patch not working

[Paul_Smith 92]

I think Bstolle is probably right. Billybob is just not interested in hearing what anyone else has to say. As there is still no such thing as a "barRon", I think I will just stop trying.

[phillik747 0]

OK, I see the issue... I usually fly with the RealityXP GNS430 or 530 installed and the HSI does showthe course deviation correctly with either of these units installed. As a test, I flew with the Carenado GNS430sand indeed the autopilot follows the course, but the HSI does not show the course deviation.. this is pretty awful.I wonder if anyone has found a solution to this? I do not think it is the GPS, but instead it is the HSI that refusesto recognize that the GPS is in GPS mode and not in VLOC mode. I've installed the default Baron HSI in a popup window as a test, and as you can see, it works correctly.

I have this issue with the RXP 430's. The course deviation is always somewhat centered when im going direct to a destination even when I'm miles off course. I have tried changing the HSI out to a different guage like the one in the MS mooney but I'm having no luck with finding the HSI in the panel.cfg. I can swap back to default FSX and use it for ILS and it works fine. Bert can you give some incite on this? I'll be out this weekend so please excuse my response until later.

[Vcockpit03]Background_color=0,0,0 size_mm=512,512visible=0pixel_size=1024,1024texture=$Panel_baron_3gauge00=rxpgns!GNS430, 173,72,328,166gauge01=rxpgns!GNS430_2, 173,252,328,166//gauge00=CarenadoG430!GNS430_nc1,  172,68,337,179//gauge01=CarenadoG430!GNS430_nc2,  172,248,337,179gauge02=BB58!Auto_taxi_onoff,  3,170,30,24gauge03=BB58!Bus_Volts,  341,1,168,66gauge04=rxpGNS!GTX327,  172,428,332,82//gauge04=BB58!transponder,  172,428,332,82gauge05=BB58!annunciator_test,  115,171,53,53gauge06=BB58!Trim,  114,226,54,124gauge07=BB58!Flap_lights,  87,266,23,81gauge08=BB58!GEM6,  9,353,159,156//gauge09=BB58!Toggle_Gps,  247,92,189,112gauge10=BB581!fuelflow,  4,4,163,162gauge11=BB583!AirSp,  4,199,28,22gauge12=BB58!Turn_light,  80,170,30,30

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

I have this issue with the RXP 430's. The course deviation is always somewhat centered when im going direct to a destination even when I'm miles off course. I have tried changing the HSI out to a different guage like the one in the MS mooney but I'm having no luck with finding the HSI in the panel.cfg. I can swap back to default FSX and use it for ILS and it works fine. Bert can you give some incite on this? I'll be out this weekend so please excuse my response until later.

You cannot swap out the HSI - it is part of the 3d model. But it works OKon my system... Do you have LinkVor=1 set in the rxpgns.ini file for this plane?"Somewhat centered" is a fuzzy description.. not sure how to interpret..

[phillik747 0]

You cannot swap out the HSI - it is part of the 3d model. But it works OKon my system... Do you have LinkVor=1 set in the rxpgns.ini file for this plane?"Somewhat centered" is a fuzzy description.. not sure how to interpret..

Would something like the reality-xp flightline T guages work as a replacement? I guess what I mean is instrument parallax that they try to build into the 3d model. I don't have LinkVor=1 in the file. What does it fall under?Thanks!

[GNS430]Popup=15431[GTX327]AutoStandBy=OnAutoStandByDelay=24VFRCode=1200AltitudeFormat=FLFlightTimerMode=CLEARAcftType=LESS_15500FlightTimer=0.000000CountUpTimer=0.000000CountDnTimer=0.000000CountDnTimerRef=0.000000AutoPowerOn=AltBrightness=-1.000000[GMA340]Brightness=-1.000000[sETTINGS]Dimmer=OffSimpleMouse=OffKeyOnFocus=On

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

Would something like the reality-xp flightline T guages work as a replacement? I don't have LinkVor=1 in the file. What does it fall under?Thanks!

It falls under [GNS430]...and sorry to say one more time "you cannot replace the round gauges in the Baron"

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

I guess what I mean is instrument parallax that they try to build into the 3d model.

If what you are saying is that you do not like their 3d gauges.... well they are what they are.Personally, I think that RealAir does a better job of 3d gauge design, but they've been doing itfor years, whereas Carenado is brand new into this.

[flya150 8]

you cannot replace the round gauges in the Baron"

I wouldn't call them exactly round. :( flya150

[phillik747 0]

If what you are saying is that you do not like their 3d gauges.... well they are what they are.Personally, I think that RealAir does a better job of 3d gauge design, but they've been doing itfor years, whereas Carenado is brand new into this.

I like the attempt they have made at 3d gauges, I was merely trying to define "somewhat centered."It's too bad Carenado has overlooked this HSI tracking bug. Any of their other aircraft work, like the Bonanza? Thanks for the help.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

Any of their other aircraft work, like the Bonanza? Thanks for the help.

The Bonanza is still my favorite Carenado plane - but only after installing a set of RealityXP FLT gauges. This is the last Carenado plane to use 2d gauges in the panel.

[Guest CharlieP51]

Are you surprised? Some of the rants on this forum have been quite vile, bordering on personal attacks. What on earth do you base that assertion on? Did you send them 50+ emails about your "throttle" issue? Have you sent one apologising for your earlier mails yet?Sorry dude, but you have not exactly demonstrated good judgement so far. Yes you have found some real and serious problems, such as the HSI issue, but you have reported them in a way that almost forces them to be dismissed. Anyone else mentioning the same issue without the depth and research that the likes of Bert can bring will be assumed to be repeating your rant. You have silently ignored or flatly contradicted anyone that doesn't see things they way you do. You have dragged up known FSX issues and tried to blame then on Carenado. In short, you have given quite a few people excuses to put you on their ignore lists. And worst of all, not one of those actions helped get a single problem solved. Thank you for that.Of course they are. What did you think they were doing it for?In your demonstratably poor opinion, perhaps. In my opinion, quality levels have remained consistent but patches are being turned around more quickly then before and new and varied models are being brought to market more quickley. Carenado are of a consistently higher standard then most other add on suppliers to the point where I believe most "avid simmers" would place them in the top five of producers that do multiple aircraft. I would personally like them higher still, but I am still more then happy to give them my money, and believe I get very good value for that money. Nobody is forcing you to give them yours.

That is true. It is -also- true that regardless of the product..if a paying consumer senses he has been cheated, left with no support, and left with a non-working " dead-end" product with no future...and then gets antagonistic remarks from Carenado shills..then..YES..they RANT...it's human nature..eh?

[pager94 4]

That is true. It is -also- true that regardless of the product..if a paying consumer senses he has been cheated, left with no support, and left with a non-working " dead-end" product with no future...and then gets antagonistic remarks from Carenado shills..then..YES..they RANT...it's human nature..eh?

Thanks CharlieP51!!FINALLY a non-Carenodo extremeist with common sense.Autopilot, stall characteristics, and HSI / GPS couple,EGT / Mixture,etc, etc, ETC. STILL don't work with current patches.To all the Carenado extremeists good luck with the C90!!! Your better off investing the money in the lottery you'll get more out of it. For all those looking not to be cheated by Carendo anymore. PMDG is releasing 737NG soon. Yes, it will cost more but you will get a functional product that has taken longer than the typical 3 month Carenado development cycle and which has actually been beta tested. Additionally, in contrast to Carendo customer support, PMDG is very helpful, effective, responsive and NON-ANTAGONISTIC!Yes their are MUCH greener pastures than here. Ta Ta!! [Cheers,BB

[pager94 4]

[After $32.95 and 2 service packs. I nominate the Carenado Barron for the Avsim 5 Cow xxxxx award! Below is my latest request from Carenado, No response yet. Dear Carenado, I’ve purchased the Barron, and have installed both service packs. I report the below squawks, please fix,asap. 1) Mixture / EGT modeling on both engines are wrong. The general principle for the mixture controls is to DECREASE the fuel to air mixture ratio. Upon leaning the both mixtures the full range of motion, there is an INCREASE in fuel flow for both engines where there should be an overall decrease and not an increase of fuel flow. Also, on engine #1 (left) the final bottom 5% allows for some leaning but ultimately results in engine fuel cut-off because the extremely narrow range of mixture function. Engine #2 (right) is slightly better than engine #1. However, both mixtures should lean overall there full range of motion forward to aft resulting and overall decrease in fuel flow to both engines and increase in EGT up to the point of max lean “Peak EGT”. The Engine #1 (left) engine mixture problem makes the aircraft nearly unflyable and the engine fuel is cut-off upon leaning. 2) Neither engine allows for feathering! Neither prop (pitch) lever will move into the feathered position. Thus, not allowing for single engine operations. 3) Stall characteristics are poor and nearly non-functional. The aircraft PLUMETS at greater than 60 degree nose dive before stall recovery initiates. Upon release of back pressure the aircraft should immediately begin stall recovery. The aircraft should be in a greater than 60 degree nose dive before the stall recovery begins. Best,

[Geofa 108]

[After $32.95 and 2 service packs.I nominate the Carenado Barron for the Avsim 5 Cow xxxxx award!Below is my latest request from Carenado, No response yet.Dear Carenado,I’ve purchased the Barron, and have installed both service packs. I report the below squawks, please fix,asap.1) Mixture / EGT modeling on both engines are wrong. The general principle for the mixture controls is to DECREASE the fuel to air mixture ratio. Upon leaning the both mixtures the full range of motion, there is an INCREASE in fuel flow for both engines where there should be an overall decrease and not an increase of fuel flow. Also, on engine #1 (left) the final bottom 5% allows for some leaning but ultimately results in engine fuel cut-off because the extremely narrow range of mixture function. Engine #2 (right) is slightly better than engine #1. However, both mixtures should lean overall there full range of motion forward to aft resulting and overall decrease in fuel flow to both engines and increase in EGT up to the point of max lean “Peak EGT”.The Engine #1 (left) engine mixture problem makes the aircraft nearly unflyable and the engine fuel is cut-off upon leaning.2) Neither engine allows for feathering! Neither prop (pitch) lever will move into the feathered position. Thus, not allowing for single engine operations.3) Stall characteristics are poor and nearly non-functional. The aircraft PLUMETS at greater than 60 degree nose dive before stall recovery initiates. Upon release of back pressure the aircraft should immediately begin stall recovery. The aircraft should be in a greater than 60 degree nose dive before the stall recovery begins.Best,

Ok-pager-I am putting you on notice. This is the third thread with your ranting and raving all on the same item and I notice you don't seem to be taking any of the help other users are giving you.That is called trolling and we don't allow it here.Take the hint-thanks, Charlie too.

[Guest CharlieP51]

Ok-pager-I am putting you on notice. This is the third thread with your ranting and raving all on the same item and I notice you don't seem to be taking any of the help other users are giving you.That is called trolling and we don't allow it here.Take the hint-thanks, Charlie too.

What help has any forum user given us for the stall issue? None. Please provide a link so can receive this help. Someone claims to have sent Carenado a fix...well is it available..pls post the download link. Thank you. CharlieP51

[n4gix 4,947]

Another chronic problem is engine intake icing. I don't understand how of all Carenado's planes that are powered by fuel injection chronicly loose power, regardless of altitude / weather, and when the carb heat (which doesn't exist on fuel injected planes) restores engine power. This is another chonic problem added to the long list.......

That is a problem with the sim, and has been since FS2000 at least. The flight sim engine model makes no distinction between normally aspirated engines, fuel-injected engines, or turbocharged engines...EVERY recip engine model is subject to "carburetor icing..."Now that said, it is possible for a prudent modeler to simply turn on "carb heat" for the customer automatically on first load, so it never becomes a "problem" for the customer, but that's a choice to be made by the systems programmer for any given project.There are quite a few problematic areas in the core of Flight Simulator (any version), but workarounds for such problems have been developed over the years. It's all too easy for a developer to overlook some of these flaws though!For example, one project I'm currently working on is for an aircraft that has no "GPS" at all, nor does it have a DME audio control. Until one of my beta team members stumbled across a situation where this lack became an issue, I hadn't even thought about it!The "solution" however was simple enough to implement by adding some logic on first load that will pre-set the sim variables for the user transparently...

    (A:DME SOUND,bool) if{ (>K:RADIO_DME1_IDENT_DISABLE) }    (A:GPS DRIVES NAV1,bool) if{ (>K:TOGGLE_GPS_DRIVES_NAV1) }

Those two commands will check to see if DME sound is turned on. If it is, it turns it OFF! Likewise, if the previous aircraft loaded had left the NAV/GPS switch in GPS mode, it will revert the panel system to NAV mode.