vololiberista wrote:

awralls wrote:

Which brings up an issue which has been concerning me for the last few weeks - the frequency of updates. While this is laudable on the face of it, and many will compliment the team for what seems to be excellent support, might it not be better to hold off a little to try to get a little more testing in? Please don't think this is a critical comment - I support Dave and his testers 100% - but I think they're making life difficult for themselves and possibly unsatisfactory for the customers.

I do a bit of testing for another FS application and updates are less frequent and testing is more protracted.... It seems to work better for them.

Just a suggestion.... I know some of the test team get a little defensive at any perceived criticism but actually, we all want the same thing.

Cheers,

Andy

From what I've read here and from other beta testers I must be the only one who is getting correct descent instructions and not being repeated. So I am wondering what type of flight profile you are all running compared to mine. I am arriving by a planned STAR i.e. not a random one. One that I have identified in the SID STAR page with SIDs STARs checked as active.
I have though flagged an anomaly with TGS. Looks like Dave wonàt have much time to finish eating his Easter eggs!!

awralls wrote:

I'm not using any modern procedures... All the flight plans are NDB-to-NDB or lat/long waypoint (which PF3 sees as any other waypoint). If you're saying PF3 only works reliably if I'm in a modern tube liner flying SIDS/STARS, then I'll cut my losses and go back to RC4 since it's use is too limited for me.

I would also note that no such limitation is included in the product description.

Andy

awralls wrote:

Which brings up an issue which has been concerning me for the last few weeks - the frequency of updates. While this is laudable on the face of it, and many will compliment the team for what seems to be excellent support, might it not be better to hold off a little to try to get a little more testing in? Please don't think this is a critical comment - I support Dave and his testers 100% - but I think they're making life difficult for themselves and possibly unsatisfactory for the customers.

I do a bit of testing for another FS application and updates are less frequent and testing is more protracted.... It seems to work better for them.

Just a suggestion.... I know some of the test team get a little defensive at any perceived criticism but actually, we all want the same thing.

Cheers,

Andy

awralls wrote:

I'm not using any modern procedures... All the flight plans are NDB-to-NDB or lat/long waypoint (which PF3 sees as any other waypoint). If you're saying PF3 only works reliably if I'm in a modern tube liner flying SIDS/STARS, then I'll cut my losses and go back to RC4 since it's use is too limited for me.

I would also note that no such limitation is included in the product description.

RALF9636 wrote:

I'm afraid this issue is not solved with 3.1.5.

Center told me to descent to the same altitude every few seconds. After handoff to Approach Approach continued to do so.

Another oddness: With the STAR option activated, I was first cleared via a STAR (reading the name that was specified on the SIDs/STARs page). Shortly after I was cleared to final at pilot's discretion. And then I received vectors. If I didn't miss something that was without a runway change.

Regards

Ralf