Ok... tried it again... from WMSA to WMKK... this is a very short flight... and I did nothing different compared to the flights once around the airport (except, that the flight plan contains now a "real" flight from A to B and not an "invalid" flight plan)... and, I got the green bar on final. So I don't think, that my procedures are so wrong. But... if you fly traffic patterns... how do you do this? Do you enter SID and STARS ? ... this might be the difference...And... about the FMS logic and so on... I don't expect, that what we got from PMDG is the real MD-11 software. So, in this case, the behaviour of this software is just simulated by an other software... if I'm right, it should definitively be possible to find out, what's going wrong here... but, I think that's like always with software... the release and the selling is the goal... not a software without bugs :)

One major difficulty in attempting to resolve this type of issue is the importance of the procedures involved. The exact order, and even the timing, of the actions taken will cause predictable and repeatable (but not always obvious) results, so when Rudolf says "I did nothing different ... except..." that "except" in this case was pretty major and has significant consequences. For example, with a valid flight plan, you have a destination with an known altitude so the automatics can determine TOD which changes flight mode, and so on. If you were able to follow the tutorial and get the expected results and then say "instead of X I did Y got the result Z" then others can reproduce exactly what you did and help understand the behviour. There is additional documentation about the MD-11 available on SmartCockpit.com which may be helpful, for example, their Automatic Flight document mention retard as a sub-stage of FLARE mode, which you clearly are not in.Andreas, I am courious to know which systems you consider "half-done", as the only incomplete systems I have found so far have been very minor and esoteric, i.e. ILS circle to land handling.

Andreas, I am courious to know which systems you consider "half-done", as the only incomplete systems I have found so far have been very minor and esoteric, i.e. ILS circle to land handling.

I meant "half done" like for a steak: Higher degree of automatism than e.g. a 737, but lower than e.g. an A320. I didn't mean the level of implemented systems in the PMDG MD-11. Among 2 or 3 others, it's my favorite plane and I admire PMDG's work.Re. the original issue: Maybe the easiest setup would be to start FSX with the MD-11 on any airport, then use the map view to place the plane somwhere mid-air and then do a landing with A/T on. This way, no FMS initialization would have been done, the plane would be rather "raw" and if retard really works without FMS, A/T should retard below 50ft. If not, A/T is dependent on other pieces of the FMS. If that reflects reality or not is another question.Andreas

I meant "half done" like for a steak: Higher degree of automatism than e.g. a 737, but lower than e.g. an A320. I didn't mean the level of implemented systems in the PMDG MD-11. Among 2 or 3 others, it's my favorite plane and I admire PMDG's work.

Strictly speaking about automatism, the MD-11 is on the same level as the A320. The Airbus is more automated in some ways (like engine start) but less in others (like the fuel system). Despite its age the MD-11 is still among the others regarding automatism, comparable to an early generation A340 or B777. Nothing "half-done" I can see. The only thing that IS half-done on the MD-11 is its wing... :( Cheers,Markus

One major difficulty in attempting to resolve this type of issue is the importance of the procedures involved. The exact order, and even the timing, of the actions taken will cause predictable and repeatable (but not always obvious) results, so when Rudolf says "I did nothing different ... except..." that "except" in this case was pretty major and has significant consequences.

You know what I'm really interested in? ... I would like to know, what those without problems enter into their flight plans, if they want to takeoff on LSZH Rwy 16, turn left around the airport, perform a touch and go on Rwy 16, fly an other circle around the airport and land again on LSZH Rwy 16. That's the key point in this investigation... nothing else.I enter LSZH/LSZH as route (INIT page), then select "none" for stored flight plans, enter the CRZ 60, CI 50 ... weight info and takeoff info (all normal, I don't think this will make any difference) and then I normally take off... so... if someone could describe me, that he/she did the same and get an other result... so then we could start to find differencies... but until now I didn't read, that someone ever made this... I don't know if you all use SID and STAR if you do this or if you enter a custom flight plan or what else you do...

Just a gentle reminder that this is an MD-11 and not a Cessna 152, but that said, and since you insisted on a left turn, I would suggest a flightplan of LSZH, AMIKI, LSZH, using the ZUE1R SID to get you to ZUE then AMIKI where you join the TRA1Z STAR, for ILS 16. Since you want a touch and go, execute the missed approach procedure which will get you back to ZUE in time to retry the TRA1Z STAR and home in time for tea and medals. If you want a more interesting approach and don't mind right turns, I would recommend LSZH, WIL, LSZH at FL80 using SID WIL2R, and then STAR GIPOL. That still leaves you the option of missed approach and recovering with the TRA1Z STAR.Even if you don't want to use SIDs or STARs, you do need to have at least one waypoint in your flight plan.

Even if you don't want to use SIDs or STARs, you do need to have at least one waypoint in your flight plan.

... that the auto-retarding works?... to have a valid flight plan?... just for fun???

Yes. To have a valid flight plan, you must have a source, a destination, and at least one waypoint. With a valid flight plan, the automatics can work out destination altitude, TOC, TOD, phase of flight and a whole bunch of other stuff.With all that stuff correctly setup, the automatics can tell when you are trying land as opposed to just trying to claim on the insurance. If the automatics know you are trying to land, they can help you with things like flare, and, yes you guessed it, retard. The MD-11 is an incredibly complex, highly automated, and very tightly integrated system. Every sub-system on board has an impact on most other sub-systems and it is this integration that makes it so easy to fly well. The disadvantage is that if you want to (or have to) deviate from the procedures, then you must have an intimate understanding of the interactions between the sub-systems so that you can accuratly predict consequences. It is wrong to try and think of the different sub-systems in isolation, they just don't work that way. This is the real reason RW pilots have to train for years instead of just playing with the PMDG simulation for a weekend. The answer to the old question about wether a good sim-jockey could land a real plane is yes and no. Yes - if nothing goes wrong, and No because if nothing had gone wrong, they wouldn't be trying to land the plane, now would they.

... Yes - if nothing goes wrong, and No because if nothing had gone wrong, they wouldn't be trying to land the plane, now would they.

You are right. But today this is the real problem with technics. Many things are wrong (or shall I say stupid?) designed. In todays world it's possible, that you cannot start the engine of your car, because you forgot to unplug the toaster in your kitchen. And the worst thing about all that is, that people think, that this is normal, because everything is very complex and to find a good solution is not easy. But it's not the case... those ingeneers are just stupid... that's all...

You are right. But today this is the real problem with technics. Many things are wrong (or shall I say stupid?) designed. In todays world it's possible, that you cannot start the engine of your car, because you forgot to unplug the toaster in your kitchen. And the worst thing about all that is, that people think, that this is normal, because everything is very complex and to find a good solution is not easy. But it's not the case... those ingeneers are just stupid... that's all...

I am sorry but I just can not agree with you. The requirements of flying an aircraft like the MD-11 are enourmous and yet the engineers have managed to make it very simple for the pilot, allowing them to concentrate on the important stuff, like flying. Try the same thing in the Simcheck A300 or even the JS41 if you want an idea of the workload that the automated systems have taken off the pilots shoulders. I think the engineers did an incredible job.I just did the LSZH, ZUE, LSZH circuit using full automatics and (as expected) everything worked perfectly. Including getting the green box for the approach configuration, and retard after flare, just below 50ft AGL. Perhaps if you try the automated flight, and then go manual one step at a time until you spot a difference in behaviour.

Hi Rudolf, I just had another look at your screens shots. You do know you are using the wrong ILS, don't you? You are tuned to IER, but ILS 16 uses IZH. I really think you should try to do it properly before you spend anymore time trying to work out why "your way" doesn't work.

Hi Rudolf, I just had another look at your screens shots. You do know you are using the wrong ILS, don't you? You are tuned to IER, but ILS 16 uses IZH. I really think you should try to do it properly before you spend anymore time trying to work out why "your way" doesn't work.

Those shots are not from LSZH but WMKK if I remember correctly...

I am sorry but I just can not agree with you. The requirements of flying an aircraft like the MD-11 are enourmous and yet the engineers have managed to make it very simple for the pilot, allowing them to concentrate on the important stuff, like flying. Try the same thing in the Simcheck A300 or even the JS41 if you want an idea of the workload that the automated systems have taken off the pilots shoulders. I think the engineers did an incredible job.I just did the LSZH, ZUE, LSZH circuit using full automatics and (as expected) everything worked perfectly. Including getting the green box for the approach configuration, and retard after flare, just below 50ft AGL. Perhaps if you try the automated flight, and then go manual one step at a time until you spot a difference in behaviour.

I'm not talking specificly about the engineers who built the MD-11... it's more a general view of todays products.And... I'm shure you used the SID and STARs for that or entered a flight plan manually ... at least, your description of what you did is not complete.

Those shots are not from LSZH but WMKK if I remember correctly...I'm not talking specificly about the engineers who built the MD-11... it's more a general view of todays products.And... I'm shure you used the SID and STARs for that or entered a flight plan manually ... at least, your description of what you did is not complete.

Touché. Normal (as per tutorial) startup and configuration. Init page LSZH/LSZH, Crz 80, CI 80.Flight plan, add way point ZUE. Add SID ZUE1R. Add STAR TRA1Z. Delete discontinuities. Remove the excurision to AMIKI. Take off. Engage AP passing 400 AGL. At cruise, adjust ALT to 4,000, set brakes to med. On approach, lower flaps and gear as indicated.When Loc alive, press APPR.When nose wheel down, raise flaps, engage reverse.At 80 knots, engines idle, touch brakes to disengage auto-brakes, retract spoilers. Disengage AP and ATS.Turn off runway at next available exit.

When nose wheel down, raise flaps, engage reverse.

I've read that until runway vacation, the current configuration has to be be kept, so flaps would need to stay where they are. Can someone give me more details or correct me, please?

I've read that until runway vacation, the current configuration has to be be kept, so flaps would need to stay where they are. Can someone give me more details or correct me, please?

It's a minor, the current config doesn't 'need' to be kept except in heavy snow or slush until at the gate. Also on taxi out you should refrain from extending the flaps until at the hold point when in heavy snow or slush.It is standard procedure to leave things as they are until vacated as both crew members should be focusing on the aircraft leaving the active runway safely.There's no technical or safety reason not to retract before the turn off.EDIT - Reread Paul's post, you definitely shouldn't be retracting the flaps after nose wheel contact! maybe just a typing error on his part.Regards