JustFlight BAe-146 v1.2 for X-Plane 11, Basic Tutorial for the Custom UFMC

[@takikatoji7851]

Thank you

[@paull502]

Excellent tutorial Joe, many thanks. I was having a little difficulty controlling the FMC / Autopilot link for some unknown reason but following your video has eliminated the problem.

[@donaldholman9070]

Thank you Joe

[@smaze1782]

Excellent video. But how do you update the nav data?

[@Sgoburgos]

I´ve the same question, how to update the airac? Thanks.

[@brandonwhite2231]

Hi Joe, I get messages on the FMC such as 'AIRAC NOT FOUND' and 'Missing Data Link' and 'No Comm' . This prevents me from selecting Star departures and arrivals along with entering any airways. Any suggestions?

[@mahmoudmike3180]

Nice video and aircraft , do you know that just flight have any plans for RJ(70,85,100) series ?????

[@josephnoe2956]

Indeed we / they do! ;) (no timeframe at the moment, but the Avro RJs are planned)

[@mahmoudmike3180]

@@josephnoe2956 Waiting for Avro,

[@williamwinborne3253]

@@josephnoe2956 nice, hopefully we can get a nice discount if we own the BAe. I love the steam gauges in the BAe but the Avro will be quite a nice choice. Thanks for your hard work

[@mahmoudmike3180]

@@josephnoe2956 Joseph why the Mahan Air livery is missed ? do you have any where to find???

[@MOTISHOW]

How to import flightplan automatically from simbrief like in fenix pdmg maddog?

[@Virtual-CPT]

Hi Joe, first of all many thanks for the video. I have one question about the light above the EXEC button. It should highlight the need to execute certain modifications, right? You removed the first discontinuity on leg page 1/4 and the light goes on. However, after you pressed next page and the display switched to leg page 2/4 the light is of again. Shouldn't it be still on? I mean, you did not execute the modifications, yet.

[@josephnoe2956]

Yeah, it might be a small bug that the EXEC light turned off when I changed the page. You are correct that it should be on in that case.

[@Virtual-CPT]

@@josephnoe2956 Sorry for pointing out such a minor problem. I'm a product owner in real life and having an eye for detail is more or less my job. I'm actually surprised that my developers still like me 😂

[@midi48]

Great video Joe thank you. Just a question, how do you set the aircraft to follow the speeds in the fmc? I would have thought pushing the vnav button would control vertical nav and speed as it does in other Aircraft?

[@josephnoe2956]

The BAe doesn't have an autothrottle, so the actual airspeed is up to the pilot to control. VNAV will control vertical speed, but you'll need to reduce the thrust levers to avoid over-speeding.

[@midi48]

@@josephnoe2956 thanks Joe

[@philipjensen6442]

Great video. Is the style/model of the fms correlating to a real world bae146 ufms?

[@samsc6728]

Not even close.

[@droge192]

X-Plane's default FMC is based on the Universal FMC, so yes, that head unit that we're used to seeing with the default FMC is generally quite realistic in this application. The update here essentially is just adding the PERF data to the default, and the real unit does have more features / characteristics. It's still a great update. People complaining "It still looks just like the default FMC!" don't appear to realise that the X-Plane FMC is not entirely fictional, and is based on the actualy UFMC unit. NB. Some 146s were fitted with the UFMC3; a newer unit with a different control head.

[@RoamingAdhocrat]

This is on the top of my to-buy list after "the rest of a PC" and "X-Plane 11"! However there is something I see in the videos that really bugs me: the behaviour of the roller number displays (altimeters, mach, engine instruments). When a smaller number is rolling over from 9 to 0, the next number should roll in sync. Instead, when going from (say) 69 to 70, the 10s drum stays stuck on 6 and pings over when the 1s drum is at about 9.5. Is this something that can be modded by an enterprising user - writing a plugin to produce a new dataref with the "correct" value and modifying the model to use this for the animation? (I've done such things in the past.) The DME readouts behaved differently still: they did not roll continuously, but pinged up and down in 0.1NM increments. Very electromagnetic-looking effect. And the captain's altimeter also seemed to move in 50ft or 33.3ft increments rather than continuously, from cockpit videos I've seen. Bit nitpicky but there's a lot of character in the behaviour of these displays and in my own experience as an X-Plane developer it's not very hard to get it right!

[@droge192]

"It's not very hard to get right" - advanced, nuanced, animations of small, scrolling numerical displays isn't hard to get right is it? :o) If that's the case, and you're a developer, then why not quickly build a mod that changes the animation? After all, "it's not very hard" to do. ;o)

[@lewishoward9568]

Are there plans in the future to have the real FMC in the BAE 146 modeled in the sim aircraft?

[@samsc6728]

Not in this version but it looks as if the MSFS version may have one! Thank god. Finally.

[@transporterdispatch231]

How would I add this new fmc to this plane????

[@samsc6728]

The heck is this? This isn't even close to a BAE 'FMC' 5555 in the cost index?! Bleurgh.

[@justfuture6585]

As far as I know the Bae 146 wasn't developed with an FMC. I think you're talking about the modern version of it (the Avro RJ) which this one isn't supposed to be.

[@samsc6728]

@@justfuture6585 Designed perhaps not but plenty of 100-300s had units retrofitted, similar to the LTN-92.

[@justfuture6585]

@Sam SC The LTN-92 was a stand-alone system. As you said, it was only retrofitted. I see no reason why an FMC similar to the UFMC could not have been retrofitted. If you want 100% realism, just remove the FMC, and if you want to use an FMC that even includes performance calculations, you can just use the UFMC. I don't see the problem, to be honest.

[@samsc6728]

@@justfuture6585I see no reason either but, well, it wasn't. But different tastes for different folks and all that. Personally can't see the point in developing something, with all the effort, to add something that wasn't ever an option in the real thing. A big shame.

[@justfuture6585]

@@samsc6728 Yes, that's right. But "hey", luckily we are allowed to think differently about things :D