Important: These forums are for discussions between SkyDemon users. They are not routinely monitored by SkyDemon staff so any urgent issues should be sent directly to our Customer Support.

Controlling automated climb/descent profiles


Author
Message
T67M
T67M
Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)Too Much Forum (22K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 206, Visits: 3.2K
I was just trying out a flight from Redhill to LeTouquet to see how well SkyDemon coped with the stepped-climb required to remain clear of controlled airspace, and found that while I could control the climb to some extent, I couldn't get exactly what I expected without adding in a LOT of extra waypoints. The best I managed is shown below:







In particular, notice that the climb from 1400' to 2400' starts before Bough Beech not after it, thus causing the flight to enter CAS. Second, whereas I would like to step-climb (or even better, cruise-climb with SkyDemon suggesting a desired RoC in fpm) to remain just below CAS at all times, the actual profile created keeps me at 2400' all the way to LYD, then makes one long climb all the way up to FL054 (which, interestingly, is shown as 5400' despite the airspace being define as a flight level).



Am I doing something wrong, or is this something that isn't (yet) supported fully by SkyDemon?



Thanks,



T67M
Replies
Tim Dawson
Tim Dawson
SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)SkyDemon Team (678K reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.1K, Visits: 9.4K
Given it has been over ten years since there was last any activity on this thread, I hope you can see why this kind of involved vertical planning is not currently anywhere near our development list.
publicom
p
Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)Too Much Forum (401 reputation)
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 38, Visits: 116
Tim Dawson - 2/15/2023 10:17:40 AM
Given it has been over ten years since there was last any activity on this thread, I hope you can see why this kind of involved vertical planning is not currently anywhere near our development list.

Or it's because people have gotten used to their suggestions being rejected in this forum anyway.

GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...





Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search