Machalot

You think this source refers to the Phoenix?

Sure!

The key point is that it doesn't attempt to scan the waypoint, it just scans at the same range as the waypoint.

I think it's more accurate to say an INS is by definition inertially-referenced, not Earth-referenced. The accels and gyros measure motion relative to an inertial reference frame, and the Earth is decidedly not an inertial reference frame by virtue of its rotation rate of 15 deg/hr. It's easy enough to convert to Earth-relative motion for navigation purposes using a few equations in the software. My guess would be "rate gyro" since the outputs of the "moment gyro" in the block diagram are angular rates. Update: On the other hand In pretty sure the Viggen has a stable platform gyro system, so ignore this. (This is my opinion as an engineer, and I'm prepared to defer to you if you know otherwise.) My understanding is that the rapid start is because no alignment is performed at all. The runway heading is just taken as the initial heading of the dead reckoning process. The relatively poor accuracy of this method is tolerable because of the use of visual/radar nav fixes and ternav fixes to keep the drift under control. Perhaps the Viggen's gyros aren't sensitive enough to perform a gyrocompass alignment, which requires that they be able to measure the Earth's rotation rate significantly above their own measurement errors over time in order to find north. In principle any INS could be initialized rapidly like the Viggen's, by just supplying the initial attitude (azimuth, elevation, roll). In fact that's how the Stored Heading Alignment mode is initialized in modern jets, although they typically follow it with a gyrocompass alignment for 90 seconds or so to make it more accurate. But you could skip the gyrocompass step if the nav drift is tolerable or you can do nav fixes.

Yes. But there's also some weird toggling behavior. I don't remember exactly, but it's something like this: If you pull the breaker and hit the emergency trim again, then replace the breaker, your trim will be disabled. Then pull the breaker and the trim will work. That might not be exactly the right sequence, but I was able to get the breaker to function backward somehow.

We discussed several issues in this thread, only one of which was a loosely related bug if I remember correctly. Can you be more specific?

I would guess the altitude grids are 10,000 ft and the Mach grids are 0.5.

Are you within valid landing parameters with that much weight on board? I.e. maybe the jet is not designed to land that heavy.

Maybe the sticker was getting worn and unreadable so the ground crew slapped another one over top of it.

This value might be a default. On one of the 4YA multiplayer servers all their road bases have the same incorrect heading, and I think it's this value.

As a workaround you could place a Bx point (Bx1-5) at bullseye. Any time you need to refer to it, set that point as your destination and look at the distance and bearing. Convert to reciprocal heading, and divide the km distance roughly in half (0.54) to get nmi.

I also think the words "and release" should be deleted. Releasing the trigger returns to the T0 state and would clear the fix, resuming automatic destination changes. Unless I have misunderstood the visual fix procedure.

Found a typo on p. 336; 80000 should be 800000. null I also have some formatting suggestions for this section. The above bullet points could probably be better presented in a table. The repitition of 0001 (800001), 0002 (800002), etc is kind of confusing. The table immediately following, which presents all the detailed settings for the RB15, lacks a table number and a caption, it is just kind of floating there across two pages. Also consider every place a CK37 memory address appears, set it in a different font, similar to how you've done with the enunciator lamps. Maybe a fixed-width font like 800000.

Just noticed something that could be improved. On page 283 in the section about radar ranging, the terms DIVEBOMB and LEVEL BOMB are used as English translation of the weapon mode names, but everywhere else in the document they are given in the original Swedish as DYK or BOMB DYK, and PLAN or BOMB PLAN, respectively. I think they should be in Swedish here too. null

I'm grateful for all the work you've put into this, we owe you a debt. It's a greatly improved document, and kudos for soliciting all this community input. But I really don't understand the version numbering. Ok, you want to keep download statistics on the January 2023 release of RC2.1. But I don't see the logic behind "RC2.1" and "RC2.1 Updated August 2023" -- especially when the footer just says "Edition RC2.1" in all versions. Why isn't the August 2023 release numbered RC2.2 or something? Sorry for harping on this, but I have been bit by duplicated/non-unique version numbering at work too many times.

I'm only taking about the version number 2.1. Typically one might increment a minor version number with each change, such as 2.1, 2.2, etc. Or 2.1.0, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, just to make it easier to identify what version you are looking at.

@TOViper Have you thought about incrementing the version number when you make updates? There are many different files out there now called 2.1(beta).

Seems like you'd have better luck getting this bug tracked if you post it on the Discord.

I think figure of yours this is one of the best interpretations, in which the orange represents asbestos fill, and extends from the outer edge radially halfway toward the inner bore surface. The other possibility is that the asbestos covers the inner surface as shown but does not fill the volume. null

I just noticed something you screenshotted in one of your other posts that I think is wrong in the manual. On page 56 there's a table with a column called "Specific fuel consumption" with units of kg/s. That is inconsistent. It's either Fuel Consumption (i.e. not "Specific") or the units need to be (kg/s)/N or (kg/s)/kN. My suggestion is that you should remove "Specific" from the title, because at a fuel consumption rate of 8.253 kg/s it consumes 495 kg/min, that provides about 9 minutes at full afterburner on internal fuel, which seems realistic. (If you do the math treating it as "specific" fuel consumption the numbers no longer make sense. I haven't written them out here but I will if anyone cares to see it.) Also I think you should put the word "Units" in the blank box of the left column. And put "N/A" or "-" in the blank box of the rightmost column.

Software bugs multiply like... bugs.

If you believe the note is necessary, I think you should reword it. It's more of a limitation than a "should". Something like "If no valid waypoint is selected, the B- scope may not display any returns."

Actually it was already discussed there last month. https://discord.com/channels/298054423656005632/473947464349646848/1118240251266207764 null

It does shine on the ground, even if the bulb is not shown to be lit. Try it at night and you'll see. In fact you can just spawn on the ground and cycle the switch between Taxi and Landning and see how the light pattern changes. But the angle of the landing light unfortunately is not extremely helpful for the landing approach. The angle may be a bug, and has been previously reported and logged.

Consider posting that in the SRS Discord as a possible bug report.