Would it be a good idea to request shorter maintenance times, just for the fun of simulation? engine maintenance is about 250 hours and I doubt I will ever fly so man hours in the NGX.So what I'd like to see is an option where we can choose shorter times, like 1/3 of the realisitc cycles. What do others think about?

I just requested the same in this thread.http://forum.avsim.net/topic/343353-failure-mode-requests/page__pid__2055908#entry2055908FRED

Try the Random Failures instead?

Yea, I'd just try random failures to get your fix. BTW, the in service failures doesn't mean it'll be a long time until you see problems. I did the first flight in a new airframe last night and experienced both an FCC-A (going off memory here) failure and a nose wheel balance failure. By comparison, my other favorite airframe, with significantly more hours on it (20+ hours), has yet to see any major problems. I rather like the realism factor thrown in with in service failures.

Would it be a good idea to request shorter maintenance times, just for the fun of simulation? engine maintenance is about 250 hours and I doubt I will ever fly so man hours in the NGX.So what I'd like to see is an option where we can choose shorter times, like 1/3 of the realisitc cycles. What do others think about?

I think it is a great idea. In the real world the plane never stops but the pilots do.

But the service based failure doesn't reset on FSX restart (like the "random" do), right?

But the service based failure doesn't reset on FSX restart (like the "random" do), right?

No, it don't

I'm sure I'll easily put 250 hours on this bird in short order. Already up to 30 so far. No failures yet though.