If you think you're preparing yourself for the real world by hand flying it in fsx, you're in for a shock when you get in the real thing or even a level d. If he wants to focus on systems, whos to say his way is wrong? Since its not a game there can be no rules for playing!

No one said that I was preparing myself for real world hand flying or anything close, but this is my hobby because I am intrigued and in love with the operations and procedures in the flying of the most complex piece of machinery in the world, the people that operate it and being able to have something so close, right on my PC.What puts me in shock is when I see all of the real world commercial line pilots, whether active and retired, that, even though they have access to the real jet and many hours of professional flying, still spend hours flying the same simulations that I fly at home.What shocks me is when these real world pilots are as excited as I am to get this beautiful PMDG 737NGX and enjoy its details, beauty and realism, even when they may have to leave in a day or two to command their real aircraft on a trip between two real world cities. Remember, I'm not the one that said anything about auto landing being wrong. Although I agree that it is better to learn to take the controls at realistic times, my comment was directed to the one that said there is no difference in flying the NGX as close to reality as each of us can possibly do, or flying it inverted under bridges.One way is simulation and one way is just playing. If playing is what someone enjoys, then, no harm done, but they are not a sim enthusiast, they are mearly playing and no different than if I would take an expensive fishing pole to the river and just splash around hitting the water with it. I'm sure someone would come to me and say "You're not fishing. You're just playing!". The real fun of this hobby and what it is really about is the phrase "As real as it gets" or flying as close to realism as is practically possible for each person. It is about education with entertainment and PMDG knows this. That is why they have worked so hard to bring the realism of a Boeing 737NG and made it available to us. Bob

What version of FS was it that had the intro video with John and Martha King? You know, the one where he's flying through the middle of Manhattan and almost hits the Empire State Building?

John and Martha King were not appealing to seasoned hard core sim enthusiast, like the ones that could appreciate the NGX. They were appealing to someone who just picked up MSFS at Walmart for the first time and wanted to jump into a default airplane and see what it was all about.

John and Martha King were not appealing to seasoned hard core sim enthusiast, like the ones that could appreciate the NGX. They were appealing to someone who just picked up MSFS at Walmart for the first time and wanted to jump into a default airplane and see what it was all about.

I'm as seasoned as they get, since I've owned every version ever made. I've also gone through real world flight training. Even today, the sim can't be used for anything more than systems proficiency. It's physics model is far too limited to come anywhere close to handling like a real aircraft would, and the lack of tactile feedback with the planes puts you at a real disadvantage when you get in the real thing. It's worthless as a hand flying aide. Hence the marketing slogan "As Real As It Gets"...Observe the post regarding whether or not the NGX could prepare you to land the real aircraft, actual pilots agree you have little to no chance of hand flying a 737 to the ground based on FSX experience. That's where our imaginations kick in. We go out of our ways to make it as real as we can, but we're still pretending.

I'm as seasoned as they get, since I've owned every version ever made. I've also gone through real world flight training. Even today, the sim can't be used for anything more than systems proficiency. It's physics model is far too limited to come anywhere close to handling like a real aircraft would, and the lack of tactile feedback with the planes puts you at a real disadvantage when you get in the real thing. It's worthless as a hand flying aide. Hence the marketing slogan "As Real As It Gets"...Observe the post regarding whether or not the NGX could prepare you to land the real aircraft, actual pilots agree you have little to no chance of hand flying a 737 to the ground based on FSX experience. That's where our imaginations kick in. We go out of our ways to make it as real as we can, but we're still pretending.

No one in their right mind would take what they have learned from FSX and try to use it to fly a real aircraft without proper training. They would have to have some kind of a death wish.That is not to say that learning to fly realistically in FSX will not influence many to go on and get their PPL. Imagination and pretending can become reality, and does in many instances.Someone asked a real commercial airline pilot a "what if..." and he said if the situation ever occurred, which would be a huge stretch in itself, to keep the aircraft on automation, because that is the closest thing a good simmer would understand and would be his only chance for survival.I have seen an abundance of real world commercial airline pilots, both in-service and retired, who love flying in FSX (most likely including Cpt. Randazzo). I even was quite honored to have a retired pilot from USAir come to my house and show me some things about the aircraft on my computer at one time. He also loves MSFS.Because you don't like MSFS or maybe ashamed that you do, and think that it is an utter waste of time, doesn't mean others can not find great enjoyment in it as a wonderful hobby by learning to fly as realistically as is possible safely on their home computer.There is nothing wrong with imagination or pretending. Look at the paint ball battles or the civil war buffs. They are pretending they are soldiers. They are enjoying it by putting their imaginations to work and being as realistic as possible. Many hobbies involve imagination and pretending.Flying in FSX realistically is not a waste of time. It is educational entertainment and flying realistic aircraft like the NGX with realistic procedures is what makes the hobby so much fun.I have read over and over again where people carry what they have learned in MSFS to real world flight training. There is even a very popular book on using FSX for real world flight training that was written by two flight instructors.I have no desire to learn to fly a real airplane myself. The only way my wheels will ever fold under me is if I run my truck off of the road.My fun is in flying on my home PC and will never go any further than that. But I love it a lot and love the NGX more than any aircraft sim I have had.

I'm addicted to it. Have been for years. I just don't think anyone has the right to tell someone that if you dont do it "the right way" than you shouldn't be doing it, because there is no right way. It's different things to different people.

No one in their right mind would take what they have learned from FSX and try to use it to fly a real aircraft without proper training. They would have to have some kind of a death wish.That is not to say that learning to fly realistically in FSX will not influence many to go on and get their PPL. Imagination and pretending can become reality, and does in many instances.Someone asked a real commercial airline pilot a "what if..." and he said if the situation ever occurred, which would be a huge stretch in itself, to keep the aircraft on automation, because that is the closest thing a good simmer would understand and would be his only chance for survival.I have seen an abundance of real world commercial airline pilots, both in-service and retired, who love flying in FSX (most likely including Cpt. Randazzo). I even was quite honored to have a retired pilot from USAir come to my house and show me some things about the aircraft on my computer at one time. He also loves MSFS.Because you don't like MSFS or maybe ashamed that you do, and think that it is an utter waste of time, doesn't mean others can not find great enjoyment in it as a wonderful hobby by learning to fly as realistically as is possible safely on their home computer.There is nothing wrong with imagination or pretending. Look at the paint ball battles or the civil war buffs. They are pretending they are soldiers. They are enjoying it by putting their imaginations to work and being as realistic as possible. Many hobbies involve imagination and pretending.Flying in FSX realistically is not a waste of time. It is educational entertainment and flying realistic aircraft like the NGX with realistic procedures is what makes the hobby so much fun.I have read over and over again where people carry what they have learned in MSFS to real world flight training. There is even a very popular book on using FSX for real world flight training that was written by two flight instructors.I have no desire to learn to fly a real airplane myself. The only way my wheels will ever fold under me is if I run my truck off of the road.My fun is in flying on my home PC and will never go any further than that. But I love it a lot and love the NGX more than any aircraft sim I have had.

Nicely put Robert, and i might add that if you are going to sit around there's no other way. I just love the hobby.

Nicely put Robert, and i might add that if you are going to sit around there's no other way. I just love the hobby.

I never understood where he got that I was opposed to it or I was downing it for pretending. I'm just being realistic about it. Flight sim is the only computer entertainment I've ever enjoyed (until Batman: Arkham Asylum came along). I've been a simmer since around 1981 if I recall. I also remember how terrible my first take off in a real plane was because I thought I already knew it all after years of FS.

How about the OP's original question? Its there a guide for it?

Nicely put Robert, and i might add that if you are going to sit around there's no other way. I just love the hobby.

I'm with you there Rick

How about the OP's original question? Its there a guide for it?

As far as I know, just the manuals now.That little circle floating around in the middle of the HGS is the flight path vector. Point that to the runway thresh hold and keep it there while keeping your speed at Vref and your VS at about 800fpm. Flare 2 to 3 degrees at about 20ft. above the runway while pulling back the thrust levers ever so slightly. It should be timed so when your wheels touch the ground, the thrust levers should be all the way to idle.Just as your nose gear touches the ground, pull the reversers.There's your tutorial

I have flown it into a mountain and under the golden gate brige. Tryed to land it on a carrier.

(until Batman: Arkham Asylum came along)

Not being critical, but thats where i differ.

Hi, I want to get back to topic here, I couldn't find anything in the manual that describes the operation of the HGS panel on the pedestal. Yes, a bit in the tutorial, but nothing in FCOM. Did I miss something there?

Hi, I want to get back to topic here, I couldn't find anything in the manual that describes the operation of the HGS panel on the pedestal. Yes, a bit in the tutorial, but nothing in FCOM. Did I miss something there?

No you did not. I looked as well. Wish something would come out t to cover it in more detail.

As far as I know, just the manuals now.That little circle floating around in the middle of the HGS is the flight path vector. Point that to the runway thresh hold and keep it there while keeping your speed at Vref and your VS at about 800fpm. Flare 2 to 3 degrees at about 20ft. above the runway while pulling back the thrust levers ever so slightly. It should be timed so when your wheels touch the ground, the thrust levers should be all the way to idle.Just as your nose gear touches the ground, pull the reversers.There's your tutorial

Thanks ill give this a try this evening when i get a chance.

Hi, I want to get back to topic here, I couldn't find anything in the manual that describes the operation of the HGS panel on the pedestal. Yes, a bit in the tutorial, but nothing in FCOM. Did I miss something there?

Im hoping Tutorial 2 expands on the HUGS a bit more and yes its nice to see the topic finally returning to an acutal point.