the airbus A380 RTO test is painfull to watch lol. http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hRzWp67PIMwCould they screw it up anymore if they tried,

Interesting video, except that's an A340 not an A380!

Interesting video, except that's an A340 not an A380!

Too bad there won't be vibrating spoilers... I hope we'll get a specific sound once extended though....

There will be. It's on the 744 already. Same with a specific sound once extended, and on extension, I believe.

Yeah. He is right. Ryan said that the anti-ice system on modern jetliners is so efficient that it's very unlikely you see ice on the airfoil. The effects of the ice on performance are likely to be modelled, but not the visuals.

Between KDAL and KTUL 2 weeks ago on a SW 737, very light rime ice (more of a frost than anything else) formed on the engine inlets and wing leading edges at cruise while flying through the very high storm clouds. It dissipated quickly after clearing the cloud. Easily visible though.Gene Bordelon

You will also see ice on decent just because the fuel is so cold and it hits water and freezes, but no idea how FSX could simulate a realistic effect for that

With regard to Q4, I have to admit that even I've seen...well here it was rain...getting kicked up from the reversers from all sorts of different aircraft here. Even the NG's. But keep in mind that this involves using up yet another FX that probably would have been far better used elsewhere on the a/c.Other than that, could someone elaborate a bit more on the APU usage on ETOPS? Does that mean that every NG flying here (PHNL) had to run their APU enroute or do you mean if they lose an engine, they must start it to provide the rest of the power? At that rate, fuel and maintenance wise, it doesn't make as much sense to me to use an NG over say a 75

According to my 737 manual for the airline I work for, the -700, -800, and -900 can operate the APU up to 41,000 feet with an electrical load. However, operating APU bleed and electrical at the same time has a maximum altitude of 10,000 feet. Furthermore, the APU bleed can only be used to a maximum alttiude of 17,000 feet. We don't fly the -600 here, but I would imagine it would have the same limitations. Note that the APU limitations on the 737 classics are a bit different. Section 3.1 (International Operations) states "due to the limited time that the B737 can operate on standby electrical power it is required that the APU be run continuously in ETOPS airspace." For my airline, the APU is operated on these flights from the ground at the departure airport until past the Extended Range Exit Point, where we usually shut it down unless it is operationally necessary to keep it running.Hope this helps!David Lynn

According to my 737 manual for the airline I work for, the -700, -800, and -900 can operate the APU up to 41,000 feet with an electrical load. However, operating APU bleed and electrical at the same time has a maximum altitude of 10,000 feet. Furthermore, the APU bleed can only be used to a maximum alttiude of 17,000 feet. We don't fly the -600 here, but I would imagine it would have the same limitations. Note that the APU limitations on the 737 classics are a bit different. Section 3.1 (International Operations) states "due to the limited time that the B737 can operate on standby electrical power it is required that the APU be run continuously in ETOPS airspace." For my airline, the APU is operated on these flights from the ground at the departure airport until past the Extended Range Exit Point, where we usually shut it down unless it is operationally necessary to keep it running.Hope this helps!David Lynn

It certainly does! Thanks. Do you know of any other airlines that may depart with the APU off and then start it before entering the Extended Range Point? And do you consider extra fuel compared to an overland flight of the same length?

regarding the icing question, ice does not build up on a modern jetliner because of its excellent de-icing. But the wing looks wet with the ice melting. Will that be modeled?

regarding the icing question, ice does not build up on a modern jetliner because of its excellent de-icing. But the wing looks wet with the ice melting. Will that be modeled?

It actually vaporizes it, so no.

It certainly does! Thanks. Do you know of any other airlines that may depart with the APU off and then start it before entering the Extended Range Point? And do you consider extra fuel compared to an overland flight of the same length?

I do not know whether other companies start the APU once airborne, though I would imagine there aren't many. We usually start the engines off of APU bleed air, so it is already running on the ground. As for the fuel, I just looked in the manual, and I can't find anywhere that gives the APU fuel burn rate. But operationally, that would be factored into the dispatch release. Regardless, the APU fuel burn is negligible compared to the CFM56's. David Lynn

It actually vaporizes it, so no.

vaporize??? At that altitude when its freezing outside??? *******, how hot does the wing get inflight?

I do not know whether other companies start the APU once airborne, though I would imagine there aren't many. We usually start the engines off of APU bleed air, so it is already running on the ground. As for the fuel, I just looked in the manual, and I can't find anywhere that gives the APU fuel burn rate. But operationally, that would be factored into the dispatch release. Regardless, the APU fuel burn is negligible compared to the CFM56's. David Lynn

I see. Thanks again for all the information David!

vaporize??? At that altitude when its freezing outside??? *******, how hot does the wing get inflight?

I guess friction takes its part.

I can't find anywhere that gives the APU fuel burn rate. But operationally, that would be factored into the dispatch release. Regardless, the APU fuel burn is negligible compared to the CFM56's. David Lynn

The APU on an NG burns approximately 350lbs of fuel per hour when the packs and electrics are on, so if anyone likes those 45 minute cockpit set up scenarios in FS, that needs to be borne in mind, as it'll be eating up your diversion fuel.Al

The APU on an NG burns approximately 350lbs of fuel per hour when the packs and electrics are on, so if anyone likes those 45 minute cockpit set up scenarios in FS, that needs to be borne in mind, as it'll be eating up your diversion fuel.

But in the real world, wouldn't the bulk of those 45 minutes usually be on ground power?Tom