Just a brief "heads up" for anyone who might have missed it -Check out this new package:http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DLID=133540This will make the Airbus 320-200 "floatable", so that one can retrace the flight path of flight 1549 and have your own "Miracle on the Hudson." A flight is setup and it includes complete flight instructions. Cool !! :(

Hmmm!Im not to sure what to make of this package !!Is it in "bad taste" or is It a challenge to your piloting skill ? :( I really cant make my mind up even as I write this .An interesting one To watch I think (download numbers)Mark

I like it. Good idea.JimCYWG

I personally spend my simming time avoiding crashing. I don't understand the morbid fascination with crashes. To each his own, I guess.

I have a nice collection of flying boats, seaplanes and amphibians, if I want to do water landings. I don't need any jetliners with float points added.

"I personally spend my simming time avoiding crashing. I don't understand the morbid fascination with crashes. To each his own, I guess."Maybe you could see it as practising two engines out at low altitude training? Why not practise this? I use FS as a way of practising handling failures of various types. It's part of flying.

"I personally spend my simming time avoiding crashing. I don't understand the morbid fascination with crashes. To each his own, I guess."Maybe you could see it as practising two engines out at low altitude training? Why not practise this? I use FS as a way of practising handling failures of various types. It's part of flying.

Training for what? FS is totally unrealistic for anything like that, as a systems simulator we are finally getting somewhere but for realistic flight dynamics for hand flying you may as well buy Mario Kart and say your training for the next Formula 1 world Title.Rob

Hmmm!Im not to sure what to make of this package !!Is it in "bad taste" or is It a challenge to your piloting skill ? :( I really cant make my mind up even as I write this .An interesting one To watch I think (download numbers)Mark

Hello:IF there had been fatalities then the file would not have been allowed in the library.RickLibrary Deputy Library Director

To me it is just bad taste to simulate an accident,....no matter what kind.And the characteristics in FS9 or FSX, for situations like that , are not even close to the real thing. So,...what to simulate really?

"I personally spend my simming time avoiding crashing. I don't understand the morbid fascination with crashes. To each his own, I guess."Maybe you could see it as practising two engines out at low altitude training? Why not practise this? I use FS as a way of practising handling failures of various types. It's part of flying.

I have no problem with practicing engine-out procedures. I don't see the need to do it at low altitude. I attempt to "keep things real" as much as is practical given the limitations of the sim. In the RW low altitude engine-out procedures would be practiced by setting a hard floor at say 6000ft giving one plenty of time to avoid having practice turn into an actual event.And as others have said, the sim simply does not replicate RW conditions regarding systems and engine failures, in my opinion.

dont really see a problem with, No fatalities no prob. On a side note, What do people think of fspassengers then, You get a random failure and end up piling it in, is that wrong?Not arguing it just curious.