JeeHell FMGS forums

Hi all, I´m facing the issue, that I´m not able to set the correct pitch trim anymore
(Version B61.3.9) . I´m getting the warning "F/TCL PITCH/TRIM/MCDU/CG DISAGREE" which
then lead to situation that the ECAM Memo remains blue after checking the ECAM by pressing
"T.O.CONFIG" Button on the ECAM. This happens, even if the pitch trim is set correct and then
checked on the Flight Controls page. For example, performance in the MCDU is set to respective
speeds, i.e, 148, 148, 151 which leads to a Flaps/Trim setting of "2/2.3DN". When these values are set
in the MCDU and then afterwards the the pitch is correctly set and also checked on the Flight Controls Page
in the SD (in this case 2.3DN), still the ECAM Memo remains blue and is showing the disagree message.

I´ve tested with all possible values from DN to UP and up- an downwards in steps of 0.1 degrees back
and forth for the pitch, but the Memo still remains Blue regardsless what pitch trim I am setting.
Did not happen in B60.0.6, which I was using before and where I was able to set the correct trim.

For test flights, I did yesterday I´ve ignored the memo by pushing "EMER CANC" but

FS is Prepar3D 5.4, Jeehell B61.3.9., P3D on a dedicated machine, FMGS server/Hardware connect/AFBW
on a second one, PFD and ND on a third computer, SD, ISIS and DDRMI on a forth.

I´m, using Skalarki Hardware(FCU, ABRK, Gear Lever, ISIS, Cloock, TGauge toghter with Thrustmaster Airbus
Joystick and TQ. The Pitch is set in the Joystick using the Slider Axis.

Best regards, Stefan

personally after being confronted with this same problem, I no longer enter the trim value but only the flaps in the PERF page and I no longer encounter any TO CONFIG problems.
I am convinced that it is a difference between the input (MCDU) and the plane trim setting (number of digits after the decimal point). if you don't put anything he doesn't do the test, at least he doesn't disagree.
regards
gilles

working all fine in version 60.0....

How do you get 2.3DN trim position? that would be really, really AFT CG for an A320? (around 39%?)

Also, please note the TO CONF button needs the pushed AND the released events, not sure how it is coded with skalarki.

Hello All, Jean Luc,

first of all, i have to blame myself for not being precise enough. I´m doing the fueling and the perfomance calculation with TopCat
(for more then a decade now, I started with A320FMGS_B31.3) and all the time this approch seemed to be ok. But now, I took a deeper
look and the following is happening: TopCat is refueling the aircraft correctly and afterwards you have the correct FOB. But what is going wrong
now, that the values for ZFW/ZFWCG, you have now in the MCDU are incorrect, in my case on a short testflight nearly 10tons were missing and then it is pretty much clear, the CG is also wrong. The Topcat loadsheet itself seems still to be okay (for ZFW/MACZFW), but you have to correct the values given in the MCDU after fueling manually(!), so they are matching the loadsheet.

So then, I took the numbers of the performance calculation/V-speeds of TopCat and entered them and well - everything is green now, the T.O. config test also becomes green.

The following thread led me to the solution, where the differences were also discussed:
viewtopic.php?t=281

I didn´t expect this to happen, so I didn´t take a deeper notice at all, I just updated the fuel with the data uplink in the MCDU without further notice.
Sorry, it was my fault.

Today I did a short test with 61.3.9. I also use Topcat, but without fuel.
I set the values for ZFW/ZFWCG, V-Speeds, Temp and Trim myself using the values determined by Topcat. I had absolutely no problem with that. Works as always.

However, I also have the deviation between Topcat and the values determined by the MCDU.

I have already stated that topcat, without modification (and I do not know how, nor if it's even possible) does not/can not load properly.
The flight model I made is particular, I have a CG computation which is very accurate and true to the real aircraft. I take into CG computations the actual fuel distribution in the tanks, so the CG is moving FWD/AFT depending on how fuel is burnt, something P3D / MSFS cannot do.
To do that, I reduced the P3D empty weight and added two loading stations ( ADJ FWD & AFT) which I use to adjust the CG AFT and front. So the P3D aircraft.ini empty weight is not what the FMGS uses, it uses empty weight + adj fwd + adj aft. And the ADJ stations are there for CG.

...well, JL, the issue is, that there is no alternative for TopCat, with the capabilities TC provides. I use the TC config file which was made a long time ago by ToTom. In the load & balance section in my topcat i can see your adjustment stations which i never touch, though. As far i also have no issues with CG at Takeoff, nor i have issues by setting up the init and fuel data in FMGS.