percycan i ask what size & brand of touchscreen you use ?

I use a majic touch screen over a 15 inch LCD monitor that displays both the FMC and lower display unit. Works great. If you want to see another whole side to cockpits go to mycockpit.org and take a look arouned you will see another side of flight sim.percy clapp

Personally, I fly using a combination of the VC and 2D. My main cockpit view is in the VC, and I manually adjust the cockpit viewpoint so it is facing the main panel, and it actually looks like a 2D panel, but it is 3D and in the VC. I then use the 2D panels for the overhead, pedestal, etc. Or, if the developer has provided built in views for the overhead and pedestal (like the JS4100), then I will use those viewpoints for the other panels.

Real men fly 2d™. The problem with VC is that its such a hassle to find the clickspots after having panned the view around a bit. Instead of wasting valuable time finding the clickspot I prefer to use a 2d panel. Its the practical solution

Real men use enough hardware with buttons/switches that you don't have to use a clickspot. :)I fly with a Saitek yoke, two throttle quads, and pedals.I can't remember the last time I had to use the mouse in the cockpit when the wheels were off the ground.Setting up your cockpit flows at the gate isn't bad using the mouse when the screen isn't moving (assuming you use TrackIR/head latency for VC).

Hi 2D lovers!I used to be a 2D panel lover in FS9 as I used 2D panels to setup the aircraft and flying when the sim was on heavy load. Since I am using FSX now, I do not use 2d panels but only VC. I am used to it but sometimes I would like to fly a 2D panel just on heavy nice scenery.My problem is that with FSX I can't setup the point of view with 2D panel as easily as with FS9. It is so hard to setup to be able to see the runway clearly at Take Off and same at landing without messing with point of view adjustment during approach. So my question is : How do you setup the point of view in the main 2D panel in FSX? What are the commands which allow to do that?Thanks in advance!Pierre Lainé

panthanks for your notes ............. just like any PMDG plane, just better !!what I was hoping to hear from the beta team was along the lines of the topic - for example, when & where you fly VC, do you setup at the gate in 2D, do you use TrackIR, multiple monitors (how), touchscreens, CDU hardware for input, joystick buttons for switching etc.I can only assume PMDG gives you guidelines on how to beta the plane using their thoughts on how on avearge it will be used by us now & with emerging technology (cheapish touchscreens).any notes will i'm sure be appreciated by many.

Hey John!As RSR stated on his latest post, we're not the "wide" beta team that will try various PC configurations, modules etc. We're 737 pilots, engineers, MX people and so on. We work on different aspects of the aircraft. Lately, for example, I've been testing a lot the flight dynamics/performance/flying behavior of the NGX working very close with the developer in charge of this. Other people are testing electrics, pneumatics etc to a level of detail that only an aircraft engineer could understand. I'm talking about hard core system simulation with information directly from the maintenance manual. You will even find known "glitches" of the real aircraft occurring in the sim...Now if you ask what's my way of flying the aircraft, I use a dual monitor configuration. I have the CDU dragged on the second and the virtual cockpit on the first. The only controls I have is the Saitek yoke and rudder pedals. No TrackIR here. I use a hat switch for panning around. As for the WX I use ASE. I have various buttons assigned, like gear up/down, flaps, AP disconnect, AT arm/disarm, TOGA, trim etc. I rarely go to the 2D. I do all preflight in the VC.

....I fly with a Saitek yoke, two throttle quads, and pedals.I can't remember the last time I had to use the mouse in the cockpit when the wheels were off the ground.Setting up your cockpit flows at the gate isn't bad using the mouse when the screen isn't moving (assuming you use TrackIR/head latency for VC).

How do you deal with stuff like radar vectors, changing altitude, changing radio frequency, tuning VORs/ILS etc?

Pan,You obviously fly the NGX by profession.What is your opinion on the current state of the aicraft from the pilot's point of view? Does it feel like the real counterpart, and what aspects would you especially like to mention in this regard (good or bad) ?thank you!kind rgds,Tero Partanen

Real men fly 2d™. The problem with VC is that its such a hassle to find the clickspots after having panned the view around a bit. Instead of wasting valuable time finding the clickspot I prefer to use a 2d panel. Its the practical solution

I fly VC only and have nver found click spots to be a problem at all to find. Maybe when you first get the a/c and are figuring out where everything is, but after a few hours of orientation its not a problem, for me anyway. The only 2D panel I am forced to use is in the LDS 767 for the FMC since you can manage it in the VC. Other than that I much prefer to use a VC over 2D panels, and if you get your point of view and zoom dialed in really well it makes finding everything real easy and looks more like your seated in an a/c rather than a 2D panel in your face.I would also say that with the advent of EZdok, you can preset buttons on your yoke/stick/throttle/keyboard which will automatically pan your view to the overhead, FMC, throttle quadrant, etc. That in combination of panning usinga hat switch or TrackIR has made the 2D panel obsolete for me.Back in the FS9 days I was forced to use 2D panels only because my computer at the time wasn't good enough to run them in the VC, as well as the fact that back then a lot of a/c you couldn't fly 100% from the VC so you ended up having to use 2D panels a lot anyway.Sean Campbell

I use both VC (outside view) and 2D panels (instruments etc...)Any add-on without 2D panels is completely useless for me.Bert Van Bulck

Hey John!As RSR stated on his latest post, we're not the "wide" beta team that will try various PC configurations, modules etc. We're 737 pilots, engineers, MX people and so on. We work on different aspects of the aircraft. Lately, for example, I've been testing a lot the flight dynamics/performance/flying behavior of the NGX working very close with the developer in charge of this. Other people are testing electrics, pneumatics etc to a level of detail that only an aircraft engineer could understand. I'm talking about hard core system simulation with information directly from the maintenance manual. You will even find known "glitches" of the real aircraft occurring in the sim...Now if you ask what's my way of flying the aircraft, I use a dual monitor configuration. I have the CDU dragged on the second and the virtual cockpit on the first. The only controls I have is the Saitek yoke and rudder pedals. No TrackIR here. I use a hat switch for panning around. As for the WX I use ASE. I have various buttons assigned, like gear up/down, flaps, AP disconnect, AT arm/disarm, TOGA, trim etc. I rarely go to the 2D. I do all preflight in the VC.

panthanks again ... it is very much how i "fly"- assuming you are using an undocked 2D CDU on the 2nd (touchscreen?) monitor (much more fps friendly than an undocked VC equivalent).i also use buttons for heading, vs/fpa and speed intervention,lights, wipers,autobrake et alia.i do however think TrackIR is great for panning to check switching etc.- and of course that bit of manual work below 1000` & on the ground.in closing, thanks & enjoy your beta role - i suppose I may need to park my LDS for a while hard that it may be.

Pan,You obviously fly the NGX by profession.What is your opinion on the current state of the aicraft from the pilot's point of view? Does it feel like the real counterpart, and what aspects would you especially like to mention in this regard (good or bad) ?thank you!kind rgds,Tero Partanen

Tero,I flew the NG (-700) for 7.5 years. I'm flying heavier tins now :)The aircraft is coming along nicely . It's beyond the "every switch moves" philosophy we've seen until now. Every switch DOES move, doing the normal action, but also tickling the right switches you resolve all NNC issues you can imagine... In other words, every system is modeled for both normal ops and every kind of failure you can imagine. What was the last time you saw different voltages with various type of electric failures and electrical loads? ;) Get your QRH ready gents!Without revealing any fancy details I can assure you that when this puppy hits the stores, the forum will get full of posts like "It should do this but it doesn't. I pressed that but no joy. On every other Boeing addon I have, this system works like that". Forget what you know gents. It's time to learn the NG like it really is. Remember the fires with the J41? Most of us thought that we actually know how to start the damn Garrett TPEs. You'll get the same feeling with the NG even during the preflight flows. You want my motto about the NGX? Learning the B737 the way it's supposed to be.Regarding the flight model it's still under tweaking. What was the last time you heard developers working on things like the "feeling" of the turn. We're not talking about the "numbers" of the turn. They're all there. Now we're working on the feeling! After many 1000s of hours flying jets I find myself intrigued when I have to explain quality factors instead of quantity and stupid numbers and graphs. But I assure you man. It's all there. Both brains and heart.

Quite simple.....2D panels allow for unique configurations, I have 6 monitors on my rig which is primarily set up for a Dash 8 project that I work with. All being pushed via 1 computer. The 2D panels allow for proper placement taking away the constant head movement, although I do still have TrackIR enabled to allow for looking left /right which is very useful when setting up for approachesI use:3 x 19" monitors for the CA, FO and Engine gauges 1 x 17" for the overhead.1 x 17" for the FMS and radio stack 1 x 24" for the external view, which I would some day like to transition to a high resolution projector

How do you deal with stuff like radar vectors, changing altitude, changing radio frequency, tuning VORs/ILS etc?

All MCP functions are on buttons off the quads.For the radios, I just pull up the 2D panel. Same with the FMC.

All MCP functions are on buttons off the quads.For the radios, I just pull up the 2D panel. Same with the FMC.

But how do you change them? How do you press keys on the FMC and such?

Tero,I flew the NG (-700) for 7.5 years. I'm flying heavier tins now :)The aircraft is coming along nicely . It's beyond the "every switch moves" philosophy we've seen until now. Every switch DOES move, doing the normal action, but also tickling the right switches you resolve all NNC issues you can imagine... In other words, every system is modeled for both normal ops and every kind of failure you can imagine. What was the last time you saw different voltages with various type of electric failures and electrical loads? ;) Get your QRH ready gents!Without revealing any fancy details I can assure you that when this puppy hits the stores, the forum will get full of posts like "It should do this but it doesn't. I pressed that but no joy. On every other Boeing addon I have, this system works like that". Forget what you know gents. It's time to learn the NG like it really is. Remember the fires with the J41? Most of us thought that we actually know how to start the damn Garrett TPEs. You'll get the same feeling with the NG even during the preflight flows. You want my motto about the NGX? Learning the B737 the way it's supposed to be.Regarding the flight model it's still under tweaking. What was the last time you heard developers working on things like the "feeling" of the turn. We're not talking about the "numbers" of the turn. They're all there. Now we're working on the feeling! After many 1000s of hours flying jets I find myself intrigued when I have to explain quality factors instead of quantity and stupid numbers and graphs. But I assure you man. It's all there. Both brains and heart.

Thank you Pan, a comprehensive take on the plane. I just noticed that I used "NGX" when I was supposed to just say NG :D. If anyone here flies NGX professionally, it's gotta be the developers heh heh.I certainly look forward to flying the NGX. I have some experience from full flight simulators, and have a decent grasp of how jets sized like the NG generally handle. I have no doubts about the system integration level on this one. Obviously it is beyond comprehensive.rgds,Tero Partanen