PMDG 737 NGX: The View Forward

[Guest BlueRidgeDx]

I think that in your quest for "realism", you're being unrealistic. Pilots do not use performance charts for any normal line flying. And 99% of the time, neither do dispatchers. It's all done via "PFM" by the computer flight planning software, or as RSR pointed out, right there in the FMS. So if FSBuild is able to spit out realistic numbers, then you have just accurately simulated real life operations.The only "performance charts" used by the crews are the speed cards, and on very, very rare occasions, there are performance correction factors found in the QRH for an abnormal in-flight condition. Thats it.In the case of the PMDG J41, the speed cards have been provided, and there are no failures to affect performance. So you're covered.Based on an average workload of 40 flights a day, I've probably dispatched approximately 45,000 revenue flights. I can count on two fingers how many times I've had to pull out the AFM or Cruise Control Manual to actually work a performance problem. One was figuring out the second-segment climb performance for J41 gear-down ferry departing a mountainous airport at night, and the other a CRJ flaps-down ferry, for which we had to get a one-time airworthiness release from the FAA to conduct. So getting into the spaghetti charts is hardly something that an FSX "pilot" needs to worry about. As long as the folks at FSBuild, FOC, or whatever can generate good data, thats all you realistically need.

[Guest realatp]

really? didint know.

[Guest BlueRidgeDx]

I'm sorry, are you being genuine, or something else?

[Guest realatp]

No really, I didn't. I use FS Build etc, but, for instance I thought if a fully loaded 733 had to land overweight for instance on a slick runway and its flap where stuck in the T/O position then I'm sure you'd pull out charts and find your landing distance and then corrections for the failure. May seem like an unrealistic event but hey so is landing in the Hudson River.Don't Airline pilots cross check there power setting's with the OAT and the fuel flow at the beginning of the cruise portion of the flight? This would ensure proper fuel flow and also reassuring that fuel will not bite into the Reserve? I don't know I'm not a dispatcher, I do have a PPL though and I know its alot differnt in a Cessna but hey its a nice thing to have.My point being. The 73 is going to be a study sim right? We are going to want things to fail on it and make diversions and have abnormal things occur. We don't have a virtual dispatch that would help us on during an event like that, so wouldn't it make sense to have this information availble to us? I thought about buying Innsburck from Aerosoft when the 73 comes out, but I don't know if she'll be able to stop on the rwy at the higher weights and if the rwy has ice on it. That's all I'm trying to say. Its a study sim and I'd like to know as much as I can about the product I'm flying.O ya I wondering, how do people make FS Build Profiles up if they dont haver performance charts?

[brucek 38]

........Don't Airline pilots cross check there power setting's with the OAT and the fuel flow at the beginning of the cruise portion of the flight? This would ensure proper fuel flow and also reassuring that fuel will not bite into the Reserve? I don't know I'm not a dispatcher, I do have a PPL though and I know its alot differnt in a Cessna but hey its a nice thing to have..........

I'm only a mere C172 IFR rated pilot (so your handle wouldn't apply to me :) )- but I think what is being said is that real pilots need to know the existance of these charts and tables, where to find them in the POH, and how to use them if ever they are needed- but which it sounds like is very rare. And if licensing is an issue then we will have to assume that we know where they are in the POH but that the flight planning s/w is taking care of that.I know that when I was doing my PP check-ride I had to know those (much simpler for a C172 ! ) charts almost by memory, but seldom used them later unless flying a cross-country and needed a more specific fuel burn figure than a simple gph number would give me, or if intending to land at an airport with a doubtful or unusual runway condition.Thanks, Bruce (Knight)

[chapstick 2,755]

Conclusion: while all of those charts would be great to have, and PMDG will put them in if it's possible, if it's illegal they won't do it.

[Guest BlueRidgeDx]

Jordan,I understand and appreciate your desire to have the charts; I'd like them too. Unfortunately, the situation is as RSR described. It's not up to PMDG.The situation you described - a 737 making an overweight landing with an abnormal flap setting - it's not unheard of. If you really want to drill down into the procedure, you'd most likely burn fuel off and remove the overweight portion of the equation. That being done, the crew would use the QRH and apply a correction factor to their landing distance. They'd probably also call their dispatcher and ask him to run the numbers too.But just to be clear, this process doesn't involve the kind of charts you might be familiar with in the POH of a Cessna. Those type of charts exist, but they're really not ever used, and in any event, they're not usually available to the crew on the airplane. Instead, there's a simple correction factor that would be applied to the planned landing distance. That distance is usually automatically calculated by the dispatcher (really, just by the computer). So if the computer says that at 135,000lb, on runway 24R, wet runway, flaps 40, the computed landing length required is 5,000ft, then the QRH might tell you to increase that distance by a factor of 1.67 if the flaps are stuck at 15. It's that simple. No tracing lines through crazy "spaghetti" charts, or anything like that.About your other question, pilots may take it upon themselves to familiarize themselves with things like average fuel flows, and power settings at various altitudes and temperatures, and stuff like that. Certainly, that's good airmanship. But you won't typically find that in any airline's operating procedures. Additionally, that kind of thing is usually done through the FMS anyway...again, no charts. It would take a GROSS error to accidentally burn into your reserve fuel, and all of the burn numbers and calculations are already included on the dispatch release anyway. The only time things would change is if you need to divert, or you want to know how much fuel you can burn while holding and still make it to your alternate. And again, thats what the dispatcher is there to do. There's no reason to have both pilots "heads down" calculating bingo fuel at 500kt, when the dispatcher is parked at 0ft and 0kt.Anyway, I agree that it would be awesome to have the real data. Just don't get caught up into thinking that you need it to fly realistically.

[downscc 1,327]

(much simpler for a C172 ! )

Can't you just use 10gph? They used to run around nine point something. The C414 is a pretty constant 38gph, and the JS41 has it's typicals as well. You can almost fuel plan these aircraft off the top of your head.

[Guest realatp]

Jordan,I understand and appreciate your desire to have the charts; I'd like them too. Unfortunately, the situation is as RSR described. It's not up to PMDG.The situation you described - a 737 making an overweight landing with an abnormal flap setting - it's not unheard of. If you really want to drill down into the procedure, you'd most likely burn fuel off and remove the overweight portion of the equation. That being done, the crew would use the QRH and apply a correction factor to their landing distance. They'd probably also call their dispatcher and ask him to run the numbers too.But just to be clear, this process doesn't involve the kind of charts you might be familiar with in the POH of a Cessna. Those type of charts exist, but they're really not ever used, and in any event, they're not usually available to the crew on the airplane. Instead, there's a simple correction factor that would be applied to the planned landing distance. That distance is usually automatically calculated by the dispatcher (really, just by the computer). So if the computer says that at 135,000lb, on runway 24R, wet runway, flaps 40, the computed landing length required is 5,000ft, then the QRH might tell you to increase that distance by a factor of 1.67 if the flaps are stuck at 15. It's that simple. No tracing lines through crazy "spaghetti" charts, or anything like that.About your other question, pilots may take it upon themselves to familiarize themselves with things like average fuel flows, and power settings at various altitudes and temperatures, and stuff like that. Certainly, that's good airmanship. But you won't typically find that in any airline's operating procedures. Additionally, that kind of thing is usually done through the FMS anyway...again, no charts. It would take a GROSS error to accidentally burn into your reserve fuel, and all of the burn numbers and calculations are already included on the dispatch release anyway. The only time things would change is if you need to divert, or you want to know how much fuel you can burn while holding and still make it to your alternate. And again, thats what the dispatcher is there to do. There's no reason to have both pilots "heads down" calculating bingo fuel at 500kt, when the dispatcher is parked at 0ft and 0kt.Anyway, I agree that it would be awesome to have the real data. Just don't get caught up into thinking that you need it to fly realistically.

I see I see. Nah I wasn't being a smartass I just wondered why I never seen them in these Heavy's. I appreciate the well explained post. I understand that it could be a legal challenge for PMDG to release certain kinds of materials, which is cool too, what can you do. Anyways you seem to be well versed in the releastic operation of Heavies. Where you a Pilot or Dispatched or something? Thanks Buddy, night.

[Guest realatp]

******* I guess Boeing does take this seriously. Have a look guys. http://www.smartcockpit.com/pdf/plane/boei...nstructor/0025/Ryan we getting Vertical Profile on the ND?

[CapP 0]

And a camera to spy on the stewardesses?

[signmanbob 592]

Dieter-The information required to fly the airplane is contained in the FMS... This is what we use on the line... I imagine it will suffice for you in the simulator too.I hope you will not be disappointed if I decline to get PMDG sued by Boeing in order to meet your demands. :( As I said (you appear to have missed?): If they allow it- you'll get it. If not, then you won't.

This may have been asked, but will you be making the printed/bound manuals (with the flightdeck poster) for the 737NGX like you did for the MD11, and releasing them ahead of the sim?

[Guest realatp]

SOOOOOOO many questions and so much time.

[crosswind 825]

A couple of military sims like the VRS F/A-18 have this too, but I don't think anyone's done it in an airliner yet. It's insanely cool looking.

This is definitely a great enhancement especially for the airliners, however the Majestic Software Dash 8 Q300 has this implemented and I agree it is cool to look at but more so very effective for the 0/0 vis approach in heavy fog or low ceilings. Seeing it in implemented in the PMDG line will be awesome.

[Lonepilot 9]

Holly f***...Potatoes!!! :( :(