We are not in beta yet

boo! could be months before we see this :(unless of course they are just about to enter beta, in which case it might not be as long! :(

why not?it takes some miliseconds too lok from PFD to outside sight with your EYES!you dont must move head up and down

I take it you have never done a hand-flown CATIII approach in a real cockpit then? It just doesn't work, you can't hand-fly CATIII until touchdown and rollout without a HUD. You can try, but it's absolutely not safe.The HUD displays much more than just what's shown on the PFD. In addition you get runway and touchdown markings, vector information, flare indications, and a lot more. Things you need to conduct a LVP approach including flare, touchdown and rollout in almost zero visibility. No way you can do that without a HUD if hand-flown.Markus

I agree. While I haven't flown a CATIII approach, I have flown a CATII with the HUD and it's priceless. Without it, the approach is just too busy to stay focused realistically. If you think you can fly a full CATIII approach without the HUD, while handflying, try doing it real world first before you say anything.

Some HUD systems also have a FLIR in the front of the plane and the picture in the HUD so the pilot se a black/white video of the ground. Personally i love the challenge (in flight sim) that when the plane goes in to the clouds in the descend and i know that the next interesting view i will see is the runway close up :( :( (or a crasch :( )

I recall reading in Aviation Week & Space Technology many years ago about the first commercial carrier certification for HUD installation in Alaska Airlines 737. The operational necessity was to allow low vis departures out of SEATAC. I thought it interesting that departures not approaches were the driver at the time.

boo! could be months before we see this :(unless of course they are just about to enter beta, in which case it might not be as long! :(

Yeah. Not the best news considering that "Mid 2010" could very well have meant a release just a few weeks away, which a lot of people have been near dying for. Still, it's good to have some idea of the progress!

I recall reading in Aviation Week & Space Technology many years ago about the first commercial carrier certification for HUD installation in Alaska Airlines 737. The operational necessity was to allow low vis departures out of SEATAC. I thought it interesting that departures not approaches were the driver at the time.

Me too...Thanks for the bit of info.

I take it you have never done a hand-flown CATIII approach in a real cockpit then? It just doesn't work, you can't hand-fly CATIII until touchdown and rollout without a HUD. You can try, but it's absolutely not safe.The HUD displays much more than just what's shown on the PFD. In addition you get runway and touchdown markings, vector information, flare indications, and a lot more. Things you need to conduct a LVP approach including flare, touchdown and rollout in almost zero visibility. No way you can do that without a HUD if hand-flown.Markus

OK i cant fly in real world or in sim its costs too much.Personally i still dont like HUD Because it not whows how much degrees or it shows i cant see.i mean in PFD it shows the wing and a point in the middle of the wings you understand what i mean?when i have the NGX i gonna try the CAT III Landing one time with HUD and one time without HUD.And then i gonna look whic is easier.

Imagine the monitor is your panel and you have to look up over the monitor to see out the windshield. A low vis approach demands a lot of focus and an efficient instrument scan, much easier with PFD than steam gauges I still fly with but still having to look away from the instruments takes more than 3 seconds. Normal procedure is for PNF to call runway in sight and PF not look up until after that, some operators will have PNF become PF when transition to visual is made. This is really a big deal in the real world, hard to relate to a computer screen.

Imagine the monitor is your panel and you have to look up over the monitor to see out the windshield. A low vis approach demands a lot of focus and an efficient instrument scan, much easier with PFD than steam gauges I still fly with but still having to look away from the instruments takes more than 3 seconds. Normal procedure is for PNF to call runway in sight and PF not look up until after that, some operators will have PNF become PF when transition to visual is made. This is really a big deal in the real world, hard to relate to a computer screen.

Yes, it's all related to depth of field. This was the hardest thing of all in my initial IR training, going from a focal point a foot or so away to infinity outside the front window. And that was a standard ILS at 200 and 1/2, and in a slow moving C172, nothing like this. The sim does not portray these depth of field issues, as when "looking outside the window" you are still at the same focal point of the monitor, it's all a flat 2D world.Interesting discussion, looking so forward to this bird :)Bruce.

3Seconds?From Monitor to Glareshield i only need 1Second.Lol i wish i could go in to a full flightsim to understand waht you guys mean but money..........extrem expensive

I don't understand the bickering about the HUD. If you don't want to use it, can't you just leave it folded up and out of the way?Jeff Calder

Yes, it's all related to depth of field.

Agreed, the transition to visual, at anything under about 500 feet takes concentration. I was flying one nasty summer day here in DC where I went from the clouds at about 1000 to the smog, and didn't get full viz till about 1/2 mile out. Really hard to keep the focus on the instruments while staring out the window.

Possibly some of the resistance to HUDs in FS comes from the fact that - to date - most attempts at representing a HUD have been non-collimated and non-conformal. Anyone who has flown the VRS F/A-18 will know that a properly done HUD is a very useful tool to have at your disposal.

....extrem expensive

Hoo yeah. You think PMDG gets pricey.... :( - Charles