Richard McDonald Woods

Well said, Smiffy!

Hi Odai, Put simply, you cannot buy a PMDG product because, by definition, it has to remain the property of PMDG. PMDG just sell you a license to use a copy of their products, therefore it cannot be transferred. I hope this helps.

Thanks, Dan.

Unfortunately I edited my last post while you were replying. Apologies!

The APPR REF shows me landing on EGLL 09L. I have now changed the runway from 09L to 09R and back again. This gets rid of the blinking, but I don't understand why. Unfortunately, as soon as I then select the OCK transition to 09L, the blinking returns.

Hi Kyle, The only INIT REF page displayable currently is APPROACH REF. With the landing flaps/speed either blank or set makes no difference with my problem. To what are you then referring?

I am flying across the Atlantic using autopilot with SPD/LNAV/VNAV PTH commanded. My Progress page has the ETAs and Fuel columns displaying apparently good data but they are constantly flickering at about 1.5 seconds frequency. The ACT RTE 1 LEGS page is showing all of my route legs correctly but without any speeds or altitude values displayed, except for my eventual descent path. What is causing this abnormal behaviour?

Stephane, Many thanks for your additions. I shall be looking into it further.

You're a brick

I have been guilty of using "established" without any authorisation, I'm sure. Many thanks for your texts. Things are beginning to come clear.

Hi Kyle, Many thanks for your lengthy explanation. Yes, I was trying to use an RNAV approach to autoland. Naughty boy! This is why I was questioning vertical navigation during landing. In future it will have to be visual landings with RNAV? I was only using RNAV approach/landing on this flight as I chose to land at KSFO 10R because of the wind direction. I also used the "report established" term to try to denote that I was on some sort of glide path. But of course with RNAV I wasn't tuned into an ILS frequency. I have found this document re RNAV. But at present this is not adding to my flying abilities because the terms LP, LPV, advisory/approved vertical guidance, baro-aiding and baro-VNAV are so hard to remember when the great majority of my experiences are with ILS. Perhaps I should just remember that, if not ILS, then LPV is a good second best? (A third best might be Ctrl+Alt+Del !) A quote from the GNS530W AFMS - it only applies to US airspace, but there are no restrictions on flying an RNAV (GPS) approach using WAAS for vertical guidance if it is in the database and the approach is inside the service volume of WAAS vertical guidance. Also from the FAA: As of January 8, 2015, there are 3,522 Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance (LPV) approach procedures serving 1,730 airports. Currently, there are also 583 Localizer Performance (LP) approach procedures in the U.S. serving 424 airports. How are PMDG aircraft equipped for LPV approaches and landings? I shall keep trying to understand how to approach/land with RNAV. Anything that you choose to add will be most welcome.

Does RNAV provide vertical navigation? If not, what is the source of vertical navigation when using RNAV? Yesterday I flew into KSFO using GPS RNAV Y 10R successfully but received an RAAS warning of a long landing. If I was flying into an airfield using RNAV but was vectored away from my planned route, what would be the meaning of a request to 'report established' when there is, therefore, no ILS being used? Elucidation much appreciated.

Hi Guys, Solved! It was my anti-virus program (SpyHunter) running in the background causing the processor overload. Waited for it to complete this morning and then took-off smoothly. What a relief!

On Wednesday I flew without problems from OMDB to EGLL. After installing the Anniversary Edition today, I cannot take-off from EGLL on my flight to KSFO. The only change I have made between the flights was to install the W10 update. Now my pre-flight and taxi out work as normal, but as I enter the runway for a rolling start (i.e. without use of the parking brake), the aircraft initially accelerates as normal, but then progressively slow to a halt half way down the runway as if stuck in glue. The engines remain at full throttle throughout. Any ideas as to what may be the problem?

Great! Many thanks.

Hi Alti, I cannot see it listed in FSS. Where is it?

Hi Stephen, My guesses (and they are only guesses, not insider knowledge) is that we have an avalanche of new goodies in the pipeline. My logic in saying this goes somehow like this: A revised FS2Crew is awaiting stabilisation of new facilities in a number of aircraft models. UGCX from FS2Crew cannot complete its development until a new PMDG SDK is available, so that a more intelligent/realistic interface between the pilots and the aircraft are possible. new releases of PMDG and other aircraft cannot complete until Aivlasoft can complete a new imbedded EFB type 3 gauge. new releases of PMDG and other aircraft cannot complete until swift can implement their specification of the CPDLC functions to be supported. new releases of aircraft cannot complete until P3D(v4?) is a 64-bit implementation. In conclusion, then, I believe that the two main developments that we are waiting for are 64-bit P3D and swift. I shall be very interested in seeing whether there is any truth in my new-world imaginings!

Hi Paul, Whilst I am behind most of your argument, where do you source your statement that 'the community is small and shrinking'? It seems to me that we now have a bounty of new software, with much more to com e.g. swift, CPDLC, EFB v2, UGCX, FTX NA, GSX, P3Dv4 PMDG SDK, additional airports, etc. with which many vendors expect to make a living.

Hi Sebastian, What could you be referring to by 'another surprise'

Do we know that 64-bit programs cannot call 32-bit routines?

Bob, I think that LM will already know about these potential costs. After all, they are very much a part of our world!

Hi Rich, I believe it is inevitable that there will be a charge for a new 64-bit version of P3D. LM will have put in a great deal of work to make the transition, and it will open a very wide scope for future developments in all kinds of simulation. LM will want a financial reward of some kind. At the same time, LM knows that they have to ask for a level of compensation that will encourage a significant percentage of existing users to convert from FS9, FSX and P3Dv3 to gain its advantages. A part of the expected attraction will be the feedback reaction of those of us who do purchase the 64-bit edition. As ever in a business which has to pay its way, there is a complex process of deciding where to pitch the conversion price. We shall not hear what this is until the product is announced. I am very hopeful that the benefit of the new will outweigh my pain of payment! Cheers, Richard

Hi Andreas, I hve foundthe time setting processes for P3D V3 to be almost impossible to define. I have resorted to just changing the P3D setting until I get the chronometer time that I want. I cannot understand why P3D cannot just set UTC time every time - the airline industry standard. Good luck!

Does the P3Dv3 Multiplayer function NOT provide the shared cockpit facilities you want

Hi Mike, After fiddling around with my own settings for a while, I decided to go exactly with your recommendations. Glad I did! I think that you have got as near as useful until we see the fruits of the full release. I shall fly with these settings for now. Many thanks for your analyses.