Hi,

I was just wondering. Will you add the INS from the 707 to the B52?

Because if you'd choose to do so it would make this product far more versatile even though being "basic" in terms of systems modeling.

I'd love to fly this baby around the world with something more than the default GPS =) (and I imagine a lot of people would, too)



Thanks,

Stefan

It would really be cool to have a periscopic sextant so we could navigate around the world using the stars and the HO 249 tables, as we did in the "wayback days (first twenty years of the BUFF).

I installed the CIVA INS (single unit) and it works perfectly.

Below are the following section additions:
Always make a back-up first!

(Shift+1 brings up the icons)

[Window Titles]
...
Window02=INS Control Display Unit
window03=INS Mode Select Unit
window04=INS ADEU

[Window00]
...
;CIVA
gauge02=../civa/INS!CduPanelIcon,   0,  652, 24, 24, 11041
gauge03=../civa/INS!MsuPanelIcon,   0,  676, 24, 24, 11040
gauge04=../civa/INS!AdeuPanelIcon,  0,  700, 24, 24, 11042
gauge05=../civa/INS!NavModeSingle,  0,  724, 24, 43

;CIVA
[Window02]
size_mm=200,195
background_color=16,16,16
window_pos=0.804, 0.500
position=0
visible=0
ident=11041
no_luminous=1
gauge00=../civa/INS!Cdu1, 0, 0, 200, 195

[Window03]
size_mm=200,71
background_color=16,16,16
window_pos=0.804, 0.756
position=0
visible=0
ident=11040
no_luminous=1
gauge00=../civa/INS!Msu1, 0, 0, 200, 71

[Window04]
size_mm=200,100
background_color=16,16,16
window_pos=0.804, 0.847
position=8
visible=0
ident=11042
no_luminous=1
gauge00=../civa/INS!Adeu1, 0, 0, 200, 100

[VCockpit01]
...
gauge14=../civa/INS!Config,         0,    0,  0,  0, csb52

The only problem I have with a single INS over a Dual INS is that I can't seem to realign it. On a long distance flight I found (in the 707) that I was quite a long way from the waypoint I wanted to cross. KSEA to PHNL was a classic example of this.

If I have missed something in the CIVA-INS documentation that can sort this out, I'd be happy to hear it.

Mark

Hi Paul.

Sorry if I have confused you. It's like this:

Single INS = No realignment in-flight = I can't get it to work. But I could be doing something wrong.
Dual INS = I CAN realign it in-flight = I can get it to work as it says in the CIVA-INS documentation.

In the KSEA - PHNL when I got within range of the VORs I couldn't get the INS to realign so I was quite a few miles off my chosen course/waypoints.

I hope I have cleared that up for you.

Mark

I understand now Mark.

I did try the duel INS in the 727 at first and found the updating to be quite fast when using on-track and off-track together. Then I tried just the on-track updating and was okay with the slightly longer update time. If you use enough VOR/DMEs in your flight plan the accuracy will stay at '1' when just using on-track updating. Also a duel set-up takes up too much screen space as I leave the CDU showing most of my flight. I could describe how I update my single unit if that would be helpful.
I also look at it this way: I'm in this hobby as a learning experience and to have fun. I understand the operations and principles of the INS unit. I really don't want to over burden myself by looking up off-track VORs online to find out the elevation info and manually enter that data into the second INS unit. No lives will be lost if I mess-up! (I hope)  

Paul

You guys are absolutely right, the fun is the main thing on flying the sim. There will always be a "too much" and also "not enough" in everyones eyes and it's hard to find the right spot for all people.

A question towards the update, Mark. Does the update flag show that there actually is an update going on?

You can, most of the time, completely drop the elevation data, it's optional while you should be accurate on the position of course.
The closer you are to VORs with that DME and the lower you fly above them, the more important the elevation data could become although it never really reaches critical values.
"Update" means a constant measurement from the CDU units and isn't bound to that one moment when passing the VOR station but to the numerous others when you've passed that thing.

Enter nothing and 0ft is assumed for its elevation.

An example.
Being right above an VOR at 37000ft, will give you a DME reading of 6,089532587 (which would be really accurate for our cockpit instruments, they will show "6.1" instead).
If the VOR was some hundred feet higher than 0, lets say 600, the DME reading is 5,99078341, so the instruments show "6.0".
I don't how the INS handles elevation data when you are very close but I assume a focus on the actual DME readings as they get more accurate when being closer.

As said, fly lower and let that VOR be at higher elevations and the error gets bigger, but since you mainly need DME updates at higher FL, you will often enough find yourself traveling well above them.
The error component isn't big there and if you are not exactly above them (which will be the case most of the time since you don't hover there), the distance between you and that thing is the vital part.
This distance is shown on the DME gauges and the real distance is calculated then since the DME readings shows the hypotenuse of that right-angled triangle.
Being exactly above the station, there is no triangle but this situation takes place just in theory. So most of the time, your "hypotenuse measurement" and the accuracy in the readings there play the big role together with a good and accurate initial alignment of the INS at the departure airport.

Also, the height component comes in at the "feet" value while you travel fast enough to collect quite some nm on the distance component. Approximately 6,076 feet in 1nm.
Since both components get into calculations on their square value, the nautical miles gain quite some strength over the maybe height deviation as you travel along.

The more you travel away from that thing, the more insignificant the elevation gets.
The whole system of your position calculation has quite some vague values in it too. The coordinates of the VOR are entered in not so exact values (only few digits), your VOR DME receiver has internal fluctuations, the signal itself is under influences of various things .. those influences gain strength when getting away from the station, so the inaccuracy there is normal and quite high when compared to that missing elevation data (which just causes deviations of some feet).

So in short, the update doesn't depend hugely on the elevation data and the double update with one station on track and another one offtrack is the best thing to do, with or without elevation data but regularly done.
The INS will always stay far away from GPS based units but even those use DME updates on the FMC birds.

No problem, Mark, all those nasty little words from back in the days seem to come back at you when you catch that flying by the numbers.
Don't expect me to be an expert, I just investigate somehow and could be very wrong on some things too. Always willing to learn.

So I'm always thankful for manuals and stuff giving insights. Although my ordinary work should give me one too on some aspects, I seem to be the better listener/reader in the after work hours.  

I had a nice table once where they showed the accuracy of "common" (INS isn't common anymore) navigation instruments. Those GPS based units advanced it by a large margin, although there are many variants of them, not all able to be described as "GPS based".
Here's a good one too from Wikipedia.

(looks black, but click it and it lightens up)

The main factor on every GPS thingy is the usability in my eyes. Even the older FMC driven aircraft update their stuff on the fly (by all means) and the pilot just checks.
Flying INS based means constant attention, lots of error sources when entering data and awkward display codes to read.

So back to your update, the green "update" flag should come on when performing DME updates. If it stays off, something was entered the wrong way, the signal was lost or the procedure never started.


Another indicator, if you don't use the flag instrument, is the FROM-TO display (No.7).



Switch to the WAYPT position and look how that display performs considering 4) in that list.