The A2A Simulations Community

I'm completely for this, including individual engine starting, as well as the ability to override him selectively if not on an individual item basis, then an engine by engine basis. i.e. The pilot dictates the settings for engine 4, and VFE controls the rest. Also, some relatively minor things, like the ability to suspend meal service, or some things like that (passengers eating dinner during landing doesn't seem like it should be happening). Perhaps even the ability to select a Captain's dialogue to match the tone of the situation ranging from "We are experiencing a minor problem" all the way to "The situtation we are facing is extremely serious, but rest assured that the crew is doing all it can....."

I'll probably get flamed for saying all this...

_________________
1)i7 980x 4.35 ghz, gtx 470s SLI, Matrox th2go, Creative x-fi
2)i7 2600k, Gigabyte z68x, gtx 285s sli

Well, that clarifies it. Guess I´ll keep sending Larry to help Heidi when he is done with his preflight and recalling him just before take off
Now if the dummy sitting next to me could something besides complaining about them foggy windows, that´ll be great hehe.

Regards, Javier

[quote="bigjuicyspider Also, some relatively minor things, like the ability to suspend meal service, or some things like that (passengers eating dinner during landing doesn't seem like it should be happening). [/quote]

This I agree with. I've circled an airport just to wait for the meal to end. Seems silly that Heidi would annonce our desent and then serve a meal. Sure the descent was around 180nm long but still...

_________________

Yes, as already mentioned I had automatically assumed a 'weight on wheels' parameter would also be considered together with the flap setting but I didn't mention it. Otherwise you are quite right that every flight would be disastrous!

The airspeed option might be awkward if you've got a strong wind. You could be doing +15kts whilst stationary, in which case the FE would refuse to open the cowl flaps. But ground speed could be used instead, if weight-on-wheels isn't an option.

Martyn

The big problem here guys is the seriousness of performing a takeoff with the cowl flaps wide opened. We have to be very careful / conservative when building AI routines, as it ultimately becomes a very complex, tangled, organic-looking web.

These cowl flaps open and close VERY slowly, and it's very easy to get into a situation where those cowl flaps are wide opened when you are barreling down the runway.

Also, keep in mind, the flow through the engines is not linear to the amount of opened flaps, but rather exponential. Meaning, a value of 9 is not giving you 3X the cooling as 3. At 3 you are getting over 50% of the flow you get at 10.

Scott.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.

Maybe I'm not fully understanding, but the AI already seems to have the logic built in to know when we are about to takeoff. The FO says "Cabin Crew Prepare for Departure" when the flaps are set at 25 and, from what I can tell, the plane is halted for a short period of time...Ideally this happens when holding short of the departure runway. Couldn't the same logic be used to clue in the VFE that it is time to set the cowls for takeoff? Then it's up to the Captain obviously to make sure they are all at 33% before he starts barelling down the runway, and if that takes 30 seconds, then so it is.

_________________
1)i7 980x 4.35 ghz, gtx 470s SLI, Matrox th2go, Creative x-fi
2)i7 2600k, Gigabyte z68x, gtx 285s sli

Having spent about 20 hours in COTS now and being new to A2A and the 377, I have to agree with the posts above. COTS is great, but I think we are asking a little bit more control over the crew. Sort of a sub-menu of tasks for each crew or phases of flight.

For example, it would be great to have a list of options for Heidi. Sometime, I do a dawn or dusk flight and no nothing is served. Also, these actions should have a positive or negative impact on the passengers.
1. Server drinks
2. Serve breakfast
3. Serve lunch, etc.
4. Prepare for landing – already automated

It would also be great if your pilot report and rating depended upon landing at destination on time, using proper lighting and an option to declare an emergency so to deviate from flight plan. How would the passengers know if you deviated from flight plan and landed at different airport?

As a Captain and airline pilot, you have to meet different obligations and this is not fully implemented in COTS.

Thoughts?

I don't want to micromanage things like meal service, but I want the virtual crew to be smart about it. Many of these issues could be addressed simply by providing a Pre-Flight info box where the User specifies an Origin, a Destination, and expected Flight Time, and an initial Cruise Altitude. I guess I'm channeling a bit of FD Live Cockpit, or FS2Crew there; But with those few items specified, the AI would have more than enough knowledge to make smart decisions relating to things like meal times, pressurization requirements; The Career mode could evaluate whether you are on-time, whether your "mileage" is reasonable for the relative stage length--if you are flying a short haul, the pilot's fuel efficiency can't be held to the same standard as if you flew 12 hours. I'm just brainstorming...

_________________
1)i7 980x 4.35 ghz, gtx 470s SLI, Matrox th2go, Creative x-fi
2)i7 2600k, Gigabyte z68x, gtx 285s sli

Well, Bishop, I think the above would be quite a significant addition to COTS, making it more like FSPassengers. Right now I don't think COTS pays any attention to your flight plan or your departure or destination, let alone have any idea of what is 'on time'. All in all, it seems more like a whole new feature than a 'tweak' or 'fix'.

(Edit: Might be worth putting this career-related topic into a separate thread? Doesn't deal with the FE directly).

However, I do agree with bigjuicyspider in that the crew seem to know when it's time for take off. I thought the "prepare for departure" call may have been triggered by the call to ATC for take off clearance, but perhaps not, especially since a lot of people won't use the default ATC.

I can see Scott's point of view as well, since (if our FE idea was implemented) I could easily see a lot of frustrated users posting on the forums saying that they can't get airborne and not necessary understanding the reason why. For those that didn't have the 377 before COTS, the crucial matter of cowl flap setting before take off might not be apparent.

With reference to the cowl flap setting, whilst I do understand the cooling effect is not proportional to the cowl setting, I'd be interested in testing the difference between 3" and wide open. Last night I had a short taxi out to the runway in an OAT of around 19°C. The engines were running constantly at 2000 RPM to keep me moving (as I had a heavy load) with light braking to keep on top of the speed; I don't run the engines between 1500-2000 RPM on the ground, as directed on the instrument panel. By the time I lined up on the runway, my CHTs were already up to the first small red mark on the gauges (over 200°C if I recall), so I had to idle the engines for a minute to allow them to cool before taking off. I'd like to repeat the same exercise with cowl flaps wide open.

As a compromise, maybe the FE could open the cowl flaps at least halfway when on the ground. That way it also wouldn't take him too long to set them to 3" before the take off began. Depends how much extra cooling it would give!

Martyn

That almost sounds as if you are saying that COTS shouldn't be improved, just because some people can't be bothered to read the manuals...

I say: let them be frustrated, it's on their heads and not A2A's fault.

_________________
Happy Landings
- Patrick

@Martyn:

This may be stating the obvious, but with the updated engine modelling came different CHT modelling it seems, as the cowl flaps don't need to be fully open to keep on top of the temps.

Once the aircraft is rolling, I find 1500 RPM is sufficient to keep it moving, with blips to 2000 RPM to accelerate. The periods of running at 1500 RPM enable the engines to cool down, along with the air flow through the cowls.

In hot weather in summer, wide open may be the best option from the start, as the engines can cook on the ground. It can be that you need to shutdown to cool them.

The cowls are slower to move, but I don't think it really makes much difference. I find opening to maybe 4" is sufficient to keep the CHT below 170 degrees C in most weather, with minimal delay configuring for takeoff.

Best regards,
Robin.

_________________
A2A/AccuSim. 'nuff said!

As the original poster I must say that I feel my question has been totally answered. Simulation is all about compromises, be it technical or economical. I understand Scott´s point and don´t mind managing the taxi phase by myself. Only wanted to know why.

Cheers

Javier

With regard to people not reading the manuals, I agree, but such things could perhaps influence design decisions to some extent; that's all I meant.

But yes, it might sound like I'm saying it shouldn't be improved, but I was thinking more from A2A's point of view. They've just released COTS according to their own vision, which I think we'll all agree is an excellent product as it is, yet we are asking for many improvements (not only fixes) - naturally for free! Some ideas revolve around dealing with current issues that slightly impact on the function of the product (such as the FE not opening the cowls fully as outlined in the checklists) whilst others are for new features (or variations of current features) altogether. Yes, COTS is designed to simulate being a captain to some degree, but everyone has a different ideal with regard to how that should be done. Clearly it isn't a complete career solution that will meet everybody's needs, and we have to accept that at some point.

In my opinion, some suggestions have more of a chance of being implemented than others. It doesn't mean I disagree with those ideas; I just wanted to give my opinion which is a conservative and 'realistic' one, I would say. Hope that helps explain it



I think I have done that in past, but it becomes a small nuisance to watch the RPM gauge each time and try to keep outside the 1500-2000 range, so I elected to leave it at 2000 (I admit to being lazy since I am in the process of getting used to COTS before serious flying begins!). I only noticed right before take off that the temps were quite high, else I would've taken action sooner.

I haven't put in so many hours on the 377 yet (despite owning it since release), and although I gained familiarity with the systems before COTS, I didn't fly it so many times that I got used to the behaviour of the CHTs on the ground, so I wouldn't be able to notice all the differences that COTS has brought along. I've spent the last 2 years 'saving' for the 377 in my AirHauler company, hence the long delay in getting it out of the hangar!

Anyway, thanks for the tips

Sure did, and I agree.

_________________
Happy Landings
- Patrick

I agree my suggestions were closer to FS Passanger but I think this idea best summarizes what I was thinking.