Sorry about the caps this looks great obviously experienced. Enjoy Waynehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKNw4Ii-uVM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

No offence lol, but this sucks! Don't use a 767 as a stunt plane! You should have gone around, and next time flare later so you don't go back upon when you try to land.

Might want to tell the person that made it the video work is good at least I think so.

its not the ngx..

200kt crosswind!!!! I don't think so. At normal Vref speeds you'd have a negative ground speed and need to land at a much highr IAS. In fact theoretically you should be able to land across the runway with a 200kt crosswind. That's cat5 hurricane stuff.Neil Bradley200kt crosswind!!!! I don't think so. At normal Vref speeds you'd have a negative ground speed and need to land at a much highr IAS. In fact theoretically you should be able to land across the runway with a 200kt crosswind. That's cat5 hurricane stuff.Neil Bradley

where's the NGX in the video?

Funny how so many grown men will play a video game (yes folks, you are playing a game), yet always scream "Realistic!!!!" every chance they get, then probably go back to watching return of the Jedi.Anywho, I like the video. Forget all the nonsense, the quality looked great, the crosswind approach looked amazing, who the hell cares if it can be done (or would be) in real life, it's a game people, and just someone posting a video.I kept the headphones off which I think was a good thing since I can still hear. My headphones are 10' away and they were screaming ;)

Anywho, I like the video. Forget all the nonsense, the quality looked great, the crosswind approach looked amazing, who the hell cares if it can be done (or would be) in real life, it's a game people, and just someone posting a video

+1 here!

1) Not NGX2) Nice smoothness3) It's a game or sim based upon the individual's way of thinking. If we use FSX to be "realistic" or use it as a "game" then we each have the freedom to do so. To say "it sucks", IMO, is just as bad as the implied "go watch your Star Wars and get over the nerdrage". I've been fighting my own hypocrisy within FSX. (I use my widebodies for whatever route I want. Screw "realistic!" Still have to repsect opposing views tho...)

What do you mean "not NGX" this is a general discussion forum!!

What do you mean "not NGX" this is a general discussion forum!!

Isn't NGX in the thread title?

Funny how so many grown men will play a video game (yes folks, you are playing a game), yet always scream "Realistic!!!!" every chance they get, then probably go back to watching return of the Jedi.

This "game" helped me save a ton of time in flight training, and therefore a good bit of money. Despite your dismissal of the sim as a game, it's based on real world terrain, can use real world weather, and simulates aircraft behavior. Sure, it can be used as a game (missions and all that), but the fact remains that it's a simulation (in terms of realism, you can generally always step backwards to game, but the inverse isn't so true).On the other hand, the above idea gives people no right to criticize those who use it as a game. To be honest, I don't understand them in the least, but they're welcome to do what they do. In the interest of full disclosure, however, I got bored one day in aviation class in high school, took a 737, set the wind right down the runway at rotation speed, set the throttles to maintain zero ground speed, and hovered off the ground. Gamey and not realistic? Sure, but it sure as heck reinforced the idea that indicated isn't always what you're doing across the ground.I don't quite understand the Star Wars comparison, though (although I get the feeling you had intended a little hyperbole and sarcasm). Flight Simulator is clearly a simulation of flight here on earth, rooted in real world data and at least an attempt at dynamics. If it were a fake world (as in something out of the Ace Combat series), I could see your point a little more. Star Wars operates on the concept of willing suspension of disbelief (the idea that you're willing to suspend your idea of disbelief - as in, are willing to accept that a lightsaber could exist, at least in the movie, despite knowing it's reasonably impossible here on Earth), whereas when you're in flight simulator you can reasonably approximate what you'd do in the real world. As an example, I can make a flight from JYO and CHO in FS, and then drive up to JYO, hop in a real plane and fly the same exact route, taking about the same amount of time, with similar winds, and so on. I cannot, however, watch Star Wars, and then jump in an X-Wing and go shoot proton torpedoes through a hole that's like shooting womprats back at home in my T-16 in order to save planets (you're welcome to anyone who's old enough to get the reference - RIP Alderaan).

This "game" helped me save a ton of time in flight training, and therefore a good bit of money. Despite your dismissal of the sim as a game, it's based on real world terrain, can use real world weather, and simulates aircraft behavior. Sure, it can be used as a game (missions and all that), but the fact remains that it's a simulation (in terms of realism, you can generally always step backwards to game, but the inverse isn't so true).On the other hand, the above idea gives people no right to criticize those who use it as a game. To be honest, I don't understand them in the least, but they're welcome to do what they do. In the interest of full disclosure, however, I got bored one day in aviation class in high school, took a 737, set the wind right down the runway at rotation speed, set the throttles to maintain zero ground speed, and hovered off the ground. Gamey and not realistic? Sure, but it sure as heck reinforced the idea that indicated isn't always what you're doing across the ground.I don't quite understand the Star Wars comparison, though (although I get the feeling you had intended a little hyperbole and sarcasm). Flight Simulator is clearly a simulation of flight here on earth, rooted in real world data and at least an attempt at dynamics. If it were a fake world (as in something out of the Ace Combat series), I could see your point a little more. Star Wars operates on the concept of willing suspension of disbelief (the idea that you're willing to suspend your idea of disbelief - as in, are willing to accept that a lightsaber could exist, at least in the movie, despite knowing it's reasonably impossible here on Earth), whereas when you're in flight simulator you can reasonably approximate what you'd do in the real world. As an example, I can make a flight from JYO and CHO in FS, and then drive up to JYO, hop in a real plane and fly the same exact route, taking about the same amount of time, with similar winds, and so on. I cannot, however, watch Star Wars, and then jump in an X-Wing and go shoot proton torpedoes through a hole that's like shooting womprats back at home in my T-16 in order to save planets (you're welcome to anyone who's old enough to get the reference - RIP Alderaan).

All I can say is that you have just silenced this topic! I agree 100% with what you say. If anyone watches Ice Pilots you would have spotted that their simualtor is acutally FSX. There is always 2 sides to everything.

Despite your dismissal of the sim as a game

Kyle, having been on my forum and seen the many hours I put into my IFR tutorials, I think you know I do not dismiss FS as a game. I give a lot of my time only for the fun of others, like you do with VATSIM. My only point was to bring people screaming realistic a little back into the 1st reality people tend to dismiss. The point being, to each their own. To take that a little further and also reply to your reply to me on the NGX thread; I see people use FS as they choose to and remember how I did. Much in the same way. I later got more involved and started seeing more and more that was modeled and try to share that with others. Such as even if all they do is autoland, that learning VOR navigation might give them a little more fun in seeing the MIP more than they might, or add to their enjoyment with knowing just how much is going on. I am on 247 alert to try and teach others new ways to use their sim, but I guess my approach is different. I don't do it in a "My way is better because it's realistic", I respect where they are in their simming or how they choose to do it and try to bring them over to the dark side (joke in reference to below).

I don't quite understand the Star Wars comparison, though

That was a joke. That one was more like your average sarcastic wit and what I felt was a good close.

On the other hand, the above idea gives people no right to criticize those who use it...

That's the main things here and reason for my post(s). It's why I feel some people need to be brought back to reality a few steps, even if that means calling FS a game. Calling FS a game is something that people don't like to read (me included), but it sure is a good way to make a point, and it kind of grabs people by their short hairs too if you know what I mean. People tend to get so involved that their way becomes the only way, or they forget that they're talking to someone that realistic or not, deserves a shred of decency. No one here is better than the other for what they know, including myself. What separates the two is how people talk to one another. With respect, or without it. There are just too many instances of this where someone drops by to share with others what they found worthy of sharing. Their intentions in the right place then get shot down from harsh comments from the peanut gallery. A lot of people don't realize they're even doing it and are just caught up in where their mind set is. I think I understand that one more than the average poster.

Kyle, having been on my forum and seen the many hours I put into my IFR tutorials, I think you know I do not dismiss FS as a game.

I guess that's the part that threw me. Normally I read a 'Dan' post and think to myself "well said Dan" and that's that and I carry on. It seemed like a slight departure from your norm, even though you can see I noted a bit of hyperbole in there.

That was a joke. That one was more like your average sarcastic wit and what I felt was a good close.

Haha. True.

That's the main things here and reason for my post(s). It's why I feel some people need to be brought back to reality a few steps, even if that means calling FS a game. Calling FS a game is something that people don't like to read (me included), but it sure is a good way to make a point, and it kind of grabs people by their short hairs too if you know what I mean. People tend to get so involved that their way becomes the only way, or they forget that they're talking to someone that realistic or not, deserves a shred of decency. No one here is better than the other for what they know, including myself. What separates the two is how people talk to one another. With respect, or without it. There are just too many instances of this where someone drops by to share with others what they found worthy of sharing. Their intentions in the right place then get shot down from harsh comments from the peanut gallery. A lot of people don't realize they're even doing it and are just caught up in where their mind set is. I think I understand that one more than the average poster.

Makes sense. There was another thread out there where someone requested some information on how PMDG goes through the coding process that I just stayed out of because the first post was "why do you care?" or something to that effect. I can understand some of the realism comments, as long as they're made tactfully.