jiggyb2

On 04/06/2016 at 8:54 AM, Guest totoro said:

Just an FYI, they're called Inlet Guide Vanes (IGVs) and they serve to stabilize and direct the airflow so that it hits the first stage of the low pressure compressor (aka the "fan") at an optimal angle. On many engines their angle can also be changed (via an actuator ring connected to a hydraulic ram), which turns them into Variable IGVs, or VIGVs. The angling is primarily used for starting and low rpm operation, because the first stage compressor blade angle would be too extreme for the static air and lead to compressor stalls. A specialty of Russian engines is that the IGVs also serve as the primary support structure for the front bearing and rotor assembly. Western engines typically have a separate set of struts in from of their IGVs for that.

That's a really great explanation! I actually just found these in my ATPL syllabus while revising, though your explanation is nicer!

So you know, those engine fans do rotate (though only as a flat, spinning disk)! What you're looking at is some sort of static ducting system, you see it a lot on these old low bypass engines - the MD80, for example, has the same. You can see them here:

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/3/2/2/1269223.jpg

And the same thing on an MD80:

http://www.trollabort.se/images/Bildbank/album/medium/PictActionMD80engine-037.jpg

12 hours ago, Stephen said:

No you are noted here under Jiggyb2, did you login? SD

Who knows!

30 minutes ago, judeb said:

The only thing that put's me off, is the fairly good quality of the existing sceneries, and the dodgy looking airbuses dotted around the airport.

Static aircraft are optional - You could always put in some other statics yourself if you'd rather.

16 hours ago, Stephen said:

You write it down wrong and its all wrong...  brain fade thanks. SD

Welcome! No idea why I'm suddenly a guest up there 

It has to be in the correct format or it won't work. Use a program like EFASS to properly manage it.

Ah, ok. I will admit I didn't test it!

Aren't there a few custom failure options buried in the FMC?

Yep, it does.

A pretty spot-on review I'd say... still getting used to her odd quirks myself (I keep getting distracted by liveries... the A330 is my favorite aircraft for them...) but when everything goes right it's a very pleasing aircraft to fly!

There's a lever between the seats, look behind you and click and it closes/opens!

It's also worth noting that the almost-released updated Aerosoft Heathrow will eventually me coming to X-Plane too - and as you can see in this video, it looks like it already converts wonderfully to X-Plane!

[Oops, forgot to login - can someone delete my comment above please?

Well after playing about a bit I just added some joystick buttons as left/right toe brakes and, while things are jerky (I can only have full on/off), it is a lot easier to turn. If there was a system like the nosewheel tiller axis for toe brakes it would be much easier to taxi!

Odd, I found it difficult to turn left, and right was near-impossible... I downloaded it from Carenado's site last night so perhaps I shall just have to re-download it and see how things go...

Nice review! I noticed the missing interior noises too - could that just be a goof on Carenado's side? 

Also, I felt the aircraft had way too wide a turning circle, I had to slam the rudder and the nosewheel tiller all the way to one side to get even a slight movement... Anyone else found that, or is it just standard for this aircraft?

I just bought this and went for a quick jaunt around Helsinki in it, and quite frankly couldn't tell it apart from a Carenado - in fact I liked it more than quite a few of their aircraft of similar size! Thus, I'm curious; What actually is the difference between Carenado and Alabeo?

Other than that though, she's a really nice aircraft, though I did notice the Right hand flaps seem to be missing their sides which is something that may want to be fixed!

I wonder if Carenado has been holding those G1000-equipped aircraft until later so they can get the execution right? Doing it in the background while releasing simpler aircraft would be a sensible move...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk