I usually don't. In fact, if it's a complex aircraft like the A2A Boeing Stratocruiser, I almost never do. My thing is flying in IMC (instrument meteorological conditions), not flipping switches.

If I feel like it, yes. If I don't, no. My thing is enjoying FS in any way I feel like - not intending to be snappy Mike, but your last part about 'flipping switches' may come over as a bit unfriendly to those who do enjoy setting up complex modern airliners from scratch. And I'm quite sure that wasn't your intention.

If I feel like it, yes. If I don't, no. My thing is enjoying FS in any way I feel like - not intending to be snappy Mike, but your last part about 'flipping switches' may come over as a bit unfriendly to those who do enjoy setting up complex modern airliners from scratch. And I'm quite sure that wasn't your intention.

You're right, Gavin, it wasn't my intention to be unfriendly, nor am I trying to tell people how they should enjoy FS.I like the knowledge that the detail and faithfulness to real world procedures is there in the complex aircraft that I buy because I'm a collector if nothing else. If I didn't care about this stuff in my own way I would not buy such aircraft.But I'll often spend a lot of time developing a checklist that will get me into the air with minimum effort. In the case of the above-mentioned B-377 that checklist is 18 items in length, it's just that I begin from a base scenario that has the engines running already. I happen not to be interested in the actual engine start sequence.Perhaps I should have titled this thread "Do You Enjoy Simulated Real World Engine Start Sequences?"

I almost always start cold and dark. I'm usually only flying general aviation airplanes though, so the start-up procedures usually are quick and easy.

You're right, Gavin, it wasn't my intention to be unfriendly, nor am I trying to tell people how they should enjoy FS.I like the knowledge that the detail and faithfulness to real world procedures is there in the complex aircraft that I buy because I'm a collector if nothing else. If I didn't care about this stuff in my own way I would not buy such aircraft.But I'll often spend a lot of time developing a checklist that will get me into the air with minimum effort. In the case of the above-mentioned B-377 that checklist is 18 items in length, it's just that I begin from a base scenario that has the engines running already. I happen not to be interested in the actual engine start sequence.Perhaps I should have titled this thread "Do You Enjoy Simulated Real World Engine Start Sequences?"

I knew you wouldn't take my post the wrong way either :( I see no need to change the title - an interesting question really.

I think people sometimes make the mistake of believing that getting in a completely shut down airliner to start a flight is always more realistic, when that is probably not so. Airlines rarely take their aircraft down to such a level of unpreparedness; they want them up in the air, pulling in revenue. Chances are your 737 has been landed by another crew 20 minutes ago and most of the stuff is still running in order to have some lights in the cabin for the ground personnel to clean things up for the next load of passengers. This is especially true in these current economic climes.Nevertheless, some people just like doing all that stuff - realism is not always the motive behind it - so that's not a dig at people who might enjoy that kind of thing. If that's what blows your skirt up, then great; 'realistic' is what you make it.Generally speaking with the way most modern airliners automate the start up these days, there's less button pressing fun to be had in cranking things up anyway, so I find that I actually do most often start up from a completely dead state, but that is more about ensuring the thing does not have any weird stuff going on, than any great desire to do such a full start up (i.e sort of like when you have to load a default Cessna first in order to make sure things are going to work properly).An exception to that is Aerosoft's recently released PBY Catalina. I do particularly enjoy cranking that up and carefully nursing the engines with a proper run up and all that kind of thing, because the modeling of all that stuff which they have implemented makes it actually necessary to do so.Al

Good point Alan, I typically load "slightly warm and dim" cockpits, simulating short ground holds. Sometimes I'll go cold and dark, though; depends on what time I'm flying. :(

I don't have much time for Cold and Dark these days, except with GA aircraft. Nowadays I just have the aircraft lined up on the runway with engines running - the fun for me is the scenery in VFR flying. Haven't flown any of my PMDG (including the MD-11) and Level-D stuff in months -- I'm just happy flying the "lite" JF DC-10!

I don't have much time for Cold and Dark these days, except with GA aircraft. Nowadays I just have the aircraft lined up on the runway with engines running - the fun for me is the scenery in VFR flying. Haven't flown any of my PMDG (including the MD-11) and Level-D stuff in months -- I'm just happy flying the "lite" JF DC-10!

While I don't start from cold and dark, I usually move the aircraft to a gate and then taxi to the runway that is active based on the current real world weather. I follow the taxiways based on actual airport diagrams in conjunction with the taxiway signs.Different strokes for different folks, I'm simply curious what other people do, especially about engine start sequences.

Being flying airliners only, to start from a C&D cockpit is a 'must do' to me.More, the cockpit preparation is for me the most exciting phase of my flight (after approach and landing, of course...... )

I always start from Cold and Dark, even though I fly in single engine props most of the time. I just find it more immersive to start as I would at an actual airport, as if I had my own plane.It just doesn't seem right to me to start with the engine on. I feel as though I've been dumped in the middle of a scenario, rather than actually starting one.That's my opinion anywho.

For me, I usually start with a "warm and dim", which I call the "Receiving Aircraft" state. Basically it's set up as the previous crew would leave it during a short ground stop. I then go through the checklist as the new crew would. For early morning flights, I will often use "cold and dark" if it's practical to expect that the aircraft would've been resting overnight.Tim

For me, I usually start with a "warm and dim", which I call the "Receiving Aircraft" state. Basically it's set up as the previous crew would leave it during a short ground stop. I then go through the checklist as the new crew would. For early morning flights, I will often use "cold and dark" if it's practical to expect that the aircraft would've been resting overnight.Tim

That is what I like to do too. There is no limit to simulating! :(

I like starting my aircraft up in cold and dark because it is almost like the real thing. When you hop in your Cessna the prop is not running. You have to do a few things like inspect the aircraft, then go through checklists and other things before you get in the air. I can tell you there is nothing like hearing the battery whine, seeing the avionics power on (steam or glass) or hearing the sound of a starting engine, whether it be prop, turboprop, turbofan, rotor, etc.... and it feels a lot better turning the "key" if you can't drive in real life yet!! :( :(.

An exception to that is Aerosoft's recently released PBY Catalina. I do particularly enjoy cranking that up and carefully nursing the engines with a proper run up and all that kind of thing, because the modeling of all that stuff which they have implemented makes it actually necessary to do so.Al

I love the startup in the Aerosoft PBY as well Al! I am proud when I get those engines running smoothly!Being mostly a GA flyer I usually go cold & dark in a parking spot. Part of the fun of GA flying for me is the startup. In an airliner I often go from the active runway but I do sometimes start at the gate.