I'm certainly not one to judge, but out of curiousity, what is the purpose of buying such a complex and realistic addon, if you intend to fly it in a completely unrealistic manner? Why not just fly the default Cessna or the Trike? They don't have a GPWS to harass you when you go barnstorming.

Here are the reasons..........1. I have always wanted to fly a Jetstream 41 in a flight simulator.2. I like my aircraft models to look phenomenal.3. It goes without saying that a "complex and realistic addon" should have (in addition to a suite of accurate aircraft systems) a very good flight model. Otherwise, it wouldn't be realistic. As far as flight models are concerned, I want the best. Nothing else will do, particularly if I am going to pay for it.4. Why would I want to use a Cessna when I want to fly a small twin turboprop? If I want to fly in and out of small airfields, I use the Beechcraft Baron.It may seem strange to some of you that I don't want to fly the J41 like a real world pilot, but that's life. I just want to be able to hand fly a super accurate version of one of my favourite aircraft, and I am prepared to pay good money for that.

Well, that is why there is a GPWS Flap Override Button

If that gets rid of all those annoying messages, then I have nothing to worry about :(

If you're getting warning messages....

I am only flying the Beechcraft Baron at the moment, so I am not getting any messages of this kind. I only know of them because I had a mess around with the default CRJ-900 just after purchasing FSX.

Also using the glideslope of the runway as a backup tool for a hand flown approach - I myself would never call it "getting help from computers" - and professional pilots do it all the time, even on smaller and older aircraft without any computers.

You misunderstood me. I am not against using a glideslope indicator to guide me on final approach. It's just those audio warnings that annoy me.To be honest, I have always found it very difficult to get other flight simmers to understand what makes me "tick". It can be very frustrating at times, because it's almost like others are criticising me for not doing things "by the book". I just want to enjoy the thrill of flying simulated planes on my PC (like everyone else here). The fact that I do this in a very strange way (set flaps and trim for take off, and then leave them there for the entire flight) is irrelevant. The point is that it makes the plane very easy to fly. It also results in an exceptionally low cruise speed (which is why I made a comment elsewhere about never getting anywhere near 200 knots), but that doesn't bother me. I rarely fly above 5000 feet, and I like to enjoy looking at the scenery as I fly "low and slow" over the British countryside (Horizon's VFR Generation X Version 2 photographic scenery is a work of art). You could argue that a Cessna would be good enough for this purpose, but that would be spectacularly missing the point.Strange, but true :(

No problem with the way you enjoy flight simulation.. however, you should be flexible to allow that some things in the simulation are intended to be realistic. If the audible alarms that bother you are realistically portrayed then I don't think you have a complaint.

I don't have a complaint about audible alarms being included in a realistic product like the PMDG Jetstream 41. All I am saying is that I would like to be able to disable them, and that seems to be the case. Whether they are "realistically portrayed" or not is irrelevant.

If that gets rid of all those annoying messages, then I have nothing to worry about :(

Actually, I was mistaken. The GPWS Flaps Override disables the "FLAPS" callout....As Rob told me "you can never get the "dumbass yer gonna hit the hill" stuff to stop yelling at you..." :(

I don't have a complaint about audible alarms being included in a realistic product like the PMDG Jetstream 41. All I am saying is that I would like to be able to disable them, and that seems to be the case. Whether they are "realistically portrayed" or not is irrelevant.

But it is relevant, if the alarms do not have a off-switch in the real airplane, it probably will not in a pmdg product. However, there is always the Q key.

I only know of them because I had a mess around with the default CRJ-900 just after purchasing FSX.

IIRC this will scream at you even when you're configured for landing and dead on the glide. Totally *UN*REALISTIC.Fair enough that you like to scream around - I do too - but if you're going to fly a realistic add-on, errmmm... don't complain if it behaves realistically.GPWS has an override button in the event of a fault/failure, so you should be OK in this regard.On Topic: can we get some more screenshots please? I'm suffering withdrawl symptoms!! :( Best regards,Robin.

4. Why would I want to use a Cessna when I want to fly a small twin turboprop? If I want to fly in and out of small airfields, I use the Beechcraft Baron.

The J41 is definitely NOT a small turboprop. A turbine BE60 or BE58 would be a small twin turboprop.Scott

But it is relevant, if the alarms do not have a off-switch in the real airplane, it probably will not in a pmdg product. However, there is always the Q key.

Yes, that's fair enough. I slightly misunderstood what you meant. Nevertheless, it would be a shame if an inability to remove those warnings reduced my enjoyment of the PMDG J41.

The J41 is definitely NOT a small turboprop. A turbine BE60 or BE58 would be a small twin turboprop.

OK, then it's a medium sized twin turboprop. The point I was trying to make is that I want to fly the J41 "low and slow", not a Cessna :(

Yes, that's fair enough. I slightly misunderstood what you meant. Nevertheless, it would be a shame if an inability to remove those warnings reduced my enjoyment of the PMDG J41.OK, then it's a medium sized twin turboprop. The point I was trying to make is that I want to fly the J41 "low and slow", not a Cessna :(

If you want to fly low and slow at 40 feet, the GPWS will yell at you.If you want to fly low and slow at 3,000 feet (provided that you are not heading straight for a mountain), the GPWS will not yell at you.....Boy .. for a "Too Much Jibber Jabber" thread, there sure is a lot of jibber jabber here :(

Boy .. for a "Too Much Jibber Jabber" thread, there sure is a lot of jibber jabber here :(

Fixed!"Indy Center, Blue Ridge 6208 is at eight point three, climbing one one thousand.":The FMS NAV page:Could be a photo:The FO's panel:Enroute to Morgantown VOR:Cruise:"Blue Ridge 6208, depart DARIN heading 195, descend and maintain three thousand nine hundred. Expect the visual Runway 1 Center.":Turning base over Manassas airport:Rolling out on final:The overhead after parking:

Nick,Absolutely superb images, we should crown you the king of screenshots. :( No matter how hard you zoom in I see no blur. I also marvel at this multi-color font in the flight management unit and unique FD cues - polygonal instead of solid magenta. I agree about this "could be a photo" - even faint 'Honeywell' sign is there.

OK, who in the heck put the fingerprint smudges on the glass of some of the gauges? :( Honestly, that takes it to a whole new level, LOL.. :(

That PMDG colour scheme is very impressive, and the quality of those gauges and instruments is phenomenal.

Stop posting up pictures of the real plane, I wanna see some in-sim screenshots. ;) LOL.#3 especially throws me for a loop. I almost can't tell that's a sim panel instead of the real thing.

The question keeps coming to mind everytime i see the PMDG stuff...How in the heck do they do this?????Who would have ever thought..especially in those days of MSFS 1?? Or even FS98 for that matter.Peter Osborn