Failure system

[Guest sleepy1981]

I just started to look at the abnormal procedures, and therfore set myself up with some failures today. Then I noticed at the bottom of the "general" page it said "birdstrike"! Cool! Gotta try that I thought. Well nothing happened... Can someone explain what this birdstrike failure is supposed to do with the plane? (i thought enging failure, windshield crack=> depressurization, or something, but nothing happened.)Also, would it be possible to make the failures "more" random. As it it now you click the random box, and for instance 45 sec pops up, or 21 min or something. When I know when and what things ar gonna happen, it isen't very random if you ask me! I think it should be a better system where we can input a reliability factor (for example fails/hour) in every system to make it fail once in a while...PMDG, any comments?RegardsTom Erik Stave

[Guest sleepy1981]

Bump

[Guest nandrzej]

I second this.This would I believe be a great feature to have and I suggest it as an idea for future development.I propose a failure system based on the frequency of real world failures, though with a slider from realism to many many times more likely than reality.For instance most flight sim flyers do not fly the hours a commercial pilot would and may want failures to occur more readily. Lets say I choose a failure rate 10 or 100 times that of reality so I have a chance of a failure in the next ten flights or so (I have no ideas of real failure rates, these are wild guesses).I understand incidence of failure statitics may be hard to find as manufacturers and airlines could be cagey about releasing this information. You may be able to ask pilots and build up a rough idea that develops over time.So to the PMDG dev team what say you?cheers, Nick

[crvm 0]

Well just speaking as a customer (not beta tester) I simply do not care for all these other failures, all I want are engine fails and insted of spending time on the other types let's model WIND SHEAR (might be as possible as cracked windscreens!! Well at least these two things I hear pilots train for alot...[h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | WD SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 |

[teropa 4]

From a training point of view, all the other system failures are more common in the real a/c than engine failures.Tero

[crvm 0]

Sorry hate to disagree with that Tero! If engine failure is not the number one then I do not know what is! Sure it is on the 767-757s ;-)[h4]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smithhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/betaimg.jpgAMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | WD SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 |

[marcom 139]

Well Tero is right - check his post again - he was referring to real a/c! Engine failures happen very very rarely. Most crews never ever had a real engine failure. Now then, other failures such as window heaters or generators etc will fail more likely. So knowing the procedure and being able to reproduce these failures is just as important. I won't say its more important, as an engine failure is more critical (especially during takeoff) than almost any other failure.But from a real world point of view, yes, other failures are more frequent!PS never knew you were in the flight training department?Regards,Mark

[Guest sleepy1981]

Windshear would be great! But from what I've read the limitation is FS9... I'm on thin ice here (considering my programing skills! :) ), but adding the "reliability factor" cant be THAT hard to do? Even if the real world reliability figures arent attainable, they could make the user input the factor they want for themself.I have no idea what failure occures in the 737NG most often in the real world, but from my experience with other planes (F-16, Saab Safari, P-3 Orion) I would think it's very unlikely that the eng. fail is the most common failure! Might be one of the more serious, but I don't think it's the most common...

[teropa 4]

Hi,Exactly, Mark.Engine failures are critical, and they should be trained to the point that V1 cuts (for example) are not an issue at all.However, when it comes to real a/c operations and failures, engine failure is a very very rare occurrence. Abnormal situations in flight controls (flaps), generators, air conditioning etc. are much more common, and their resolution should be, in fact, the basic knowledge of each "serious" arm-chair pilot as well.Tero

[Guest nandrzej]

I found some infocheckhttp://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagaz...o_07/etops.htmland look for fig.1 and fig.2, they link to some info about IFSD or in flight shut down.cheers, Nick