Service base failures (PMDG feedback if poss?)

[Tabs 2,790]

I can bring this idea up with the dev team.

[Flamin_Squirrel 71]

I can bring this idea up with the dev team.

 

Thank you!

[Sara Louise Capon 21]

Many different failure types can be good,

to practice what's in the manuals,

and possibly a few that aren't.

That's what simulators are for,

so we can do it in 'fantasy',

especially as most of can't do it in reality.

As long as every flight isnt a mishap lol,

that would be kind of tedious unless so desired.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I always considered simulators more for practice than for fantasy, but to each their own I guess.

 

When I think fantasy, I think of something that would never happen. When I think simulator, I think of something that could possibly, or will happen.

[Airbusman330 300]

I always considered simulators more for practice than for fantasy, but to each their own I guess.

 

When I think fantasy, I think of something that would never happen. When I think simulator, I think of something that could possibly, or will happen.

 

Right now being an airline pilot is out of my reach so in a way FS is a fantasy world for me and probably for others as well.

[kevinh 409]

I always considered simulators more for practice than for fantasy, but to each their own I guess.

 

When I think fantasy, I think of something that would never happen. When I think simulator, I think of something that could possibly, or will happen.

The vast majority of flight sim users aren't practising for anything. It's used as a hobby, an end in itself. Anyone who has flown for a virtual airline is certainly indulging in fantasy.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

The vast majority of flight sim users aren't practising for anything. It's used as a hobby, an end in itself. Anyone who has flown for a virtual airline is certainly indulging in fantasy.

 

You mean I'm special because I use the sim for things other than fantasy? I've always kind of chuckled at VAs. I've been in a few, but in the end, I found them too restrictive and gamey.

 

You landed with a 0.898234 v/s touchdown rate! Perfect! You get a gold star! Captain after 30 flights! Fly any aircraft by rank!

 

(Sorry, I'd outright agree with you, but I don't want to incite the Mayans)

[Danielsen 14]

I don't fly a big airliner for a living (yet), so flight sim to me is mostly "fantasy" I suppose. BUT I do like to be very realistic about my flights, but in the end that's not even training. Briefing an approach to my self might be more than others do, but still don't consider it purely training. It's just my way of having fun. When I do use flight sim for training however, it has nothing to do with having the latest CPU, graphics card, nor an up to date version for the latest Aerosoft scenery nor a very complex airliner such as the NGX. I use the default Baron a lot for keeping me in the loop for IFR stuff.

I agree with you Kyle, that most VAs are very restrictive and have strange ranking systems! I used to think that was very fun. But in the end showing off your hundreds of hours or passing checkrides, doesn't prove nothing. I actually have much more fun on my own doing my own thing lol!

[EGLL77W 1,508]

Briefing an approach to my self might be more than others do

 

I found myself saying "Cabin crew doors to manual and cross-check, thanks!" to myself :LMAO:

 

I always considered simulators more for practice than for fantasy, but to each their own I guess.

 

Yep, I used FSX to practice VOR & NDB navigation in GA - helped massively throughout my training. Along with learning to identify VOR/NDB's morse-code's from my Sectional.

 

I've done a ton of VFR flights in the simulator using the terminal charts too just by Pilotage.

 

Before I do my MCC (Multi Crew Cooperation) course, I'll definitely use the NGX to familiarise myself with the 737 if I've forgotten it all by the time I've got through ATPLs :(

[LHookins 3,102]

I've found that when flying any aircraft that has a possibility of failures, I tend to be more alert and watch the instruments more. Even if there are failures, but they almost never happen, you can pretty much ignore the instruments and not worry about it. That's not simming, that's gaming.

 

For those who tend to start a flight then go to bed, or who fly with very high time compression, a higher chance of failures probably wouldn't be to their liking.

 

Keep in mind that a higher chance of failures doesn't mean you'll have multiple failures on every flight. The whole idea of having an increased chance of failure is to keep you on your toes. Since not everyone wants this experience, then a variable failure rate could even allow them to turn off failures completely for those aircraft that don't already have this ability. When I'm flight testing, I don't want failures. When I'm flying a normal flight, I'd like that chance, and it should be just high enough to keep me alert, but not high enough to be annoying.

 

Hook

[algarete 15]

I always considered simulators more for practice than for fantasy, but to each their own I guess.

 

When I think fantasy, I think of something that would never happen. When I think simulator, I think of something that could possibly, or will happen.

 

Well it depends how you characterize "fantasy" because in my world something will happen... :girl_devil: :Worried: :girl_devil:

 

Oh... and thanks for reminding me not to run out of gas or hit a bird in FSX, because i really want to be around for the new release of PMDG 777...... :p0504: :LMAO:

[ttaylor0024 0]

Failures will happen in the NGX... I actually had my nose gear get stuck down one flight, then promptly buckle upon touchdown.

[froggy 21]

 

For those who tend to start a flight then go to bed, or who fly with very high time compression, a higher chance of failures probably wouldn't be to their liking.

 

 

For those people, Just have it set as an option in the FMC options menu. I.e 1x, 2x, 4x..................................................................

 

oh hang on, The whole Configuration options thing is unrealistic, therefore FSX is a fantasy. PMDG HAS CONTRADICTED THEIR OWN MANTRA!!!!!! STOP THE PRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol

[Danielsen 14]

I found myself saying "Cabin crew doors to manual and cross-check, thanks!" to myself :LMAO:

 

Yep, I used FSX to practice VOR & NDB navigation in GA - helped massively throughout my training. Along with learning to identify VOR/NDB's morse-code's from my Sectional.

 

I've done a ton of VFR flights in the simulator using the terminal charts too just by Pilotage.

 

Before I do my MCC (Multi Crew Cooperation) course, I'll definitely use the NGX to familiarise myself with the 737 if I've forgotten it all by the time I've got through ATPLs :(

 

Haha exactly! But personally I don't consider that other than having some fun :lol:

Also I personally endorse using flight sim for IFR familiarisation and keeping your skills current. Making all the mistakes at home in front of my PC instead of on the clock in the airplane saved me a ton of money! I never really trained VFR flying in flight sim. But for navigation, if you have great VFR scenery, I can see that as a great tool for area familiarisation as well. But never ever have I used it to get to know how the C172 handles. Doesn't even come close! :lol:

 

In a few months I'll be ready for my MCC and I'm going to spend some time with the NGX before that as well ^_^

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Yeah, I use it all the time prior to longer XC flights (I have UTX/GEX) just so I can get a feel for how the flight will go. Some airports are difficult to spot, and don't have many great landmarks to reference, so just knowing how you'll approach the airport visually helps sometimes.