The earliest commercial Constellations and B.O.A.C. Oct 4, 2019 5:53:52 GMT -5
Post by connieguy on Oct 4, 2019 5:53:52 GMT -5
Hi Manfred. Thank you for your reply. I should explain that I fly descents, approaches and landings in the way that I believe they were done before there were autopilots which could do them for the pilot. Thus I use the autopilot in cruise but when the time comes to descend I switch it off and it is not switched on again at any point. I find my own headings and I control descent by varying trim, rpm and throttle. Approaches to particular runways can often be done by aligning with an NDB or VOR (if I think it existed at the time of my flight) otherwise they must be done visually. As you will have seen there has been discussion in this thread about whether visual approaches were done at night, but it is now pretty clear that they were, although I still tend to believe that this was easier in real life than in FS9. That is why, when I was faced with a landing on a runway at Shannon which did not have any navaids, I used your AILA gauge to line up on it - there is a screenshot of my vc with the AILA gauge visible during this landing on page 3 of the thread. I was too low, but I increased throttle and rpm to fly level for a period until it was time to descend again. Your gauge is immensely valuable from the point of view of AILA alone, but I have not so far used the PAR element of it very much because when I tried it I found that the autopilot was switched on automatically and caused my aircraft heading to change rapidly against my wishes. I know that it can be switched off immediately, but this is still a step which interrupts the flow of what I am doing, which I would prefer to avoid and which is not the way things worked in the era before complex autopilots existed. As far as I am concerned it is my job to put the aircraft on a heading and at a height where PAR can take over fairly seamlessly, and this would have been the case with the approach at Shannon had I chosen to use PAR. If I can't do that then I ought to be able to, and although my approaches vary in their effectiveness most of the time I do get it more or less right. I am aware that the number of flight simmers who want a gauge which operates in this may not even number a few hundred worldwide, and that is why I have hesitated about asking for a modification to a gauge which is already an extremely useful one and which because it will provide ILS for any runway will already allow landings on them in very poor visibility. It would add an extra level of realism if I could hear the GCA voice as well, but of course this is not essential and I do not press it, not wishing to appear to be one of those simmers who is never satisfied no matter how much is done for them. Please ask if I have not explained any of this clearly enough. The crucial thing is that I would like a gauge in which there is no action by the autopilot at all, or where one can stop such action before it starts.