Dare I say it...?

[Johan_Dees 84]

My DC3 doesnt require all that.. just hop in and fly.. albeit a tad slow.

Did Samadan departure, in Swiss, and when heading to Stuttgart, its a handful to get over those mountains! And FUN!

[Phillip Gallagher 101]

For me the thrill of FSX is in the complexity of the aircraft systems and the seeking of ultimate aviation realism! I enjoy the aircraft start up and airport operations procedures more than the actual flight (except for the climb out). That being said, I do see your point. It can easily take me 30 minutes just to get into the air after flight planning and start up. I don't have kids to look after so I have plenty of time for FXS. I still spend too much time at computer. Probably if I had a family I wouldn't have them anymore if I spent this much time with FSX!

[VeryBumpy 272]

Not with a plane that simulates the systems in depth.

Ctrl+E won't work

 

Lee

 

Interesting, I thought Ctrl E worked in all planes. Oh well.

 

Aside, the Aerosoft Catalina X has a 2D panel with 2 buttons, 1 for cold and dark and 1 for warm and lit. That way if you are in a hurry you just hit 1 button and you are ready to push back immediately with all systems properly set. Surprised a high end plane like the NGX doesn't have such a feature.

[LHookins 3,103]

My DC3 doesnt require all that.. just hop in and fly.. albeit a tad slow.

 

Which DC3? I'm flying the default right now, with a couple of minor tweaks. Cranking up the CHT factor in the air file from 1.0 to 1.16 makes using the cowl flaps important, at least if you're monitoring the gauge.

 

Lessee... weather and flight planning, about 30 minutes, and that's before starting FSX. Cold and dark DC3 cockpit, start the engines, let them warm up, tune the radios, request taxi clearance or announce taxi, pushback, probably 10 minutes. Taxi to the runway, too darn long in a big airport. Engine runup, maybe 5 more minutes. Engine management for takeoff, climb and cruise... there's a lot to do with a complex piston engine, even one as simple as the default DC3. Navigation by VOR and NDB, ATC comms including flight following, monitoring the weather and keeping the engines tuned, rudimentary autopilot that I don't use... there's a lot to do during flight as well.

 

Or, you can just jump in and fly. Nothing wrong with that, either.

 

You don't need a complex modern jetliner to have a fairly complex systems workload.

 

Hook

[lodestar 186]

Actually you can allways load a panel state "ready to taxi" or "ready for TO", even with the Maddog, NGX, MD11 etc and still enjoy much better fly dynamics then aerosoft bus...

I understand your point of view, but i don't like aerosoft bus, not becouse of light systems simulation but becouse of bad FBW and flight dynamics

[ryanbatc 12,851]

Not with a plane that simulates the systems in depth.

Ctrl+E won't work

 

Lee

 

Yeah but you can save a flight with engines/systems running. That's what I do with NGX... I like the plane for its graphics - but I don't have the time except for FMS programming..

[Johan_Dees 84]

Which DC3? I'm flying the default right now, with a couple of minor tweaks. Cranking up the CHT factor in the air file from 1.0 to 1.16 makes using the cowl flaps important, at least if you're monitoring the gauge.

 

Lessee... weather and flight planning, about 30 minutes, and that's before starting FSX. Cold and dark DC3 cockpit, start the engines, let them warm up, tune the radios, request taxi clearance or announce taxi, pushback, probably 10 minutes. Taxi to the runway, too darn long in a big airport. Engine runup, maybe 5 more minutes. Engine management for takeoff, climb and cruise... there's a lot to do with a complex piston engine, even one as simple as the default DC3. Navigation by VOR and NDB, ATC comms including flight following, monitoring the weather and keeping the engines tuned, rudimentary autopilot that I don't use... there's a lot to do during flight as well.

 

Or, you can just jump in and fly. Nothing wrong with that, either.

 

You don't need a complex modern jetliner to have a fairly complex systems workload.

 

Hook

 

 

I use Manfreds C47.

Changed panel, sounds, livery, flight dynamics and added realengine to it.

My videos shows thhe old one I think, is completly changed now.

http://i1187.photobucket.com/albums/z385/Johan_dees/1-1.jpg

This is how it looks now, on 6 screens.

I also changed more planes, http://s1187.beta.photobucket.com/user/Johan_dees/library/ and I can do a quick start, or a complete one, but takes only 5 minuts.

Then indeed the runup etc. if I have time.

When using the L749 or L1049 its indeed a handfull. I still need to adjust the bad airflle to make it handfly friendly.

 

Johan

[LHookins 3,103]

I use Manfreds C47.

Changed panel, sounds, livery, flight dynamics and added realengine to it.

 

Thanks. Good to see that I'm not the only one who tweaks the heck out of an aircraft.

 

Hook