Use the aircraft only with checklist will not revaeal a lot of bugs, going out of them will open a world of bugs.

And this is called "pilot error" in the crash investigation report, case closed

It might be a flight control calibration issue. That behavior is not normal. My other ideas are that the installer wasn't run as an admin, or something of that nature.I have never seen that behavior in my aircraft, regardless of flight mode, and I do a heavy bit of flying by hand with A/T on and off - TO/GA or other mode - it doesn't matter.[side Point: Speed]For the record on the speed issue:In the States, it's 10 and 250, unless the (clean) min safe speed is higher, or the Administrator has exempted the type.From a controller's perspective, we see groundspeed, not indicated. No matter what your indicated is, we can't tell by that alone. The way we can tell you're busting the speed is that everyone else's speed readout is 260-270 and yours is 290 at around the same altitude (speeds listed are examples, and depend on wind). That's about it.Controllers are controllers, and not sky police. If you bust 250 indicated, or hit your crossing restriction of 11,000 at 11,502, chances are they won't care unless it causes a problem. It's really to try and keep everyone on a same/similar page (ever notice those aircraft they assume can't maintain 250 get different altitudes?).[/side Point: Speed]

And this is called "pilot error" in the crash investigation report, case closed

You can do all the errors you want, an IRS working or not, (as the weather was good in the video) cannot cause uncommanded aircraft motion, also because control column is not moving. :)Simulator is called a thing that simulates a real thing, a real 737 will never be able to do it if IRS are in ATT.For a 1945 pilot (for example) a 737 working in ATT mode is a plane that fully works (and with more than the required instruments)Kyle, it's not a controller error as with IRS in nav mode there is absolutely no problem.It is a bug related to the ATT function, another one.

And this is called "pilot error" in the crash investigation report, case closed

There was an pilot error on a adamair 734 regarding IRS.Pilots had problems with one IRS, but ten they putted both in ATT... inside a storm...Maybe the aircraft moved like in the video...The plane collapsed before toucing the sea due to overspeed/stress.PS: The plane was in AirOne fleet just few years before the crash, I worked on it sometimes.

For the first flight AP was not used, it become crazy with only AT on TOGA

Yes!!... almost the same happened to me.Glad to see I'm not alone :-)

lol - forgive me if im not able to read between the lines here. Your saying, that by operating the airplane opposite of its normal functions will cause it to function improperly... and its a bug? Your obviously doing something that the systems cant cope with or handle... even if the airplane is suppose to act according to your NG guide.. who is to say that its not just a limitation of FSX, rather than a bug... in that case, its an FSX bug, which PMDG can do little about.

Maybe FSX or not, but it seems a bug.Using simplanes out of checklists explore sometimes never experimented and fully tested situations, so sometimes discover bugs.Using a real plane in wrong mode produce wrong results, but the system advertice pilot with alarms or other.Anyway a real 737 cannot do this crazy behaviour.In some point of the video it starts suddenly run backward and in others perform tonneau faster than an extra 300.

If a real pilot want to take off with battery power and all other things off (assuming it is aligned on a large runway and engines are running) the plane is still able to fly.It has all the required things to fly.737 has:-wings-ailerons-elevators-a couple of fully working engines.-stby instruments.Now, if the plane could fly in this way, also the sim must do. Why? because the 737 is designed to do it.

Hi Bert, and to the rest sorry for getting OT here...

Myself and IVAO Sweden department don't agree with you sir.http://ivao.se/about

But do note that IVAO says "or the classification of airspace you are flying in means you are exempt from the rule". You only need permission from ATC to exceed the 250 kts limit if there IS a such a limit in place. The limit is only in place if so dictated by the procedures for the airport (which I omitted to explain since I tried to make it short) or , as I wrote, SID/STAR specifies that. Here is the actual AIP and not what IVAO says: http://www.lfv.se/AI..._ENR_1_4_en.pdf

And this charthttp://www.lfv.se/sv...AD-0-4/AD-2/S1/

Which is a STAR procudure, as I stated!

Myself and IVAO Sweden department don't agree with you sir.Also what you say about the 2 airpsaces in Sweden is just wrong.Look at thishttp://www.lfv.se/sv/FPC/IAIP/ENR-0-1/and look at the ATS Airspace Classification please.Bert Van Bulck

There are really only two types of airspaces in use in Sweden: C, which is controlled airspace and G which is everything outside that. A, B and F airspaces are not used in the Sweden FIR. There are actually two very small areas of class D and E in sothern part of Sweden (Bornholm and Oresund) but they are just an exemption. I suggest you take a look at the aip again: http://www.lfv.se/AI..._ENR_1_4_en.pdf

If a real pilot want to take off with battery power and all other things off (assuming it is aligned on a large runway and engines are running) the plane is still able to fly.It has all the required things to fly.737 has:-wings-ailerons-elevators-a couple of fully working engines.-stby instruments.Now, if the plane could fly in this way, also the sim must do. Why? because the 737 is designed to do it.

Well, well...a B737 isn't a sailplane or a cessna C172.How have you planned to start the "fully working engines" without fueltanks that hopefully has some fuel in them?How have you planned to start the "fully working engines" without a APU or a ground start unit?Have you planned to fly above 10000'' you need AC fuelpumps that pressurize the fuellines or the fuel will boil and you have engine flameout!You need AC power to stay in the air some time because the battery won't last long at 30-40 amps draining!What was your plan to steer the plane, since you don't have a hydralic power?How will you get hydraulic power without a hydraulic system?You need a rudder!The stby instruments needs electrical power to the ADIRU that tells them what to show!and so on...The thing is that you can't see this airplane as a non complex aircraft.

-Fuel tanks are inside the wings-The fuel is part of te necessary items.-Check your procedures, an air cart is required for starting, but battery will do the rest-the aircraft is airborne when the last wheel leave the runway, there is no absolute need to go over 10000fts (or more or even less)-Battery/batteries will last for 30 minutes, sufficient for a full flight. Wilbur Wright remained in air for few seconds, and he made a flight...-I told that airplane must be on runway, however, when rolling and inflight engines can be used to steer the aircraft.-A 747 remained in air for about an half hour with the loss of the entire rudder PLUS vertical stabilizer.-Do you really need an hydraulic system to let fly it? Do you need a ruddder on a twin engine airplane?-The mechanical stby system uses its own information, and the IFSD uses only HDG from ADIRU 1It is a nonsense to have a stby display that uses same full data from a primary system.Wilbur Wright did not used an IRS, or an attitude indicator.Ah... without hyd you can also brake some times....

Just to complete:-engine hyd pumps will be repressurized if power of the DC buses 1 and 2 are lost. Pressure will remain also if battery is discharged.If battery discharges:-Fuel shut off has its battery to let you shut down the engine if no other sources are avaiable, so the engines will continue to work.-Engine controls (EEC) is self powered by the EEC alternator that will live until engine shut down.So, definetly, the 737 is designed to still fly with all things off.

Ridiculous thread.These two guys try to fly the aircraft any way possible other than proper, then try to claim the software has bugs.......Waste of everyone's time....

Ridiculous thread.These two guys try to fly the aircraft any way possible other than proper, then try to claim the software has bugs.......Waste of everyone's time....

You have not seen the video... I'm pretty sure about this... you have not wasted your time looking at it, so why do you waste your time posting?And continue to follow your checklists without knowing what you're doing... just push buttons in sequence...

I checked the video, and I saw this happen before. The problem is within FSX. In such cases, only help is to reinstall FSX, make a completely clean configuration (make sure you do know how to do that!), and then try again.I'm pretty sure this is not a problem with NGX.

I checked the video, and I saw this happen before. The problem is within FSX. In such cases, only help is to reinstall FSX, make a completely clean configuration (make sure you do know how to do that!), and then try again.I'm pretty sure this is not a problem with NGX.

The problem is linked to ATT function of the pmdg, it will happen if you take off (with or without AT, with or without AP) in ATT mode.If you take off with irs aligned correctly, or with irs off the problem is not present.The ATT function is already bugged for other reason that only who read checklists and execute like robots cannot see them.There is no loss of attitude and heading during ATT, there is non sense heading request on ngx as it will disregard manual entries, there is no reason to wait leveled the align light as the attitude is fully working in the same time you put selector to ATT.But, the robots says that it's not a bug as the checklist works great, it tells to mantain attitude, yes you do, you must enter heading, yes you do, you must wait 30 seconds, yes you do... OOHhhhh as the checklist can be executed as the same of the lines in a computer program, there is no bug... A bug is only a thing that is not working as listed in checklist...Ngx so for some people simulates only checklists, not aircraft systems.