http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/27/...in5804673.shtml

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/27/...in5804673.shtml

I've often wondered why as advanced as the systems are, that they don't add some sort of easy way to govern the angle of departure. Something that would perhaps make the max allowed angle be 8 degrees until + 100' or something to that effect. I often watch my FD wondering "am I going to tail strike,,, this time?"I wish it was modeled in the PMDG. I have tried to get tail strikes and have never been able to.

I've often wondered why as advanced as the systems are, that they don't add some sort of easy way to govern the angle of departure. Something that would perhaps make the max allowed angle be 8 degrees until + 100' or something to that effect. I often watch my FD wondering "am I going to tail strike,,, this time?"I wish it was modeled in the PMDG. I have tried to get tail strikes and have never been able to.

It is modeled if you use FSpassengers, all the extras with that program are worth the price even if you dont want to fly with virtual pax. Regarding this crash, it's gotta be something more then simply over rotating. I saw some pics on SKY and they took out the ILS on the far end of the runway. It looks like a Weight & balence issue but I dont want to speculate.RegardsRob

:(

It is modeled if you use FSpassengers, all the extras with that program are worth the price even if you dont want to fly with virtual pax. Regarding this crash, it's gotta be something more then simply over rotating. I saw some pics on SKY and they took out the ILS on the far end of the runway. It looks like a Weight & balence issue but I dont want to speculate.RegardsRob

I meant modeled as a crash in the PMDG alone without FSP, or maybe it's just FSX not caring when it happens, as in like FSX Stress or something. I do use FSP and wouldn't fly without it but have also never been able to simulate this even in FSP. I am probably just getting lift too fast to see it. Perhaps I'll see it if I try to ascend well before VR. Regardless it is still strange that a govenor of some type isn't added for takeoff just to be on the safe side. After all, they can land themselves, it is just odd that they don't have this takeoff failsafe.Regarding the ILS being taken out, I would think that after they had the tail strike that it crippled them enough to bring them straight down, then again if you got a tail strike hard enough you definitely would not be maintaing your original pitch, the jar in your momentum and speed would have imediate consequences. Or maybe their angle was so extreme they stalled almost right away. I agree on the weight issue. It could have been over weight and the tail strike happened due to desperately pulling back to get wheels up once they relised they passed the point of no return, scary thought.

Some persons speculate it could have been a load shift as it appears to be similar to a Fine Air DC8 crash at Miami in 1997.But as ill continue to do, just wait for the official report.

Some persons speculate it could have been a load shift as it appears to be similar to a Fine Air DC8 crash at Miami in 1997.But as ill continue to do, just wait for the official report.

Hello,I bet a quid you won't have any official report, or it won't be the real thing. That company, Avient, is an english company with an AOC from Zimbabwe, formaly based out of Vatry (france) and now base in Belgium. That company is world wilde know to carry weapons and ammos, like many other. No doubt that the crw is well trained and so on, but if you read the article you will notice that the guy said they were not carrying any weapons or ammos, but will not say what they were carrying....No commentCyrille