PM support available?

[ryanf]

Hi Everyone,

Has anyone had any recent (past week) communication from PMm support? I do not seem to be able to contact anyone regarding PM Airbus software.

thanks,
Ryan.

[NicD]

yes - got a quick reply on some PM systems questions

[ryanf]

thanks - i'll keep trying so.

/Ryan

[michelmvd]

I have been informed by Jonathan some weeks ago than Enrico was travelling and that he couldn't not look into the problem (navdata issues) on that moment.
B. Rgds
Michel

[mauriceb]

I have been informed by Jonathan some weeks ago than Enrico was travelling and that he couldn't not look into the problem (navdata issues) on that moment.
B. Rgds
Michel


That's the same answer I got a couple of times :rolleyes:. I vote for less travelling for Enrico & more timely software fixes or at the very least, some communication from him...any re-assuring communication would be nice. :razz:

Maurice

[Trevor Hale]

Maurice. I understand you pain, however please remember that Enrico's traveling is for the Commercial clients of PM. Without them, there would be No PM for us hobbiests.

Secondly, I urge you guys not to be to hasty to upgrade to those intermediate builds. They are not bug free as I am sure you are all aware.

Trev

[mauriceb]

Maurice. I understand you pain, however please remember that Enrico's traveling is for the Commercial clients of PM. Without them, there would be No PM for us hobbiests.
Trev

I do understant that. But you can't tell me that Enrico cannot spare a few minutes to send some communications to his existing customers without which he would have no business and no commercial clients likely as well (and not the other way around as you mentioned). The commercial part came after he developed his business with non-commercial customers I believe (I could be wrong).

When was the last time anyone received a newsletter from him? I signed up for this below and have yet to receive any communication. Have you or anyone received anything lately?
"NEW Go to the Project Magenta Mailing List Subscription Page and enter your e-mail address for our Announcements Mailing List (usually about 1-4 e-mails a month) "

I'm still a very big fan of PM, but a few re-assuring words would go a long way in my opinion.

Maurice

[frans]

My dear Trev,

These guys are so right, surley your CDU is also not working as it should. We paid for this software. I find some people on this board are a bid afraid to speak there mind.
Enrico is a very nice guy. I met him in Delft and on an other Sim meeting some years ago. But if our stuff is not working properly why should the pro stuff be working fine????
I wrote Enrico on the subject but.... no answer yet.
Come on guys,write to PM and let them know what you think.

Frans Spruit EHAM

[Bob Reed]

Hi guys. It is as I stated before. The Pro software IS the software we are using. The people using it do not care about the latest air arc or whatever it is called. They are teaching procedures and as long as there is data there that is all they need.... So they are still using the old stable software. Enrico's trip out this time might actually help us as he may be installing the latest software on one of the Pro setups which means he will have to fix the problems while he is there. This means updated software for us. Keep your fingers crossed.

[ryanf]

The last contact I had with Enrico was about three weeks ago when I reported some problems.

He said he was on vacation but would look into it on return. Don't know how long he is on vacation for so that was why I was wondering if anyone else had heard from him.

I am using a released build for the PM Airbus FCU and it has some new bugs i.e. stuff that worked before does not any longer....

PM support (nor support for any commercial software [which is what this is]) should not rely on one person. That is unfair for both the paid customers and the person that has to support the software.


/Ryan.

[Bob Reed]

The last contact I had with Enrico was about three weeks ago when I reported some problems.

He said he was on vacation but would look into it on return. Don't know how long he is on vacation for so that was why I was wondering if anyone else had heard from him.

I am using a released build for the PM Airbus FCU and it has some new bugs i.e. stuff that worked before does not any longer....

PM support (nor support for any commercial software [which is what this is]) should not rely on one person. That is unfair for both the paid customers and the person that has to support the software.

/Ryan.

Well sounds like we are talking internal problems in the software. There is only one programmer for PM and sounds like that's what you are waiting for. Only the programmer can fix this sort of issue right wrong or indifferent that is why you wait for Enrico.

[ryanf]

Thanks Bob.

I'll sit tight! At least its good to know I am not the only one.

/Ryan.

[Jackpilot]

Hi guys. It is as I stated before. The Pro software IS the software we are using. The people using it do not care about the latest air arc or whatever it is called. They are teaching procedures and as long as there is data there that is all they need.... So they are still using the old stable software..

Guys
I know Enrico too and he IS a nice guy, besides I'm pretty shure he reads this forum. This being said...
I already submitted the idea but will repeat.

Can't we figure out what the old stable software is.
Can't we put it somewhere here where we can download it from
Can't we revert the process and get back to flying while waiting for PM to sort things out.

HE WHO HAS A STABLE SETUP WITH OLD BUILDS SPEAKS LOUD AND CLEAR...


??????

[Bob Reed]

Well I am running newer builds but I am still running the second beta navdata. The only issue I have is if I go to modify the rout I have to put the ac on hdg mode or it starts to turn back to the beginning of the route. Trevor, what are you running and what are your issues?

[Trevor Hale]

My dear Trev,

These guys are so right, surley your CDU is also not working as it should. We paid for this software. I find some people on this board are a bid afraid to speak there mind.
Enrico is a very nice guy. I met him in Delft and on an other Sim meeting some years ago. But if our stuff is not working properly why should the pro stuff be working fine????
I wrote Enrico on the subject but.... no answer yet.
Come on guys,write to PM and let them know what you think.

Frans Spruit EHAM

Frans, I hate to tell you, but Despite maybe a little outdated Navdata, My PM Software is working 100%. I am using a build that is over a year and a half old. I would give you the build numbers if I was at my house right now. I don't have any issues at all. Vnav, and Lnav work perfectly, and if I make changes to the RTE midstream everything responds well.

Don't know what to tell you other then, I don't upgrade my PM software just because a new release is out. (I wait for all you guys to Beta test it for me LOL)

Maurice, you are right. Hobby was first, then Commercial, however it is the commercial customers that Keep Enrico working on the software. Just think, If he were like "another company in the community" right now and dropped the hobyiest, where would that leave all of us. Better yet, What if he had decided to charge us for updates.

You all make valid points, I am just pointing out that If too many people complain, all that happens is convince him that (we as hobiests) are more of a pain then it is worth. I for one would hate to have support or updates cut-off when we spent so much money. (Look at SA_WXR) for example. Support sucks, and no response from emails. Can you imagine what would happen to all of us if that is what happened to PM. I would hate that.

Just my two cents boys, Take it or leave it. I just don't want to be cut off.

Trev

[Bob Reed]

Well complaining is not always a bad thing as long as we do not get out of hand and so far that is not the case. We should be allowed to state how we feel without fear of reprisals (hmmm???) Anyway but if my kids start to complain or "wine" too much I shut them up! I do anyway. So just keep it in check do not get carried away. I can say I am a little disappointed in PM too without fear (I think I just did) but I also know that in the long run it will be fixed.So Trevor why don't we see about putting your builds up for others to test? Talk to you about it when you get home.

[Tim]

For all the above reasons, I am looking forward to seeing what Ellie Systems will offer.

[Bob Reed]

For all the above reasons, I am looking forward to seeing what Ellie Systems will offer.

Coming to a neighborhood near you soon! ;)

[Jackpilot]

Frans, I hate to tell you, but Despite maybe a little outdated Navdata, My PM Software is working 100%. I am using a build that is over a year and a half old. I would give you the build numbers if I was at my house right now. I don't have any issues at all.


Trevor,
at last someone happy!!!

You are the WISE man...tell us what you use ...

Great news..
Cheers
Jack

[Trevor Hale]

I was away from the PC last night, I will give you all my build numbers as soon as I get home from work today. However, like I said the Nav data would be a little out of date.

Trev

[Bob Reed]

I was away from the PC last night, I will give you all my build numbers as soon as I get home from work today. However, like I said the Nav data would be a little out of date.

Trev

Can you imagine, someone thinking there is something more important then simulators last night??!! Huh?? :) Just kidding we will get this in a place where you guys can get to it tonight.

[mauriceb]

You all make valid points, I am just pointing out that If too many people complain, all that happens is convince him that (we as hobiests) are more of a pain then it is worth. I for one would hate to have support or updates cut-off when we spent so much money. (Look at SA_WXR) for example. Support sucks, and no response from emails. Can you imagine what would happen to all of us if that is what happened to PM. I would hate that.

Just my two cents boys, Take it or leave it. I just don't want to be cut off.

Trev

I think you need to give Enrico a little more credit than that. I doubt he would be childish enough to just say "They are all complaining... I'll cut off support & show them" . I met him personally and I do believe he has a lot more integrity than that.
Nobody here has been flaming him; we are just a bit concerned and maybe a bit too impatient, but this isn't war or even a minor skirmish :D.

As far as charging for support is concerned, I think he should if that would allow him to hire/train more staff to deal with support issues. Most commercial software companies do so I believe, and nobody is screaming about that. It's very rare these days to get something for nothing and that is what we have been getting from Enrico.

Bottom line, I don't think voicing concerns is going to change the way Enrico does his business and his decisions will strictly come from pure business common sense and not hot-headed gut reaction. At least I hope so :D

Maurice

[3202b]

I've been waiting a good few weeks for some support regarding airbus problems - especially the FCU which is basically a mess at the moment. Speed, climb, descent and basically all other modes do not function at all correctly. The default FS9 autopilot is more stable. I wish they would fix the problems I've been reporting since last November! :cry:

[Matt Olieman]

I can only suggest, for the moment, temporarily, go back to a version that has worked for you.

I know (being an Airbus builder myself), Enrico and staff is very much interested and concerned with the functionality of the Airbus software. As you know, Airbus logic is quite complicated and to PM, this has become very time consuming and challenging.

I'm confident, in the end and in time, the Airbus software will be spectacular.

[ryanf]

Hi Matt,

what versions are you using (especially the FCU & MCDU)? Any known problems?

thanks,
Ryan.

[3202b]

Yes could somebody please suggest the last good and stable airbus build, I've not seen any since November last year, everytime I ask for a problem to be fixed it causes 3 other new problems!! :(

[Trevor Hale]

Guys Once again I had to fight with Micro$oft last night, I was unable to get your Boeing Stable Build info. Please be patient. I will post my builds in the download section as soon as possible.

Trev

[mauriceb]

I was away from the PC last night, I will give you all my build numbers as soon as I get home from work today. However, like I said the Nav data would be a little out of date.

Trev


Did you get back to your PC yet? Still waiting for those elusive 'bug free' build numbers :p

Thanks,
Maurice

[Trevor Hale]

Yes everything is working. I will post the Build #'s tonight around 6:00pm EST.

Best regards,

Trev

[ryanf]

For us bus drivers, if anyone can give the stable airbus builds they are using also - that would be great.

Also, are all other A320 guys using the flight model (IFDG A319-100) and ini file downloaded from the pm web-site - or anyone got something different that works better.

It could be that some AP or A/T performance problems could be due to problems in the model and ini file being used. I am assuming the ones downloaded from pm are the best but maybe not....

thanks,
Ryan.

[3202b]

I've just switched to the new PA A320, the FDE is superb - much more stable than anything else I've used before but all the problems still exist - they most certainly appear to be down to the software. Enrico has done loads of work in the past to improve the software. I'm sure when he has time again he will get it all working again. Will be great when the FMGC (MCDU & FCU) problems are sorted.

I'm using the latest AB beta builds, yes there are quite a few problems but they are less severe and have more functionality than some of the previous builds.

[Trevor Hale]

Hey Guys..

As promised, I have seen no bugs with the following builds (old Navdata)

MCP Build #410
PFD/ND/EICAS Build #436
PMSYSTEMS Build #107
PM FMC Build#372

If you want me to actually Zip and Post my programs for Download, I can do that Just let me know.

Best regards,

Trev

[ryanf]

Hi Ben,

thanks for the update.

Did you put the pm ini file together yourself or reuse an existing pm one?

thanks,
Ryan.

[excalibur67]

Hi, this is my mail to PM Support:

"Hi, just some informations, i would like to know if you intend to continue to give us the updates or this service is ended. Because I saw that all is stopped at May and also the intermediate builds and now is July. Due that I continue to have problems with CDU and also little problems with CG (Boeing Type) and not only me but also many others , i start to worry because after that i spent many money to buy this product, this situation is not acceptable , with no messages, no newsletters, no nothing. Once there was one forum dedicated where each customer was sharing every problem happened and in the 80% of cases that was solved from other customers and also from that forum you can know many news for everything round about the simbuilder, and you what you did ? Eliminated…. This is not the way to lead the customers. If the support and the update services is one problem of costs for you, then you propose at yours many clients to pay one fee and you’ll see that all peoples (or most of them) will be very glad to do this because for them and also for me the important is that what we bought after works… now and in the future time. In most situations i saw in several forums that Enrico Schiratti told always that for the products updates doesn’t want take money, but my question is… doesn’t want because wants share his product with the community of simbuilders or because after he is forced to give us the updates ?.

With no bad intentions.... One customer disappointed..

Best Regards,
Giuseppe Reda

P.S. Sorry for my english.
"

And this is the replay:

"Hi, Updates are still available, we have given no indication anywhere that they are not – I am not really sure what you are reffering to… updates have been freely available for seven years or more….

Regards
Jonathan Richardson
"""""


What do you think about this ????

Giuseppe Reda

[mauriceb]

"

And this is the replay:

"Hi, Updates are still available, we have given no indication anywhere that they are not – I am not really sure what you are reffering to… updates have been freely available for seven years or more….

Regards
Jonathan Richardson
"""""


What do you think about this ????

Giuseppe Reda

It's obvious they don't want to talk about what is really going on. This is good or bad for us depending on what their plans are and what is really going on. Only time will tell I guess.

Maurice

[PeterH]

Hi Trevor,

how about the CDU?
Any "BUg Free";) version??

Thanks

best rgds

Peter



Hey Guys..

As promised, I have seen no bugs with the following builds (old Navdata)

MCP Build #410
PFD/ND/EICAS Build #436
PMSYSTEMS Build #107
PM FMC Build#372

If you want me to actually Zip and Post my programs for Download, I can do that Just let me know.

Best regards,

Trev

[mauriceb]

Hi Trevor,

how about the CDU?
Any "BUg Free";) version??
Thanks
best rgds
Peter

As everybody suspects, or is beginning to suspect, there is no such thing unless you are not using all of the CDU functionality (particularly VNAV & LNAV). That's what I think anyway and I would be thrilled to learn I'm wrong on this one. :D

Maurice

[ryanf]

Hi All,

I voiced my concerns to PM support regarding the A320 software. Jonathan explained that they are working on an A320 FTD as a platform to further test and enhance the airbus software. He said that for them this is a significant investment. Their ambition is to have it up and running by september I think and then maybe we will see some product improvements.

However, I pointed out to Jonathan that an A320 FTD was not necessary to investigate and fix the problems I reported (and I am sure that is the case for the issues that anyone else reported also).

So I am a little doubtful that this initiative will suddenly lead to our reported faults getting fixed. To be honest I don't really know.

Does anyone from PM read this forum? I think that it would be very wise of them to respond to the growing customer concerns over their product support. I wonder if they are aware that people are a bit disappointed with them (myself included). I for one would really appreciate more communication from them.

cheers,
Ryan.

[3202b]

Agree with what you have said Ryan, I fully appreciate all the time Enrico has put into the software for my specific bugs in the past (he has worked his a$$ off several times to fix problems) but I still am a little disappointed with the software as it is now. There are so many bugs with the Airbus software as it is now that using the software is not pleasurable to fly, it's a fight to stop the aircraft from crashing or stop it doing what it shouldn't. I really wish they would look into the MDCU and FCU probs.

BTW PM staff do read this forum and have read this thread.

[Matt Olieman]

Regarding Airbus software, I wish I could be of help. Unfortunately my cockpit has not been in operation, almost a year now.

But, when it was, I had no serious PM, Airbus software issues, definitely not where the aircraft would crash. I've flown over a 1K hours in my A340 and PM software (including the MCDU), going from point A to B and so forth, without crashing. Beautiful auto-lands :)

So, I don't know what's happened over the past year to have such adverse effects.

Enrico is a perfectionist and proud of his work. I can't imagine if Enrico would know of serious problems with his software and not responding.

Damn, I've got to get my cockpit back together...... :roll:

[Trevor Hale]

Hi Trevor,

how about the CDU?
Any "BUg Free";) version??

Thanks

best rgds

Peter

Peter CDU = FMC

I do not have Airbus sweet, Just the boeing suite. I use LNAV and VNAV every time I fly.

Best

Trev

[Trevor Hale]

As everybody suspects, or is beginning to suspect, there is no such thing unless you are not using all of the CDU functionality (particularly VNAV & LNAV). That's what I think anyway and I would be thrilled to learn I'm wrong on this one. :D

Maurice

Maurice..

As I stated. I use LNAV and VNAV every flight I make FMC Build is stable. No issues.

Trev

[NicD]

Agree Maurice... any PM problems I have are always trigerred by CDU bugs. Thats' the core of the issue it seems.

[PeterH]

Hi Trevor,

sorry for dumb question. Just didn´t read your msg well. Think I need a new pair of glasses soon. Hopefully they will not ground me now;);)

BTW which version of navdata are you using with your setup though?
If old ones, what about online flying?

Best rgds

Peter



Peter CDU = FMC

I do not have Airbus sweet, Just the boeing suite. I use LNAV and VNAV every time I fly.

Best

Trev

[Trevor Hale]

I honestly couldn't tell you what version I am using, as I am not quite sure how to check it out. I can tell you that for online flying (If I tell CLD that I am going to do a Crowe6 Into KLAS, and he tells me that I need to amend my plan to a CroweX Approach, It doesn't cause many problems)

I just modify the Legs Page on the FMC. I have a complete North America and Europe set of Jepps, so I usually check the charts prior to CLD anyway.

Best.

Trev

[mauriceb]

I honestly couldn't tell you what version I am using, as I am not quite sure how to check it out. I can tell you that for online flying (If I tell CLD that I am going to do a Crowe6 Into KLAS, and he tells me that I need to amend my plan to a CroweX Approach, It doesn't cause many problems)

I just modify the Legs Page on the FMC. I have a complete North America and Europe set of Jepps, so I usually check the charts prior to CLD anyway.

Best.

Trev


Trev,

That's where I think we differ in saying there are problems or no problems with the FMC (CDU). You say you modify the legs page on the FMC based on the new approach that is required; that also works fine for me (with all the latest builds) and modifying the legs page at anytime does not cause any major problems as far as I can tell (minor problems definitely such as erroneous Top of Descent re-calculations etc..).

But have you tried to select a new approach on the FMC as opposed to manually selecting the waypoints on the legs page? This is where most of the problems occur when modifying a route, & not when modifying the legs page (for me at least).

Thanks,
Maurice

[Trevor Hale]

No I don't think I have ever changed STARS Mid flight, as I have an approved approach from CLD. Although I guess if your en route to a destination and the winds changed suddenly, I could think you would have to amend your flight plan.

I will try that this weekend and let you know what happens. If I crash in a puddle of Residential neighborhoods, or houses I will keep you posted.

When I update the legs page, I have not witnessed any abnormalities to the "STOCK" Altitudes at fixes, again I refer to my charts and amend the altitudes per the approach plate anyway. I guess I never considered that a "BUG" Just a human correction on a computer calculation based on a fictitious weight category of aircraft (737) that I am not flying. My aircraft weighs much less then a 737.

Regards,

Trev

[Tomlin]

... I guess I never considered that a "BUG" Just a human correction on a computer calculation based on a fictitious weight category of aircraft (737) that I am not flying. My aircraft weighs much less then a 737.

Regards,

Trev

Another reason why I really hope that they get some more development for the RJ soon enough....I really dont want to buy BGC CDU/MCP for a Lear, but I may have to. BTW, do I HAVE to have the MCP software for the CDU software to work?

[Bob Reed]

If you talk to PM I think you can work a deal where if you get the Boeing software (CDU, MCP) once the RJ stuff comes out you can switch. In other words kinda like pre buying and question number 2 is yes. All the functions needed to for the AP to work right are not in FS so if you want to fly the plane with the CDU you will need the MCP for it all to work.

[mauriceb]

No I don't think I have ever changed STARS Mid flight, as I have an approved approach from CLD. Although I guess if your en route to a destination and the winds changed suddenly, I could think you would have to amend your flight plan.

Trev

I may be wrong on this one, but I think most of the time, real life pilots do not enter a STAR on their FMC until they get closer to destination (real pilots, please jump in here :-). If that is the case, adding a STAR by adding its waypoints would be very cumbersome at best when the functionality exists to just add the STAR at anytime (assuming that works properly of course).

Anyway, would be nice to know if your current builds lets you do that without any problems either.

Thanks,
Maurice

[Trevor Hale]

Maurice,

I must apologize if I am wrong here, but I must admit that I am finding it difficult to understand the tone in your post. Normally I can understand people's expressions, however I am honestly trying to help everyone here. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it almost seems like your typing your message trying to point the finger at me and say (Ha Ha) I knew I was right.

If this is your intentions, I am sorry but will not take part in such an activity. However if you are truly asking because you are interested, I am more then happy to help.

I will have a peak at the FMC before the week is up and let you know what happens when I Dep/Ar an approach whilst in the air under LNAV and VNAV, and then try to change the DEP/ARR Star Selection midstream, while unde LNAV and Vnav modes.

Best regards,

Trev

[mauriceb]

Maurice,

I must apologize if I am wrong here, but I must admit that I am finding it difficult to understand the tone in your post. Normally I can understand people's expressions, however I am honestly trying to help everyone here. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it almost seems like your typing your message trying to point the finger at me and say (Ha Ha) I knew I was right.



Trev,

I'm 62 years old and I'm way behind playing such stupid games. I take no pleasure in proving people wrong except perhaps my wife on occasions, but then, it is just good humored & never offensive or hurtful to her and she does the same to me. That is a part of life and I challenge anyone to say that they never engage in such behaviour.

Having said that, I fail to understand what it is that I said that would make you think proving you wrong was my goal. I & nobody else in this forum have anything to gain by you being wrong, On the contrary, there are many people that have asked you & others if there is a stable build for the CDU and who would be delighted if there was. Yes, I was & I still am skeptical that there is a stable build, but I'm certainly not implying in any way, shape or form that you do have problems as well, and that you are just trying to hide them. What possible motive would you have to do that?

The only reason I pushed you to reveal more about your personal experience was that I suspected that maybe you were not using all of the functionality and it does look like you weren’t. That does not make you wrong in my books; you are absolutely right within the boundaries of your experience. I have no problems using Microsoft Word, but it does not mean MS Word is bug free. You are definitely wrong however about your interpretation of my posts and I take no joy in that either.

You, on the other hand, and more than once I believe, almost boasted you were the smart one for not jumping on to new builds & you instead let others be the guinea pigs for testing the new builds. Some people could also have got offended by that, but I took it for what it was, good humoured ribbing and nothing else.

I have read most if not all your posts since I joined this forum and I always thought you were always very helpful and courteous to others and I have always appreciated your very informative & insightful inputs even when the information you gave was not directly helpful to me. Playing a silly game of proving you or anyone else wrong has never been & will never be my agenda.

If the moderators of this forum feel I am or was out of line at anytime, please feel free to remove my profile. I do spend too much time there anyway.

Regards,
Maurice

[Bob Reed]

Ok you 2.. Looks like it is all ok now.... Shake hands and kiss an malk up.. :) Just kidding. Looks like a little mis understanding here and nothing more so lets get back to flight simming. Now I too need to check this out as I put my STAR in at the start too. BUT.. I have changed STARS on the fly before. But I will try it again . The only issue I am having is if I go to modify the CDU I need to put the AC in HGD mode before I start messing with it or it wonders off on it's own. Get all done hit exec and hit LNav again all is good but I will check again..

[mauriceb]

The only issue I am having is if I go to modify the CDU I need to put the AC in HGD mode before I start messing with it or it wonders off on it's own. Get all done hit exec and hit LNav again all is good but I will check again..

I got that problem as well, but this is really minor as you said, just put AC in HDG mode first. The much more serious problem that others have had as well is that past waypoints get re-inserted and that the route looks like a spaghetti plate and it takes a long time to fix things up especially if you are close to the airport and you want to set up a nice approach.

This cannot be a NavData problem as the folks in PM have claimed. Bad NavData would add incorrect waypoint maybe but would not re-insert the waypoints which you have already passed and which are not part of the STAR.

Also, at times, the aircraft passes a waypoint and circles back to it for some reason. This has already been reported as well by several people.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, this is an intermittent problem. I have had some flights where everything worked perfectly. One test only would not prove or disprove anything. You really need several flights to test this properly. So, the jury is still out I think. Is there really a stable build that does not have any of these problems?

Maurice

[Bob Reed]

Well on the setup I am flying with right now I probably have 30 to 40 flights... All in different lengths and I am very sure of my results and I have never, not once had the spaghetti mess you are referring to. I wish I could explain why, but I can not..... But keep in mind I always ( if I am going to use one) select the STAR while on the ground at the origin.

[Trevor Hale]

Trev,

I'm 62 years old and I'm way behind playing such stupid games. I take no pleasure in proving people wrong except perhaps my wife on occasions, but then, it is just good humored & never offensive or hurtful to her and she does the same to me. That is a part of life and I challenge anyone to say that they never engage in such behaviour.

If the moderators of this forum feel I am or was out of line at anytime, please feel free to remove my profile. I do spend too much time there anyway.

Regards,
Maurice

K. Mau. Sorry man I tried to ask the question in a way that hoped you wouldn't be offended. I apologize for upsetting you, as that was not my intention. I was asking that question as a member not as a moderator.

I was trying to understand what you were getting at. Yes I too try to rib my wife about anything I can, trying to prove her wrong just Once to no avail. I would like to chalk this one up as a misunderstanding. I again apologize to you for this confusion. It just seemed that everything I said was taking a kicking.

Here is what I propose. Please allow me to zip and email you my FMC Build. Use it to it's fullest and please by all means let me know if it is a stable build.

I think you have been able to justify that I do not operate the build as a true 737 FMC. Therefore you are probably right, It is in fact full of the same bugs you have reported.

At no time will I, or do I wish to remove you as a user on this forum. It is constant contribution from members like you that make Mycockpit.org a great place to relax and let your hair down.

Please again allow me to publicly apologize for ofending you as this was not my intention. I just wanted to make sure that I was not being led down a trail for disaster.

My Humble and sincere thanks for your participation, and I hope this has not in any way changed your opinion of me. (worse then you may have already thought) Some people are entitled to a bad day.

Best regards and again I am sorry.

Trev

[Trailing Link]

Although there are exceptions, if we file a flight plan and it includes the STAR we generally enter it into the FMC on the ground prior to pushback. When we receive our clearance, it will either be "As Filed" or revise our flight plan, generally to include the new STAR. Prudence would dictate that by putting a STAR into the FMC prior to departure will only reduce workload later during times of higher workload. Additionally if you have been cleared to do it, you are only setting yourself up for a violation by not entering it; you might forget it later, when things get busy. If a change is issued later by ATC it is not a big deal to change the STAR in the FMC, however in the general interest of safety, we aim to reduce workload during descent, approach and landing. Generally, try to get as much done as you can at the gate when your biggest concern is the temperature of your coffee. Keep having fun boys.


I may be wrong on this one, but I think most of the time, real life pilots do not enter a STAR on their FMC until they get closer to destination (real pilots, please jump in here :-). If that is the case, adding a STAR by adding its waypoints would be very cumbersome at best when the functionality exists to just add the STAR at anytime (assuming that works properly of course).

Anyway, would be nice to know if your current builds lets you do that without any problems either.

Thanks,
Maurice

[mauriceb]

Well on the setup I am flying with right now I probably have 30 to 40 flights... All in different lengths and I am very sure of my results and I have never, not once had the spaghetti mess you are referring to. I wish I could explain why, but I can not..... But keep in mind I always ( if I am going to use one) select the STAR while on the ground at the origin.

I too have never had any problems with STARs when I selected A STAR on the ground. That's the way I always used to do it since I made my flight plans with FSBuild and there is the option of automatically adding a SID & a STAR to the plan before you take off.

But then, I read in several places that this isn't done in real life since you have no way of being sure of the weather & runway in use at your destination and STARs are selected based on direction of travel and the runway in use.

Here is a quote from Captain Mike Ray in one of his books: " FAA/ATC will actually assign an approach STAR and landing runway at least 50 miles out. You will have ample opportunity to program the CDU/FMC ..."

I just completed a round the world flight on my 737 in 23 hops. I did it with real weather and I almost always selected a STAR after I heard the destination ATIS. I would say that in most cases, I had to fix the resulting mess in the route but a few times, things were absolutely perfect.

All & all though, I still think PM software is great and I would buy it all over again even with all the reported bugs. I'm sure that they will get fixed eventually and even if they weren't, you can work around its limitations once you know what they are.

Maurice

[Bob Reed]

So maurice, here is my train of thought on this.. And I am going to test this in just a few minutes.... If we put a STAR in on the ground (which I do) this seems to cure the problem of the mess? If this is the case I think this is an easy work around as long as you can change the STAR when in route and keep the mess away. Like I said I am starting up the sim as we speak. So the question as I see it is if you put the STAR in on the ground, can you change it without a mess.. We will know VERY soon......

[mauriceb]

So maurice, here is my train of thought on this.. And I am going to test this in just a few minutes.... If we put a STAR in on the ground (which I do) this seems to cure the problem of the mess? If this is the case I think this is an easy work around as long as you can change the STAR when in route and keep the mess away. Like I said I am starting up the sim as we speak. So the question as I see it is if you put the STAR in on the ground, can you change it without a mess.. We will know VERY soon......

My experience is that it does not matter whether you add a STAR in flight or whether you change an existing STAR in flight. In either case, the route gets messed up most, but not all the time. So, you may not likely get an accurate picture with just a couple of flights.

If I were you though, I would not waste too much time on this if you are happy with the way you operate. My original questions were based on the thought that most everybody operated the way I do now since I think it is the right way. But the right way depends on what you want and in a SIM, you can do whatever you want if it suits you better.

So, thanks for any input, but no need to waste hours on this unless you are also curious now :-)

Maurice

[Bob Reed]

Well now I am very curious. I would like to know why some of us have this problem and some of us do not. I fly 3 or 4 times a week as a rule of thumb and I am using much newer builds then Trevor with about the same results he is having. I will be in the aitr in a bit and see what happens. I will keep you all up to date. I am only using the second beta Navdata that PM issued I did buy time on the site where we are supposed to get our Navdata so maybe I need to dld a navdata set from them and see what happens. And I must admit I too stopped updating to the newer builds a long time ago to wait and see what others said first... Just got tired of not knowing if it where my setup or the software.Any way time to hit the clouds.

[mauriceb]

I have all the latest builds (including Beta releases) and I also use the latest Navigraph data. But as I said before, it cannot be the Navigraph data causing this problem. The Navigraph data has no way of knowing or re-instating waypoints that you have already passed and that were not showing up in the CDU anymore until you added or changed to a different STAR. That just would not make any sense to me, but I have been known to be wrong on rare occasions :-).

It's almost funny (but tragic) to see the crooked & twisted Magenta line that gets drawn. Maybe there is alcohol in them STARs :D

Enjoy your flight(s).

Maurice

[Tomlin]

Going back to the original post, I have to say that I got a personal email reply to my issue on Thrust Set Trend for PMRJ this morning, and I sent it to PM yesterday afternoon, so I would say that maybe the PM crew has been on holidays or busy? Maybe so, at any rate, let's hope that they are working hard on software updates for all of us!

[brianwilliamson]

I have been testing the MCDU and FCU for a couple of weeks now. When I started to use the MCDU and FCU, I had very limited experience as how to program it and how to impliment the flight plan during flight and use the FCU correctly. I also got some weird things happening. As I then got into the bookwork, and let me tell you there is an awful lot to learn, then the flight plans started to operate as one would expect. I would suspect most of the problems some people are having is simply because of their technique, and my advise is to get as many books on the operation of their particular aircraft and CDU and FCU as possible, and I am sure this will cure a lot of the problems. I am using the latest builds of Navigraph and PM.
Regards..................Brian W.

[3202b]

I have been testing the MCDU and FCU for a couple of weeks now. When I started to use the MCDU and FCU, I had very limited experience as how to program it and how to impliment the flight plan during flight and use the FCU correctly. I also got some weird things happening. As I then got into the bookwork, and let me tell you there is an awful lot to learn, then the flight plans started to operate as one would expect. I would suspect most of the problems some people are having is simply because of their technique, and my advise is to get as many books on the operation of their particular aircraft and CDU and FCU as possible, and I am sure this will cure a lot of the problems. I am using the latest builds of Navigraph and PM.
Regards..................Brian W.

Hi Brian I consider myself pretty knowledgeable in Airbus operation (I'm no pilot and don't claim to be but I know a little!) - I think (and hope) I've been pretty helpful to Enrico in fixing quite a few problems.

It's the software that has the problems not me. In my case it's the other way round! the more I learn about airbus philosophy the more I realise how much is missing from the software. It's even the very basic things - even like maintaining the correct speed or capturing altitudes that don't work.

Anybody heard anything yet? been two months since any type of update.

[michelmvd]

Hi Brian,

I 100% agree with you that you have to look into the manuals before complaining. A lot of complains can be avoid that way and real life pilots also has to study month's before they can start flying a new type of aircraft. Once they are flying that type, then every six month's they have to jump in the books again to pass they recurrent simsessions.

But just as Ben is saying, also for me it's the other way around. I consider myself as having a pretty good knowledge about the B744 operations and systems - having the opportunity to have all the technical, operational info and lots of B744 level-d simsessions. I can say as deeper you go into it, as much you get dissapointed. When basic items as these route / star input issues are not working correctly for what ever reasons then I understand very well the frustration a lot of customers has.

I met Enrico already on several occasions and I know how much efforts he is putting into his project, but now I must agree that these basic cdu problems are becoming very much frustrating.

Let's hope they will be solved in the next couple of weeks.

B. Rgds
Michel

[brianwilliamson]

Just some info that may help those that are not familiar with airways operations that we have to handle in real life, these manuals are very good and I just bought the Airbus one:
http://www.fspilotshop.com/index.php?cPath=22&osCsid=4db711e7604dc8ab9fc3029da40966cb
One of the best ways is to pick a short flight (15 minutes) and practise fooling around with that flight every which way, and use one of these manuals to help you with the vagaries of your particular aircraft. This way you can help identify any major problems with the software.
Cheers...............Brian

[ryanf]

Hi All,

on the issue of problems with the PM Airbus software - I updated my aircraft model to the new Project Airbus A320 and after a little hacking of the A320200IAV definition file from the PM web-site (just to get the flap positions displaying correctly), I ran a few circuits.

As Ben had earlier indicated it is much more stable. However, much to my surprise, the problems I was having with open climb and open descent disappeared! These modes seem to work fine now.

I did a full Autoland in pretty strong cross winds and a bit of a tail wind and it was rock steady.

I also saw much less speed loss during certain maneouvres (not entirely) so I am beginning to wonder, how much of our problems can be attributed to the flight model and aircraft definition file and how much can be attributed to the PM software itself.

I would love to get a more complete and up to date aircraft definition file for the new Project Airbus A320 since I have no way of knowing if all the performance data is correct in the one I downloaded from PM.


I am sure there are still some functional shortcomings in the PM software but the thing that always annoyed me most was when it would perform very poorly under the AP and A/T.

It would be great if Project Magenta partnered more with the likes of Project Airbus so that they could provide a complete solution i.e. PM software, definition file and flight model, that was all tested and validated. I feel it is left too much to the user at present with the result that the pm software could be working with an inferior or incomplete model/aircraft config which makes it perform poorly.

Actually, when I reported the problems I was having, all I asked for was for some assistance in figuring out if they were real software bugs or configuration bugs. I received no such assistance unfortunately.

So, does anyone got a good definition file for this new model they could share?? Or Even know where to get the performance data?

/Ryan.

[3202b]

Hi Ryan, I have a pretty good cofig file at home, I will send it to you tonight if you would like. It's based on the one on the PM site with a good few mods from data I've found in performance manuals/other data. It's works pretty well.

I totally agree that PM should use only one flight model for the software - it would make everything so much more stable if we were all singing from the same song book. It might be wise for them as you said to partner with a FS developer to produce a 'PM' flight model and package.

While we're on this subject does anybody have a decent logic file for PMSYS? nothing seems functional on the Airbus - the whole pressurisation system doesn't seem to be modelled.

[ryanf]

That would be great Ben.

Thanks!
/Ryan.

[michelmvd]

To Maurice,

I can confirm after checking with several pilots (european flights - longhaul flights) and looking more in depth in the SOP's that mostly this days the STAR procedure is set in the CDU during the flight preparation at the gate, as this is also mentioned in the companyflightplan. When the approach procedures are set by pilot flying the settings are rechecked. This is usually about 30 minutes before descend just before the Approach briefing is done. Due to very reliable weather information and recommanded landingrunways most of the time the information is accurate. By setting the STAR/landing RWY during flightpreparation at the gate, it can reduce workload later, but at any time during the flight or at the approach preparation the settings in the CDU must be able to change - selecting other RWY's, other STAR procedures or a combination of that in flight.

Me too I'm very surprised to hear everytime from PM that the problem is with Navigraph - for the same reasons as you, but of course we don't know how PM is programming it programs.

B. Rgds
Michel

[Jackpilot]

Trevor said

As promised, I have seen no bugs with the following builds (old Navdata)

MCP Build #410
PFD/ND/EICAS Build #436
PMSYSTEMS Build #107
PM FMC Build#372


Hi Trevor
Could you upload them so that we can access it?
Cheers
Jack

[michelmvd]

Hi Trevor,
Thanks for sharing these builds with us. It's good to know we can rely on those builds when we have to do a stable flight or demo of the cockpit.
What NAVDATA are you using with them ?

I also suppose a lot of new functionality will be missing, as the present beta builds are CDU391ee, MCP421 and GC451a.

The "stable" builds according the webpage updates are
CDU 390, MCP420, GC450.

I therefore think it's very misleading when some people say they don't have problems with the software, when they still are using these very old builds. It looks to me the present builds in the update page should at least do it. (I don't talk about intermediate builds in the sub-page) It's like comparing apples with pears. The CDU372 build came out 13 feb 2006 and the MCP 410 on 16 SEP2006, so long before the introduction of the new navdata by Navigraph, due to the shutdown of the DAFIF services.


BRgds
Michel

[Bob Reed]

Hi Trevor,
Thanks for sharing these builds with us. It's good to know we can rely on those builds when we have to do a stable flight or demo of the cockpit.
What NAVDATA are you using with them ?

I also suppose a lot of new functionality will be missing, as the present beta builds are CDU391ee, MCP421 and GC451a.

The "stable" builds according the webpage updates are
CDU 390, MCP420, GC450.

I therefore think it's very misleading when some people say they don't have problems with the software, when they still are using these very old builds. It looks to me the present builds in the update page should at least do it. (I don't talk about intermediate builds in the sub-page) It's like comparing apples with pears. The CDU372 build came out 13 feb 2006 and the MCP 410 on 16 SEP2006, so long before the introduction of the new navdata by Navigraph, due to the shutdown of the DAFIF services.


BRgds
Michel

This has been stated from the begging, we are running older builds and are stable. My builds are not as old as Trevor's but they are at least 6 months old..... We are not comparing anything to anything just stating fact. We fly on a regular bases and these builds seem stable.

Bob Reed

[BillTee]

Hi Guys,

Time for me to jump in again.

I have been using the same builds as Michelmvd with good results, I DONOT use NavData; I use the old data that Enrico used to supply.

I have good results with my system and do I understand your frustration.

Good luck with all these issues,

Bill T.

[Trevor Hale]

My FMC Is in the Download directory Under PM. It is including the navdata I am using. I am unaware what navdata I am using. Like Bob said. I am only reporting that I have no issues with my builds.

The fmc is the main cause of your dilemmas. Download it and try it with your MCP builds.

Trev

[michelmvd]

Hi Bob, Trevor,

Thanks a lot for your information and help. I certainly appreciate it. The big problem here is that I'm using my B744 cockpit project, to simulate as much as possible real life B744 -commercial flights - operating in a online IVAO enviroment.
To do that I use upto date navigation charts, approach plates, real life flightplanning, etc. So I also need up to date NAVDATA, as all items must be in sync.
When you use real life up to date flightplanning sources, your navdata in the aircraft system also must be up to date otherwise it is impossible to enter the routes. In Europe airways system are changing a lot and a one year old data is simply not useable anymore.
Also in the more recent PM builds a lot has been added to cover B744 functionality. So I hope you understand a little bit my frustration.
The main purpose of my hobby is NOT building a cockpit, but FLYING it in the most realistic way. For me the cockpit itself is just a tool to achieve my goal.

In other words, if I would be a Oil Sheik , I would buy a multi dollar Level-d sim ;) ;) ;)
B. rgds
Michel

[Peter Dowson]

My FMC Is in the Download directory Under PM. It is including the navdata I am using. I am unaware what navdata I am using. Like Bob said. I am only reporting that I have no issues with my builds.

Hi Trevor,

I am trying to decide whether some autothrottle/VNAV control problems I have with PM on FSX are due to FSX models, FSUIPC/SimConnect, or PM. To this end I have been trying different older builds of PM too, but I am still undecided where the problems lay and so how to fix them.

Of the releases you say you are using successfully, I do have GC436 and CDU372, but I don't appear to have MCP410. I believe the MCP actions are crucial to my investigations, so could you please email me a copy of this (the EXE and DLL)? petedowson@btconnect.com

Thank you very much.

Best Regards

Pete

[NicD]

Michel - you put that very well, and expressed exactly how I feel about it. I didn't build the sim to just be a "she'll be right" hobby ... and just lately I've had a number of commercial pilots flying the sim, and there are more to use it this week. They, and I, require a level or realism that is achievable, or at least *should* be achievable with PM. Old Navdata just doesn't cut it on VATSIM either.

[Trevor Hale]

Hi Trevor,

I am trying to decide whether some autothrottle/VNAV control problems I have with PM on FSX are due to FSX models, FSUIPC/SimConnect, or PM. To this end I have been trying different older builds of PM too, but I am still undecided where the problems lay and so how to fix them.

Of the releases you say you are using successfully, I do have GC436 and CDU372, but I don't appear to have MCP410. I believe the MCP actions are crucial to my investigations, so could you please email me a copy of this (the EXE and DLL)? petedowson@btconnect.com

Thank you very much.

Best Regards

Pete

Pete, I would be more then happy to send them. As soon as I get Home from work tonight I will forward the MCP build to your attention.

Best regards..


Trev

[Trevor Hale]

I did want to mention to everyone.....

I can't see the navdata being the issue. Take the old FMC build and add the new Navdata. Maurice said it best earlier in the Post. The problem seems to lie in the addition or removals of the STAR. Not the NavData itself, but the way the FMC Adds the Data to the route.

So if you want download the older build FMC and add New Navdata.

Trev

[Peter Dowson]

Pete, I would be more then happy to send them. As soon as I get Home from work tonight I will forward the MCP build to your attention.

Thanks, but a copy has already arrived from another reader! Phew, so quick!

Thanks anyway,

Pete

[Bob Reed]

Michel - you put that very well, and expressed exactly how I feel about it. I didn't build the sim to just be a "she'll be right" hobby ... and just lately I've had a number of commercial pilots flying the sim, and there are more to use it this week. They, and I, require a level or realism that is achievable, or at least *should* be achievable with PM. Old Navdata just doesn't cut it on VATSIM either.

Yes Nic, I agree this should be achievable and old navdata is no good for Vatsim. I have been staying away from Vatsim due to the sim needing a little more work to make it more Vatsim friendly but the other thing is after making a couple of online flights, the work load for one person in the sim is HUGE! And with me still learning to fly this thing I felt it better to avoid it for now but I do understand your point!