Dee-Jay

... Do not know if it has been already said (?) ... but on M2000, paddle works the opposite of many A/C. The paddle I am talking about is the black part on this picture: While on F-16 (for instance) pressing the paddle is to put the A/P into STBY, on M2000, when paddle is pressed, A/P is set to "standby" and you got the full manual control (including trims). When paddle is depressed, (depending on, if, no advanced AP mode are selected) A/P is going into a sort of CWS (Control Wheel Steering like in B737, or equivalent to the Attitude mode on F-16) and the aircraft is automatically trimmed for this attitude (IIRC, if pitch and roll is less than 10° ... but I am not 100% sure about the values)

Thank you for input. So, as said, impossible to use it as precision approach symbology. Not a bug and can be the case IRL depending on QNH setting and data fed in the system for the runway 3D coordinates. Please refer to posts above. Af far as I can see, current implementation is correct. The synthetic runway remains in the HUD until WOW is compressed (touchdown). What I can't say, is if the runway overlay fit to the real runway dimensions, or if it is a generic size (probably based on a standard NATO runway of 2400*45m). I would rather bet on the later. (?) Will try to get the answer.

I do not exactly know. To be certified, HUD must comply with a lot of characteristics. (probably "fail safe" (loss of info/sources must not confuse the pilot and must be clearly identified), readability, reliability, no risks of spatial disorientation, presences of marker, ILS LOC & GLIDE deviations, head up vs head down compatibility, display refresh rate, symbology standardization ... etc ...) Synthetic runway is also an issue. I do not know how the synthetic runway is generated (?) If it is with the ILS LOC/GLIDE radio beam (external source), maybe it can be trusted (?). If it is an inertial feature (like the FPM) display thanks to aircraft' inertial/GPS positioning + aircraft altitude/elevation source, it is certainly not enough reliable because it depends on a digital terrain elevation info and/or QHN setting which can be potentially erroneous. On my a/c it is clearly not possible to land safely using only the synthetic runway as reference since positioning precision is about 10 to 20m (geo coordinates system used is xxx°xx,xx'), depends on given QNH and QNH set in the system, and also depend on runway's threshold coordinates, elevation, axis, mag variation and runway's length programmed by the crew (or present in navdata) . We must have the runway in visual. M2000's HUD is certainly considered as: "Supplemental use" , not as "Primary instrument" ... at least, not for instrument approaches, nor for hazardous situation recovery (spatial disorientation issues).

I just did before posting my last by asking a former M2KD pilot who is deployed with me. I already knew it but asked him to confirm. And for sure, synthetic runway on HUD is not a "low visibility landing" system. Just a nice/useful overlay.

Hi Only for DCS! Sorry if I am misunderstood you, but if you are talking about the synthetic runway in HUD, this is not a "low visibility landing" feature and changes nothings to the pilot's minimums. In other words, with, without, it change nothing. Note also that on M2000, HUD is not primary flight display, ILS and other instruments procedures has to be performed heads down. Kind regards.

@ Jef32 Hi Jef32! This is from the AFI11-2F-16V3 (unclassified) : 3.7. Formation Takeoff: 3.7.1. Formation takeoffs are restricted to elements of two aircraft. 3.7.2. Elements will be led by a qualified flight lead unless an IP or flight lead qualified squadron supervisor is in the element. 3.7.3. To takeoff in formation, aircraft must be within 2,500 pounds gross weight of each other and symmetrically loaded. Consider symmetrical loading as those store loadings which do not require an abnormal trim or control application to counter a heavy wing or yaw during takeoff and acceleration to climb airspeed. 3.7.4. Do not make formation takeoffs when: 3.7.4.1. Runway width is less than 125 feet. 3.7.4.2. Standing water, ice, slush or snow is on the runway. 3.7.4.3. The crosswind or gust component exceeds 15 knots. 3.7.4.4. Loaded with live munitions (excluding air-to-air missiles, 20mm ammunition, 2.75 rockets, AGM-88, AGM-65, and night illumination flares). 3.7.4.5. Ferrying aircraft from contractor/AFMC facilities. 3.7.5. (USAFE) Weather must be 300 feet/1.6 km or the most restrictive pilot weather category in the flight, whichever is higher. And this is from French CPSV (Consignes Permanentes de Sécurité des Vols): 5. DECOLLAGE EN PATROUILLE SERREE "Les décollages en patrouille serrée peuvent être entrepris suivant le chargement des appareils et les conditions ambiantes. Dans tous les cas ils sont interdits : - de nuit ; - avec une composante de vent de travers supérieure à 10 kt ; - sur piste inondée ou verglacée ; - en configuration dissymétrique ; - lorsque les avions sont déclarés "lourds" ; - avec des charges externes actives (bombes, roquettes)." ... Same kind of restrictions applies for Close Formation Landing. 5.2. ATTERRISSAGE DES DEUX AVIONS 5.2.1. CONDITIONS D'EXÉCUTION "Les conditions normales autorisées en exercice pour effectuer un atterrissage simultané à l'issue d'une présentation en patrouille serrée sont : − avions de même type ; − atterrissage de jour ; − aérodrome parfaitement connu des pilotes ; − piste sèche de type OTAN9(longueur : 2 400 m - largeur : 45 m) ; − terrain JAUNE ; − vent de travers ≤ 10 kt. Close Formation Takeoff or Landing are delicate (relatively "dangerous") maneuvers and tiering for crews. There is no real operational benefits. Mostly performed for teaching/training purposes and flight demonstrations.

... some ppl are also here "to help you" :smilewink: Indeed, on moderns jets like M2000, F-16, F-15, Rafale ... etc ... we do not fly a speed during the approach, but an AoA. What is important is to get the right AoA during approach and landing. Airspeed depends on weight, not the case of the AoA. Example: It was easier to fly the airspeed because indication is more stable than the AoA indicator, so the aim was to take AoA 10°, note the corresponding airspeed, then fly this airspeed. But most important is to have the right AoA ... no more, no less. :thumbup: So as you said, and what is important to remember : The airspeed during approach and landing depends on aircraft's weight. What is mandatory is not the speed, but the AoA. This video is a good illustration of this point: ${1} :smartass:

Hi! MIII has nothing to do with a M2000. :smilewink: M2000 is an FBW a/c and has LEF, no commonalities with MIII even if both are Deltas. On M2K, AOA during approach and landing is 14° (12.5° in case of any sort of FLCS, engine or anemo failures) IMHO, you should listen what Corsair has to say, I can tell you that he is obviously more advised about the M2000 than this KFIR pilot. ;) Kind regards.