Well the AP has to be engaged in RVSM airspace, that's probably what your thinking of...

Of course it has to but normally this conversation's terms are more relaxed. Pilots who hand fly descending from 10.000ft, they do it because they love hand flying. And when they are obligued to keep the autopilot on until 200ft agl, well, it must be a little frustrating. I remember AMAZING hand flown approaches in the canary islands where most of the times you'd end up flying visual.

I remember a nice hand flown approach into Tivat, Yugoslavia (as it was called back then) as a passenger on a DC-9. The pilot was dodging big fluffy clouds left and right to maintain his visual and was descending quite quickly as well. The landing was perfectly fine in the end.

I remember a nice hand flown approach into Tivat, Yugoslavia (as it was called back then) as a passenger on a DC-9. The pilot was dodging big fluffy clouds left and right to maintain his visual and was descending quite quickly as well. The landing was perfectly fine in the end.

Montengro pilots like to fly crazy visual approaches at Tivat :) This one is nice:http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Fokker_100-Airline_Montenegro_Aviation_Video-11055.html

Normally in FSX I take over at about 10000ft, however if workload is heavy (STAR flying raw data, never done in real I bet, but should be fun, have to try) or a runway change is needed I'll let Otto do the steering, and concentrate on the procedure, radio, systems, and so on. On departure I also hand-fly it at least to 10000ft, maybe 18000.

To each their own, as they say... My own interest in the autoland is because I'm fascinated by the automation on modern aircraft. And I like the effort that PMDG has put into modeling these systems. There's probably more to be learned from learning the systems than there is from hand flying in FSX anyway. I don't believe any amount 'hours' hand flying a 737 in FSX will do you much good if you were put behind the controls of an actual aircraft on anything but a perfect day. The real world pilots can fill in the missing 'feel' part of it because they know what it is actually like. The rest of us can only make assumptions that would probably not serve us well if faced with 'reality'. I like to do manual landings as well with NGX and 747 but I would never assume that it 'counts' in any way as real world experience. The system functions, assuming they're modeled correctly, could more readily be applied on the real flight deck. In the end it's entertainment, so do what makes you happy.

Absolutely, to each their own...I like to hand-fly quite a bit, even though I know it isn't comparable to the real thing. But the automation and how it is implemented, learning to use it good is also an interesting part.

Here is an interesting little TV report. They tried if a guy who only has experience with the PC Flight Simulator would be able to manually land the aircraft in an airline's full motion simulator. The result is interesting, even hough a full motion simulator still isn't the real deal. It's in German, but I think you will get the gist by the visuals: p.s.: move the slider to 4m50s for the important part. The timecode doesn't seem to work on the forum.

Cool video... could you translate the jist of the ending sequence. What did the training guy sitting behind have to say at the end? And then what did the guy in the leather jacket ask the pilot flying when he exited the sim?

I don't believe any amount 'hours' hand flying a 737 in FSX will do you much good if you were put behind the controls of an actual aircraft on anything but a perfect day.

You'd be surprised.

Cool video... could you translate the jist of the ending sequence. What did the training guy sitting behind have to say at the end? And then what did the guy in the leather jacket ask the pilot flying when he exited the sim?

+1

Montengro pilots like to fly crazy visual approaches at Tivat :) This one is nice:http://www.flightlev...ideo-11055.html

Cool video. Looks like it's fun to fly into that airport. Gotta try it myself (again).

Cool video... could you translate the jist of the ending sequence. What did the training guy sitting behind have to say at the end? And then what did the guy in the leather jacket ask the pilot flying when he exited the sim?

Instructor: It's definitely noticable that you already did that on the computer. You clearly have tried VFR approaches on the computer, otherwise it would have been impossible for you to fly it manually.Jacket guy: And, did you make it or not?Pilot dude: Yes, I made it!Jacket guy: What?! Congratulations! Is that normal?Instructor: No, that most definitely isn't normal. Bernhard has great motor skills, he excellently landed the aircraft by VFR rules. Congratulations as well. I think the both of us were a good team. Jacket guy: What was it like?Pilot dude (aka Bernhard): It was awesome, pure adrenalin. It was absolutely fantastic.

Haha awesome! That sim looked exactly like the NGX so if he had even FS9 NG experience he'd probably done well!

Normally in FSX I take over at about 10000ft, however if workload is heavy (STAR flying raw data, never done in real I bet, but should be fun, have to try) or a runway change is needed I'll let Otto do the steering, and concentrate on the procedure, radio, systems, and so on. On departure I also hand-fly it at least to 10000ft, maybe 18000.

We fly raw data any time we want to, maybe say 15-30% of the time for me, but I'm probably a bit more hands on than most pilots, take say 10-25% as the average for the industry.

We fly raw data any time we want to, maybe say 15-30% of the time for me, but I'm probably a bit more hands on than most pilots, take say 10-25% as the average for the industry.

Flying RAW data is awesome and needed. There's nothing like nailing a complex approach with procedure turns in an airplane that wants to fly 5nm ahead of you.

Whether I autoland or not in the MD11 or the 747 depends on how much I have had to drink. Hey...just like real pilots then....

There seems to be so many theads on the AutoLand. Why are you guys so obsessed with it? I thought the whole purpose of buying a plane as complex as the 737-NGX was to learn to fly like a real world pilot? In the real world the majority of the time planes are landed manually by the pilots and most pilots do not even like using the autoland. If you can't land a 737-800 manually you can forget about flying the Heavies. (767, 747, MD11).

There is no obsession with it as long as it is working properly (and with the NGX, it works perfectly). It is very disappointing to get in an airplane sim and set up to try the autoland and find it is full of bugs. I rarely use autoland, but I like to know that it works (same as the real pilots, I guess).I have done several full autolands with the NGX and every time, it works perfectly.I haven't made as many flights with the NGX as some here, but with the flights that I've done, the NGX has worked X-ceptional.