MD-11 dfdr off

[Lmaire 38]

Hi,I've been searching for a while but never found info. On the status page (misc) i have that alarm "dfdr off". Is there a switch somewhere to turn it on or it turns on by itself when airborne. (if there is a switch somewhere could you please tell me where it is). Many thanks and congratulations. I thinks that the best one made so far.Real

[tcas_climb 45]

Hi, The DFDR remains off until Engines are running

[AirbusA340300 0]

on the ground, the DFDR needs the engines on and parking brake released to operate, so its normal to see the message before engine start. i got that pretty much straight from the manual. what really helps me, is if i have a question i go into the manual and use the search function in adobe acrobatadam

[Lmaire 38]

Sorry. Am i wrong. DFDR means digital flight data recorder. So it must be "On" during the flight. So engine must be running as well. I'm a bit confused. RealOups sorry, i understand now. When i turn parking brake off DFDR goes on. I've tried to find the info in manual but no success. Many thanks for the info. RegardsReal

[AirbusA340300 0]

go to the systems manual, and in the adobe acrobat search bar, type in DFDR, and it should point you to the section that has it. it is on page 449. in the instruments and navigation alerts section, inst.40.1adam

[jennwill99 0]

What's the point of an online forum if everyone answers with "Go check your Manual"? Why can't people spend more time answering the initial question and less time on the snarky comments since obviously the point is not to have to go check the manual(s)?This, especially considering the PMDG MD-11 comes with 7 separate PDF manuals installed in five separate sub-folders that you would have to search through...Likewise, when someone asks a question here and someone answers it, it helps everyone else in the future who is searching through search engines for an answer to the same question.

"...on the ground, the DFDR needs the engines on and parking brake released to operate, so its normal to see the message before engine start. i got that pretty much straight from the manual. what really helps me, is if i have a question i go into the manual and use the search function in adobe acrobat"adam

</p></p>

[scandinavian13 5,192]

What's the point of an online forum if everyone answers with "Go check your Manual"? Why can't people spend more time answering the initial question and less time on the snarky comments since obviously the point is not to have to go check the manual(s)? This, especially considering the PMDG MD-11 comes with 7 separate PDF manuals installed in five separate sub-folders that you would have to search through...Likewise, when someone asks a question here and someone answers it, it helps everyone else in the future who is searching through search engines for an answer to the same question.

Because if we all sat here answering questions that are easily answered by the manuals (which, as mentioned are searchable PDF), the forum would be clogged with the clutter of answering the same questions over, and over again. That's also not mentioning that it's a horribly inefficient use of anything to simply reflect the same information across two sources. Nobody said anyone was above answering a question, and by pointing to the manual, we essentially answered the question. If you read the post question again, you'd see the comment was mostly harmless and I don't see any barbs in it. I can see how you could, but I don't see any intent in this case. I tend to be the one with the RTFM commentary, and I don't see it here. The forum is here for discussion, whatever that discussion may be. If the question is easily answered by the manuals you paid for, a point to the manual isn't entirely unreasonable. In my opinion, everyone should read the manuals and look to the manuals for answers, with the forums as an area to come to the understanding of the material. There's nothing wrong with discussing the manual's content here, but relying on everyone here to do the searching for you is selfish and teaches you little to nothing. I'm not saying the OP's motive was intentionally selfish, rather, your point immediately above mine here, [unnamed - jennwill]. The point being not to search the manuals means you're okay with simply allowing others to do the manual reading and knowledge gathering for you. I don't see that as fair in the least. The following is provided in an unbiased and neutrally spoken side-point:This is a sticky in the main PMDG forum, but because it tends to be in a random subsection of the forum it goes unseen. I will summarize its intent here: You must post your full real name, or your post risks being deleted. The following link is provided to the source document: http://forum.avsim.n...ill-be-deleted/ The following is provided as an intentionally honest and in no way motivated by the above commentary:Welcome to the forums.

[member111333 8]

I am always looking for the fastest possible way to get information. More time for work and family left. Manuals are not perfect. Often I have to google what the abbreviations stand for. Costs a lot of time. Therefore asking in the forums is an effective way to get the information without gettiing too much additional, overwhelming and confusing data .

[jennwill99 0]

Nobody requires the users here to answer questions - if you do, why can't someone's question simply be answered without having to tell them to RTFM? They obviously asked b/c they either did and couldn't find an answer or didn't want to read the manual.If it's too much trouble and causes such angst, just don't respond to someone's question.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I understand what you're saying but again, you expect people are going to do the work for you, and others expect you'll do the work for yourself. Who's right? To be honest, the guy answered the question when he alluded to the manual (didn't say RTFM, btw), so there's nothing to get upset about.

[mburkhard 23]

Nobody requires the users here to answer questions - if you do, why can't someone's question simply be answered without having to tell them to RTFM?

There is a big difference between a RTFM reply and a reply of someone stating exactly WHAT to look for and WHERE in the manuals. While I agree that the first is not polite nor helpful, I must say the latter is perfectly fine for something like a complex aircraft. Now obviously if the person looking for help reads the manual and does not understand what it says, then coming back to the forum to ask is the best way to continue the learning process. Cheers,Markus

[pcubine 143]

scandinavian13 "(which, as mentioned are searchable PDF)". That is good to know. It's been obvious all along. I just never put 2 and 2 together. For the longest time I never knew what I/P meant on the ND and I was too embaressed to ask. Well someone finally asked on this forum. The question was answsered and the manual page was indicated. I went to the page and thought how is anyone going to find that in one obscure sentence. I could look for years and never find what I/P was. Now using the PDF search it takes me right to the sentence, Same with the DFDR alert. Thank youMichael Cubine

[speedbird 0]

Good CRM in the real world is vital between crews. Having been privileged to be on the flight deck on many occasions I often hear crew ask each other questions and never heard anyone say RTM! I do advocate reading the manuals but as mentioned here sometimes you cannot find what you are looking for even with a search and piling through hundreds of pages looking for one particular thing can be very frustrating and time consuming. The great thing about asking is getting a human response and that bit of extra information by user familiarity. The best explanations I have seen on here are from the people who take the time to explain something and also point you in the direction of the correct place in the manual to look for clarification. Why wouldn't people want to do that if they have the time? Its especially useful for less experienced simmers or for those just starting out. We all had to start somewhere!

[flyerboy 114]

What's the point of an online forum if everyone answers with "Go check your Manual"? Why can't people spend more time answering the initial question and less time on the snarky comments since obviously the point is not to have to go check the manual(s)? This, especially considering the PMDG MD-11 comes with 7 separate PDF manuals installed in five separate sub-folders that you would have to search through...Likewise, when someone asks a question here and someone answers it, it helps everyone else in the future who is searching through search engines for an answer to the same question.</p></p>

LOL this guy got upset at a 2 year old thread??

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Having been privileged to be on the flight deck on many occasions I often hear crew ask each other questions and never heard anyone say RTM!

I see your point, but when you're in an aircraft, you have an excuse not to (the safety of everyone in back, as an example). Here, you're at a computer that the manuals are likely on, and you're obviously not doing something else, so there's really no excuse to not start there. Typing out a question takes more effort than does opening the manual and reading it, for the most part, anyway. That's also not mentioning the fact that in an aircraft such as the ones you're alluding to, you have a type rating, which requires a very intimate knowledge of your aircraft (Example questions for the 737), so the likelihood you'd ask a question worthy of such a response is slim. That's further not mentioning that crews generally have an understanding that you worked to get where you are (or should at least get that respect until you prove otherwise), so they won't assume you're asking because you can't be arsed to look it up yourself. Look, to those so hell-bent against the idea that someone tell another to go read the manual that has the answer, none of us are saying you should never come here in favor of the manual. We are saying go check the manual, and if you don't understand, ask us here. Yes, personal responses are likely better than the manual, but indicating you read the manual will likely get you an even better response. [psych]Example of assumed responses:SimPilot A and SimPilot B both have the same aviation knowledge, but are both frustrated on the same topic. Both understand what has been written in the manual (they've both read it, to the same degree).-SimPilot A shows up and does not indicate he has read the manual. He asks his question, but the responses only cover the very vague, basic understanding of the concept, that barely eclipses the manual's explanation, if that.-SimPilot B shows up and indicates he has read the manual. He asks his question and the responses, though fewer, come from those with more knowledge on the topic. Why? First, indicating you read the manual generally keeps those who haven't read the manual or don't understand the topic out of the discussion because they self filter, as they don't want to answer incorrectly. Second, indicating you read the manual helps those who know the answer judge how to best phrase the answer. Since they know you have a basic understanding, you don't need the whole story, and they can jump right into the content. Third, even if SimPilotA indicates in a later post that he read the manual, seldom do those browsing forums continue to investigate beyond the first post for supporting information. -SimPilotC shows up, doesn't read the manual, and doesn't say he read the manual. He gets a generic response, plus perhaps an RTFM, and goes back to simming in it's most mediocre, missing entirely the depth and immersion of what he has bought into.[/psych] It's only in your benefit to read the manual, and not sugar coating the arrow pointing at the manual stings a bit, but it still points to what you need. If you're not willing to spend the effort attempting to help yourself, I'm not going to spend the effort to sugar coat something.