MALTBY D wrote:Interesting about the Tinmouse settings Ian.
I copied those into the Trident & ran my autoland tester saved flight with it.
It did indeed capture the localizer beam cleaner & I was convinced this was the magic ingredient.
However the autoland test has a 36kt side wind & it didn't like that at all, eventually drifting so far off line that it nearly took the roof off The Airport pub (Manchester).
Ok, 36kt is a serious side wind & more than the real Trident was allowed to land with, but the Tinmouse settings failed at 24kt too, which was allowed.
From what I can remember, the inability to correct the drift will be because the nav_integrator_boundary is only 0.5 (2.5 on the Trident)
That makes the Trident more coarse, but gives it the ability to cope better with a rough ride.
It would be a pity, but I suspect that may be all it is. Those derivative settings on their own didn't seem to help the Trident any.
DM
David - Out of curiosity, I've just done a few circuits in the Tinmouse to try out your crosswind scenario. You are correct in thinking that the Tinmouse will not cope with a crosswind with the nav_integrator_boundary value set at 0.5. I set the crosswind at 90 degrees to the runway and let the autopilot intercept the localiser at 45 degrees and tried a few settings changes. I had to increase the value to 2.5 (the same as the Trident) for it to cope with reasonable crosswinds. It still engaged the localiser pretty cleanly but the maximum crosswinds it could take to hold the beam were 24kts when intercepting into the wind or 16kts if intercepting with the wind on the tail. The tailwind pushed it a tad over the beam and it really struggled to get back. Still no weaving in either case, though. The 2.5 setting in a still air situation still allowed a pretty clean intercept but took a long, very shallow angle to get right on to the centreline.
I don't know what the crosswind limit was for a 737-200 (I would guess in the region of 18-20kts) but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody doesn't come along soon and let me know!
QED - Professor Vickers's lesson transformed into a practical experiment. I hope he's giving marks for coursework. I might yet graduate from the CBFS academy with lettuce after my name
Thanks for continuing the experiment with the tinmouse Ian.
I was wondering if they were perhaps using FSUIPC to change the A/P settings to suit the conditions, but obviously not.
Yes Prof Vicker's lecture has indeed been a triumph. I think we should have some more.
Thanks Garry, I will now display my ARSE with pride.
Like the Gorilla Colin. Nearly spat my tea everywhere when I saw it just.
MALTBY D wrote:Yes Prof Vicker's lecture has indeed been a triumph. I think we should have some more.
:redface: Dunno about the Prof bit, I dont even have a PhD (I'm in the minority in my office in that respect and consquently feel rather academically inferior )
If DM or anyone has any other serious issues that I might be able to explain to you or confuse you with, just ask and I'll do my best... no promises!
TobyV wrote:If DM or anyone has any other serious issues that I might be able to explain to you or confuse you with, just ask and I'll do my best... no promises!
I was a bit confused about Rocket Science, Toby; but Garry's explanation has cleared that up for me :roll:
When my stepson was seven he once said to me, "I don't need to go to school any more, Ian". "Oh, why's that?" says I.
"Because I can't think of anything I don't know".
I know just what he meant. Surprise us, Toby I love posts like this.
Dunno about the Prof bit, I dont even have a PhD (I'm in the minority in my office in that respect and consquently feel rather academically inferior 
Ian
