Without a doubt my new go to aircraft. Well done Captain Sim.

You should bear in mind what you wrote on post number 419, and not what you've now amended that to in a revisionist post. That is to say, you wrote: 'the Heading Bug is just broken on this aircraft'. My reference was related to that comment, since what you wrote is absolutely untrue, it is not broken, it is merely not to your preference.

 

Thus yours was a misleading comment which may cause people to think there is a fault of some kind, and since it is not actually 'broken' as you state, there is nothing wrong with me saying it is fine and does not need fixing, because it is functioning; maybe not how you would like it to, but that is nevertheless the case.

 

My comment has nothing to do with attempts at railroading opinions; but saying that something is broken when it is not however, may very well have that effect, and that is why I felt it necessary to address the point.

 

Al

I got it. I must say, since I haven't bought anything CS since the 757 2 years ago, this seems to be a major step forward for them in terms of VC quality. Not that the 757 VC is awful ,which it isn't, this is just MUCH better looking. However, I'm having some issues...how in the world can I get this thing started? I took my NG knowledge and managed to start the APU, but as soon as I clicked "APU GEN" the thing died on me, with GRND PWR going offline, as well as the Bleed Air.

Any help for a guy whose traveling back in time?

The quick and dirty guide to cranking it up: Fuel pump switches on, ground power switch on, ground power source selected on the electical services bus panel. Start APU, select APU GEN on the bus transfer panel. Fuel cutoff levers on start, throttles reduced, APU bleeds on, then hit the start switch on the overhead. The engine should then crank. Switch the buses to GEN 1 and TR. Disconnect ground power. Off you go.

 

It is probably either the buses or the APU bleeds that you are forgetting.

 

Al

Got it. I guess you have to press what is the APU 2 switch in the NG to get the APU GEN working in the /200? And is there a manual on the PCDS somewhere?

Thanks,

The engines won't start unless you have the engine bleeds open, which I think is not correct in the real aircraft. There are still a small number of normal procedure systems/switches that I think are still not working correctly, such as the overspeed warning test buttons.

The engines won't start unless you have the engine bleeds open, which I think is not correct in the real aircraft. There are still a small number of normal procedure systems/switches that I think are still not working correctly, such as the overspeed warning test buttons.

 

Bingo

And is there a manual on the PCDS somewhere?

Thanks,

That one is explained in the manual2 from here. http://www.captainsi...37/manuals.html Pretty detailed instrument that is so far, but I'm having trouble that my engage key doesn't drive the EPR bugs. From reading, I think it should though. Maybe you folks can help, I've posted that issue over at CS and might set up a ticket too. Just want to make sure that I'm seeing a bug, not an user error.

Bought this bird last night.

 

Looks Beautiful and the systems are satisfactorily deep enough to satisfy me.

However, It felt way too powerful to me, I was. accelerating above 250 knts with 15 degrees pitch up and takeoff flaps still extended. This did not feel realistic. But after a small amount of tweaking in the CFG it feels more realistic.I did a short flight to Singapore and cruised at FL350, and even with my reduced engine thrust it managed to make the altitude and cruise nicely at Mach .74.

 

One thing that I have found annoying is that when you land it automatically brakes the aircraft even if you have Auto Brakes turned off. The only way to stop the braking is to come to a full-stop. I have fixed this issue by removing the Autobrakes line from the CFG.

It also needs a large amount of thrust for taxi, but this might just be because ive been using the NGX almost exclusively since it was released, and that needs very small thrust inputs for ground Handeling.

 

All in All, A very Nice Package I havent been able to get the engines started without pressing Ctrl E, but im certain this is user erorr, there must be some differences to a NG (some posts above may help me with this, as it seems im not the only one who has found the NG technique doesn't work. I haven't bought any of the expansions, I may do in the future though. Can anyone tell me if the performance characteristics of each model have been reproduced? Looking forward for the talented re painters to get onto it as well, not much choice yet.

 

(edited to remove duplication of text)

The engines won't start unless you have the engine bleeds open, which I think is not correct in the real aircraft. There are still a small number of normal procedure systems/switches that I think are still not working correctly, such as the overspeed warning test buttons.

 

The engine bleed is real for the 737-200. Too much NGX flying i guess :P

 

This is a different aircraft, it operates differently so reading the manuals is advised.

The manual with the normal procedures isn't out yet. But I think Shane has a point when stating that you currently need the engine bleeds to be open to be able to start her. This dependency isn't present on the real plane, at least they are starting her with the APU bleed on and the engine bleeds off in this video.

At 6:17, they are starting the left engine and left engine bleed is off. Later, as that one engine is running, the engine bleed comes on.

 

However, from the schematics in manual2, the engine bleed valves are the only way for the APU air to reach the engine. So I'm puzzled in regard to that rw video, where the folks are able to start without the e bleeds being open. Maybe they were left open? :Thinking: Just guessing.

The 737NG would incorporate an extra starter valve path which the original 737 doesn't have.

 

Here's a video with the bleeds on.

The manual with the normal procedures isn't out yet. But I think Shane has a point when stating that you currently need the engine bleeds to be open to be able to start her. This dependency isn't present on the real plane, at least they are starting her with the APU bleed on and the engine bleeds off in this video.

At 6:17, they are starting the left engine and left engine bleed is off. Later, as that one engine is running, the engine bleed comes on.

 

However, from the schematics in manual2, the engine bleed valves are the only way for the APU air to reach the engine. So I'm puzzled in regard to that rw video, where the folks are able to start without the e bleeds being open. Maybe they were left open? :Thinking:

The 737NG would incorporate an extra starter valve path which the original 737 doesn't have.

 

Here's a video with the bleeds on.

 

The right seat reaches up to the overhead and does something just as the camera pans down after the left seat releasing the start switch. So it's *possible* he flicks the No 1 bleed switch at that point, and it's only as the camera pans down and his arm has gone up, that the 'start valve' lamp comes on...

 

More interesting to me, though, is that they start with the engines in cutoff, and there actually isn't a 'start' detent on their fuel cutoff lever at all.

 

This picture of a 737-200 throttle pedestal shows the cut-off/start/idle detents as existing, so it's not safe to say CS got that detail wrong.

 

All in all, I'm tempted to say that the video you linked shows a 737-200 with a retrofitted throttle pedestal (possibly from a 737 classic), which might also imply different start procedures.

 

 

Edit: According to the FAA, Baker's 737 is a -201ADV, which has the 2 position fuel control. The startup procedure for the ADV *does* state that the engine bleed should be open before start, whether that translates into 'won't start if the bleed valve is closed' I have no idea. /Edit

 

Either way, it's a fairly trivial detail, and certainly doesn't affect my experience.

 

Also...

 

Start APU, select APU GEN on the bus transfer panel.

 

Edit: Although apparently I've been doing my ground air starts wrong, apparently you're supposed to start #2 first when running from ground air, then bleed #2 to start #1.

That's one way to do it, but the APU bleed air isn't necessary to start the engines, you CAN use ground air on ground power...

Right you are, small detail. On the bleeds, In regard to the schematics, I'd even say that CS did it right for the original 737. Leaves us wondering about the first video. Good catch from your side indeed. Maybe he did flip that switch.

 

I have another question for you drivers. Are you happy with the amount of thrust? Some helpful CS forum member pointed out correctly that the values should be way lower. I did the max GW takeoff test and could easily pull some 3500-4000 ft/min while accelerating rather fast. So, with just my subjective 'measurement', I'd say she offers a lot of power. Too much for being such an old brick.

The sounds and all are cool plus the hand flying is big fun. Just too much power in my eyes. Am I wrong? Tim mentioned some similar impression and the thrust values in the aircraft.cfg are indeed 'strong'.

 

However, It felt way too powerful to me, I was. accelerating above 250 knts with 15 degrees pitch up and takeoff flaps still extended. This did not feel realistic.

 

One thing that I have found annoying is that when you land it automatically brakes the aircraft even if you have Auto Brakes turned off. The only way to stop the braking is to come to a full-stop.

Surely renders her to handle more easily in e.g. the landing config and high altitude airports. But I loved the feel of the 707 in that regard, giving you very limited power with the flaps and gear hanging out. 'Do or die.'

 

Same thing on the autobrake. I'm still looking into it, but I can't disable it via manual breaking or switching it off. Full stop all the time, as you say. I can't rule out an user error, but it deserves a closer look I think.

Bought this bird last night.

 

Looks Beautiful and the systems are satisfactorily deep enough to satisfy me.

However, It felt way too powerful to me, I was. accelerating above 250 knts with 15 degrees pitch up and takeoff flaps still extended. This did not feel realistic. But after a small amount of tweaking in the CFG it feels more realistic.I did a short flight to Singapore and cruised at FL350, and even with my reduced engine thrust it managed to make the altitude and cruise nicely at Mach .74.

 

One thing that I have found annoying is that when you land it automatically brakes the aircraft even if you have Auto Brakes turned off. The only way to stop the braking is to come to a full-stop. I have fixed this issue by removing the Autobrakes line from the CFG.

It also needs a large amount of thrust for taxi, but this might just be because ive been using the NGX almost exclusively since it was released, and that needs very small thrust inputs for ground Handeling.

 

All in All, A very Nice Package I havent been able to get the engines started without pressing Ctrl E, but im certain this is user erorr, there must be some differences to a NG (some posts above may help me with this, as it seems im not the only one who has found the NG technique doesn't work. I haven't bought any of the expansions, I may do in the future though. Can anyone tell me if the performance characteristics of each model have been reproduced? Looking forward for the talented re painters to get onto it as well, not much choice yet.

 

(edited to remove duplication of text)

 

Well i guess u didnt know that this aircraft was called by pilot as the POCKET ROCKET.. well u know now why :))

No problem with a good climber or takeoff performance, but I had some +2t over max GW, flaps out, gear too and I saw those 250 and more really fast. Judging by the aircraft.cfg thrust values, we are running a third engine. Those values don't have to relate to anything in the real world for me though, but the acceleration is indeed amazing.