If you turn the Flight Path Vector on (on the PFD) you get exactly the same amount of information.CaptEm1 - where did that photo come form. Didn't know the NG had a VSD.Cheers,Amman.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/feature/737tech.htmlPMDG, are you implementing a VSD into the NGX? That would be pretty neat.

HUD will take getting used to. I would probably find myself turning it away and using the PFD unless either SOP's demand that I use it or if I'm used to it from military experience. HUD has too much information clutter for my taste.

That's interesting but for me it's exactly the contrary : In a simulator (and that includes MSFS), a HUD is ideal because it solves the problem with the limited field of view that you get with the monitor.Well, obviously, there are still plenty of parameters to monitor (engines etc...) but for us simmers, just like in the real world, the HUD should really help. Best regards,Bruno

It looks like the F/O doesn't have a HUD, didn't know that.I'll be going to bed smarter tonight.

I could just see a jealous FO pestering the Captain about switching seats for the landing."but it's my turn to use the HUD!!!" :(

I don't know. Every time I tried to use the hud, the info just blended in with the ground, and I found myself using the PFD anyhow. Since I don't use the VC, its no problem for my eyes to dart to and from the PFD to check my airspeed. All I need is the airspeed, and the ILS ques and I'm good to go. FO gives altitude callouts on final. As for takeoff, after I rotate my eyes are glued to the PFD.

the FO having a hud is just an option that I guess some airliners do not get to save on money

That's interesting but for me it's exactly the contrary : In a simulator (and that includes MSFS), a HUD is ideal because it solves the problem with the limited field of view that you get with the monitor.

I full concur with the above.Not only that but HUD is really meant for serious IFR flying so in effect you stare not at HUD's symbology overlaid on top of the ground but overlaid on top of milky nothingness ... As to the amount of information - it is the absolute minimum if you happen to be shooting ILS to CAT II.

I feel that my view is perfectly fine in FS :( Not saying a HUD is bad, its just too distracting and in my way for my taste. For CAT II/III I do autolands and then my eye is glued to the PFD.

I feel that my view is perfectly fine in FS :(

You already said it number of times and we are all extremely happy ... :( .. but professional pilots do have to 'unglue' their eyes at some point while flying ILS (manually or auto) and HUD is a big help in transitioning from solid IFR to visuals in front of aircraft. HUD is all about reducing the 'cost' of this transition and givingpilots more confidence. No wonder that HUD equipped aircraft are certified to do more ...

I understand, but I'm mainly talking about HUD's in FS. In the RW I would probably use them depending on the SOP's.

After those pictures above, i fell frustrated when i have to seat in old PMDG. :( It's not even close to the pictures above. :( RegardsDalibor

I'm not familiar yet with the 737 type HUD, what it can do and what not.My experience is with HUDs on aircraft that do not have autoland capability and therefore the HUD is used to land in low visibility manually. Got to try this on an Embraer 145 myself and was fascinated by the precision that is achieved by following the HUD guidance on a manual CATIII approach. I felt like a Space Shuttle pilot when that little flare symbol started appearing from the bottom to guide you through flare... :( Can't wait to use the HUD on a 737!Markus

American Airlines 738 that crashed in Jamaica appears to have the HUD deployed. From what I've read, only the left seat has a HUD.

There used to be a HUD addon for the PMDG 737 on Avsim.Marty Becker

I was thinking, with HUDs being available in airliners now (the NG at least), why can't the FPV be used to maintain the correct speed on approach just like military HUDs do with a FPV and a E-Bracket? If you can land F/A-18s and F-16s using the FPV and E-Bracket alone (whatever the IAS maybe), can't the same principle be applied to heavier craft like airliners?Keep the airport on the -3 degree pitch ladder + maintain pitch to put the FPV on the threshold + slow or speed up to keep the E-Bracket centred = a perfect on-speed landing :(Aren't fighter jets and airliners basically the same, that airliners could follow the same principle as the fast movers?Subin

There used to be a HUD addon for the PMDG 737 on Avsim.Marty Becker

Yes, I have it in my PMDG 737 (anything is better than nothing...) but (there is always a but):- The selected speed and the selected altitude indications are not tied to the MCP.- It has a "ground mode" that hides the pitch scale ladder until you are airborne, so it is useless in takeoffs if you must have a target pitch attitude (a very important thing in the 800 and 900 to avoid tailstrikes).

If you can land F/A-18s and F-16s using the FPV and E-Bracket alone (whatever the IAS maybe), can't the same principle be applied to heavier craft like airliners?

Probably can but I fail to see why this 737NG setup is somehow "inferior". Clearly they do have FPV and while they don't have an AOA gauge they have perfect controlover speed which is an indirect way of controlling AOA. In civilian aviation military style AOA gauge somehow never rose to prominence. Perhaps (my speculation)civilian pilots must pay much closer attention to aircraft speed (Boeing, airlines SOPs strictly require it) than their military colleagues. "Whatever the IAS" has no place in civilian aviation.