500fpm or just extend the Speed brakes. But then again, who knows if thats accurate behavior or not. I do feel that the UNS-1 could get a little more love considering the F28 costs 70$ and is in the same price range as the Fenix, PMDG, TFDI, etc... So many features are missing which would be included in the real counterpart. I would say its probably modelled around 60% of the real one. Just the DTO page alone looks so plain compared to the real one. [image: 9c29a2be-53d5-4289-b05f-c3f7702f5a31.png] [image: 63477a02-d330-464f-9fcc-33ca20e1b334.png] Ive been told the F28 should be getting a update later this year but i have my doubts that any major features will be added considering this is the state of the aircraft after almost 3 years. I guess we can only hope. Kind Regards, Leon

Thank you