With v4.4 and also with v4.6 on my system it lands with a perfect flare.

What's the reading on your VSI on touchdown. Don't get me wrong, it does flare, but it starts it to late resulting in a rather hard touchdown about 400fpm.

In 4.4 it didnt flare at all tho. I havent tried the autoland in 4.6 yet, infact, I havent done an autoland in any airplane in years.

What's the reading on your VSI on touchdown. Don't get me wrong, it does flare, but it starts it to late resulting in a rather hard touchdown about 400fpm.

Not on my system.

after the update v4.6, Captain Sim!!!

+1. Absolutely!

They released an update a couple of weeks ago. It fixed a whole bunch of bugs, there are still a couple of issues left tho. As far as the accuracy, the FMC is still suggesting very low vREF, in the 120kts ballpark, I would guess thats inaccurate, its certainly far slower than the vref of the 738

It is accurate. The 757 does land slower; its wing is another Boeing masterpiece. The stretched 737s have to land fast or else they'll strike the tail.

Autoland? Blasphemy!

Not on my system.

Then you are the only one that I have heard reporting that, I would love to see a video on it!! There is a easy way to circumvent it by just adding a little back pressure o the flare, but then it's no longer an autoland.

What's the reading on your VSI on touchdown. Don't get me wrong, it does flare, but it starts it to late resulting in a rather hard touchdown about 400fpm.

400 FPM is not really excessive for an autoland, according to everyting I have seen. The computer is not trying to 'grease it on'. The goal is to make a firm landing so that there is no delay in getting the autobrakes engaged and the spoilers up to provide maximum stopping distance.My only question is: will the CS 4.6 meet descent crossing restrictions when in VNAV mode? Previous versions were absolutely terrible in that area. (For example, the KEPEC2 arrival into KLAS which is pretty demanding and was absolutely mangled by previous versions of the CS 757.)

400 FPM is not really excessive for an autoland, according to everyting I have seen. The computer is not trying to 'grease it on'. The goal is to make a firm landing so that there is no delay in getting the autobrakes engaged and the spoilers up to provide maximum stopping distance.My only question is: will the CS 4.6 meet descent crossing restrictions when in VNAV mode? Previous versions were absolutely terrible in that area. (For example, the KEPEC2 arrival into KLAS which is pretty demanding and was absolutely mangled by previous versions of the CS 757.)

Are you saying Level-D and PMDG have it wrong? All of their aircraft autolands are butter smooth at less than 100fpm touchdown. Also all the real cockpit videos I've seen of autolands, are smooth.

Well, I am always open to learning something new. I'm no expert, but I can think of many factors that would have a big influence on the sink rate at touchdown in different aircraft/situations, such as different autopilot software, inaccurate payload data in the FMS, errors in the air data system, pilot carrying extra speed, etc.I respect PMDG and LVD's work, and their dedication to accuracy. Personally though, I am not really interested in comparing the CS behavior to other sim aircraft. I am only really interested in comparing with what the real world aircraft does. So, My comment comes from numerous discussions on aviation forums, for example this thread at, ironcially, the CS forums.http://www.captainsi...?num=1300307356Now whether you believe the user "LOU" is a real commercial pilot is up to you. But google will turn up a bunch of the similar discussions I'm sure.This document is the one that was sticking in my memory.http://www.smartcock...ted_Runways.pdfwhich gives the rationale, and says that average touchdown rates are 3 ft./sec. (180 fpm), with as low as 2 ft/sec. (120 fpm) and up to 5 ft/sec. (300 fpm) being very common, and up to 10 ft./sec. (600 fpm) permitted. (yes, the doc is about airbus, but I've seen the same for boeing.)So the 400 fpm of the CS 757 maybe a bit on the high side, but none of these sources say that typical autoland systems are striving for sub 100 fpm touchdowns.Anyway, I've just emailed a friend of mine who, until recently, flew 737s and (I believe) 767s. He says he will check the AFM to see what it says.p.s. -hell just froze over. Never thought I would find myself 'defending' anything CS does....