Coolsky DC-9... take a look!

[Sekstifire 10]

....the fact that you mention that its an overlay means that the rnav tag came after it was already a conventional nav arrival. So yes the freqs and other info would be already charted. However a brand new arrival suited for rnav equip wouldnt have that stuff charted making it impossible to fly with conventional nav equip.

The current arrivals into ENGM were never non-rnav. They were designed not long ago, utilizing a new concept in arrival and departure flow, called "Point Merge". These arrivals into ENGM were the first point merge arrivals in the world at the time they were introduced, about 10 months ago.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Sekstifire

[ahsmatt7 1,201]

In 1965, when the -9 began it's service, "RNAV" wasn't even in the vocabulary. Air navigation was done using 2 x VOR units (inc. ILS) and 2 x ADF units, with a weather radar. DME was a rarity. There were some airlines that used Doppler, (which had a nice, but unreliable moving map mounted on the instrument panel), and some which used INS. Oceanic traffic also had 2 x HF units. Transistors were a rarity, most avionics using tube technology and 'rotary transformers' to produce the required 115 and 200 volts power systems. One can technically say that "I cannot fly this approach because it doesn't have RNAV" when flying in one of the 129 that are still in service inthe real world, but I suspect they will have upgraded avionics suites installed, but this is a simulator and you can add equipment as you so desire, but if you want to simulate a generic 1968 DC-9 experience, then one has to ignore modern charts: they simply didn't exist 'back then'.

totally agree...I think I said the same thing you said before lol

The current arrivals into ENGM were never non-rnav. They were designed not long ago, utilizing a new concept in arrival and departure flow, called "Point Merge". These arrivals into ENGM were the first point merge arrivals in the world at the time they were introduced, about 10 months ago.

I see I see, I think I misunderstood your use of the word "overlay" here in the states, it measn that an approach that was first based off of a vor or ndb now has the capability to be flown under rnav. It other words, one can use the GPS for total lateral navigation as before, you could only use the magenta line as a reference and the navaid had to be the primary source of navigation....(I am sure you understand this already.)On the other side fo things, the "Point-merge" system looks amazing. I would love to see that here in the states. looks interesting to fly. I hate flying arcs though haha

[Skysurfer7 34]

One thing that has gone unnoticed to me about the already very advanced Failure Simulation for the DC-9 is:Espens words: "Engine separation". Yup, actually covered by the real AOM and the DC-9 Classic failure simulation! :) You're a single engine pilot now...You'll see a number of different system failures in the various simulated bird strike scenarios."There's been a couple of IRL engine separations...& bird strikes...it will be very interesting to be able to simulate this....I think we'll have our hands full with the DC-9:-)

[Skysurfer7 34]

DC-9 Classic Schematics will have five sub categories; Electrical 1 (AC), Electrical 2 (DC), Fuel, Hydraulic and Pneumatic.Reed more & see pictures hare: http://www.coolsky.n...-news&Itemid=50 The systems will be a piece of cake to learn that way.

[Avantime 81]

If I recall correctly the real DC-9's autopilot were useless enough that the nav mode was never used as it couldn't capture a VOR radial properly, so it's either heading hold or hand flying. The Delta/NWA DC-9s does not have FMS/GPS RNAV capability and were flown VOR to VOR. This coupled with the very short sectors for the DC-9s means very hard work for the pilots, Usually for less pay than their peers on other types.Some European DC-9s were equipped with FMS for B-RNAV capability but it's very rare to see them now because of high fuel prices and noise restrictions.

[Skysurfer7 34]

Some new screenshots of the DC-9 Classic tails: http://www.coolsky.no/ looks very nice!

[ryanbatc 13,031]

I miss NWA!

[ZachLW 37]

Some new screenshots of the DC-9 Classic tails: http://www.coolsky.no/ looks very nice!

With system schematics! What made the original Coolsky MD-80 "revolutionary" in it's day for me was the real time, in sim systems and flow help. Looks like they're going to keep that format and also have a very highly polished product up to "PMDG standards".

[dighost 25]

If you haven't seen it, check out this dose of nostalgia-- a film of the brand new DC9-50 for North Central (Republic).http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWTDIIuffGo&feature=related

[Skysurfer7 34]

First preview video of the bird is out :Hypnotized:

[Stick 0]

GULP!

 

That is astonishing..... B) .... I cannot wait for this one to be released. I love Espen's work: still fly the MD-80 Pro a lot, and will always buy what he works on.

[beoingrocks 0]

wow it looks really nice

[bud7h7 1]

Not sure what's more impressive, the amazing work done on the DC-9 or the plastic surgery done on that video. FSX looks nothing like that.

[Benjamin J 751]

Not sure what's more impressive, the amazing work done on the DC-9 or the plastic surgery done on that video. FSX looks nothing like that.

 

Erm... OrbX scenery does look like that. The fact that's a USAir repaint doesn't mean that they fly the plane around the US in that video.

 

Anyway, the plane looks beautiful. The VC is a work of art. Buying it won't be a difficult choice at all!

[ZachLW 37]

Erm... OrbX scenery does look like that. The fact that's a USAir repaint doesn't mean that they fly the plane around the US in that video.

 

Anyway, the plane looks beautiful. The VC is a work of art. Buying it won't be a difficult choice at all!

 

Erm. Most of Orbx's scenery is in the US now. But that's beside the point!