Does anyone have the Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System if so can you tell me how to configure the yoke to do things in the sim.

Zachary,

 

I have the Saitek Pro Flight Yoke system with extra throttle unit and the Pro pedals. I also have a Saitek X45 stick with throttle. I set everything up via FSUIPC which is the only way to go for me, since I use different configurations for different airplanes.

 

I also have Goflight units for handling gear, flaps, trim, radios etc and a CPFlight MCP for autopilot functions on some airplanes.

 

Like:

 

- stick with throttle unit with one spoiler axis, two throttle axis and two reverse axis and one flaps axis . The X45 throttle units rudder function I use as tiller axis. (Aerosoft Airbus Extreme)

- yoke with saitek throttle and the axis setup as above (PMDG 737 and other two engined jets)

- stick with x45 throttle unit for the Lotussim L-39

- stick with saitek throttle with the axis set up for throttle, prop and mixture when flying the (Realair Lancair, SF260, SIbwings Birdog etc)

- yoke with saitek throttle unit set up with two axis for throttle, two for prop and two for mixture (eg the Realair Duke, Aeroworx B200)

- yoke with saitek throttle unit setup with one spoiler axis, four throttle axis with detent for reverse and final axis for flaps (PMDG 747, Qualitysim Avro)

 

well, you get the picture..

Zachary,

 

I have the Saitek Pro Flight Yoke system with extra throttle unit and the Pro pedals. I also have a Saitek X45 stick with throttle. I set everything up via FSUIPC which is the only way to go for me, since I use different configurations for different airplanes.

 

I also have Goflight units for handling gear, flaps, trim, radios etc and a CPFlight MCP for autopilot functions on some airplanes.

 

Like:

 

- stick with throttle unit with one spoiler axis, two throttle axis and two reverse axis and one flaps axis . The X45 throttle units rudder function I use as tiller axis. (Aerosoft Airbus Extreme)

- yoke with saitek throttle and the axis setup as above (PMDG 737 and other two engined jets)

- stick with x45 throttle unit for the Lotussim L-39

- stick with saitek throttle with the axis set up for throttle, prop and mixture when flying the (Realair Lancair, SF260, SIbwings Birdog etc)

- yoke with saitek throttle unit set up with two axis for throttle, two for prop and two for mixture (eg the Realair Duke, Aeroworx B200)

- yoke with saitek throttle unit setup with one spoiler axis, four throttle axis with detent for reverse and final axis for flaps (PMDG 747, Qualitysim Avro)

 

well, you get the picture..

 

So I should use FSUIPC for the configure.

So I should use FSUIPC for the configure.

If there is one thing simmers agree upon, that is the one. You have to get the paid version but it really is a no brainer.

If there is one thing simmers agree upon, that is the one. You have to get the paid version but it really is a no brainer.

 

How much is it i live in the us.

I don't remember - you have to check the sales page of FSUIPC.

If you want my advice - go back to FS2004 and the earlier PMDG 737 800/900. I have spent some time trying to adapt to virtual cockpit and it seems to be a realism too far. The earlier sim was realism enough.

 

No way I can agree on that one mate.

The NGX is the perfectly right step towards more realism in pc flight simulation. There is no such thing as "enough realism".

I highly commend PMDG for their efforts in maxing out realism and strongly encourage them to further continue this way.

 

Thank you but it is academic so far as I am concerned. The 737NGX has been uninstalled, thrown away and the review written. I spoke to a retailer who specialises in FS software and he tells me that the rate of returns for PMDG is significantly higher than any other; the main complaint being the lack of basic instruction. As I suspected, the average purchaser wants first of all to get up and running (for which he needs a basic page of instructions) after which he can then take the matter to levels of greater detail. I believe that PMDG are making a grave commercial error in believing that the market are happy to trawl through hundreds of pages in the first instance.

 

PMDG would do well to take a page out of a rival manufacturer - I forget their name - whose 767 is just as detailed (and with just as many pages of instruction) as a PMDG offering but nevertheless comes with a simple 'start' guide to ensure that the user does not lose interest during the learning process.

 

Anyway, thank you for your help.

Thank you but it is academic so far as I am concerned. The 737NGX has been uninstalled, thrown away and the review written. I spoke to a retailer who specialises in FS software and he tells me that the rate of returns for PMDG is significantly higher than any other; the main complaint being the lack of basic instruction. As I suspected, the average purchaser wants first of all to get up and running (for which he needs a basic page of instructions) after which he can then take the matter to levels of greater detail. I believe that PMDG are making a grave commercial error in believing that the market are happy to trawl through hundreds of pages in the first instance.

 

PMDG would do well to take a page out of a rival manufacturer - I forget their name - whose 767 is just as detailed (and with just as many pages of instruction) as a PMDG offering but nevertheless comes with a simple 'start' guide to ensure that the user does not lose interest during the learning process.

 

Anyway, thank you for your help.

 

If you have some factual information to support your own claims and those of this "sales" guy, please do post them for all to see.

 

In the meantime, please just stop making 100% false claims. The NGX came with plenty of documentation and two tutorials, plus an introduction document.

All of these facts have been beaten into your head at this point, and frankly I'm sure many here are tired of reading the same baseless complaints from you.

 

You didn't like the NGX, and that's your opinion which is fine, but stop spreading misinformation. It's not welcome here.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone...typing errors imminent

If you took the trouble to see what the 737 NGX came with, you would find that it was accompanied by a booklet that described the FMC and little besides. I put it to you that most users do not want to have to trawl through a mass of pdf documentation simply to get the panel into the correct shape to start the engines and taxi out.

 

None of the points I have raised are baseless since I have supported all my assertions with fact. The paragraph above can hardly be 'misinformation' since it is a matter of fact. The only point of opinion I have raised is that of the virtual flightdeck. In my opinion the 2D alternative is the more realistic of the two.

I believe that PMDG are making a grave commercial error in believing that the market are happy to trawl through hundreds of pages in the first instance.

 

Yeah right, I'm sure the NGX is a one of the all time commercial failures in the Flight Simulation World :rolleyes: . Really man, I wouldn't be surprised if the NGX hasn't sold more units than the next 3 or 4 developers have sold of all their planes available combined.

 

PMDG would do well to take a page out of a rival manufacturer - I forget their name - whose 767 is just as detailed (and with just as many pages of instruction) as a PMDG offering but nevertheless comes with a simple 'start' guide to ensure that the user does not lose interest during the learning process.

 

Anyway, thank you for your help.

 

This is the second time you've mentioned "some other developers 767." If that one is so wonderful and detailed in its instruction, which it might be, than why is it you have such a problem starting cold/dark or other essentially similar tasks with the NGX? The process is almost exactly the same, and I believe it is a fair statement to say that if you know how to do something on an even half decent simulation of the 767, you can pretty much do the same thing on the NGX without even glancing at the manuals. Yet, for some reason, you profess to be utterly stonewalled, as if you've never seen anything like it in all of your life. Something isn't adding up here....

 

I still think you are just trolling.

If you took the trouble to see what the 737 NGX came with, you would find that it was accompanied by a booklet that described the FMC and little besides. I put it to you that most users do not want to have to trawl through a mass of pdf documentation simply to get the panel into the correct shape to start the engines and taxi out.

 

None of the points I have raised are baseless since I have supported all my assertions with fact. The paragraph above can hardly be 'misinformation' since it is a matter of fact. The only point of opinion I have raised is that of the virtual flightdeck. In my opinion the 2D alternative is the more realistic of the two.

 

Have you even done either of the tutorials offered with the NGX?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone...typing errors imminent

Yeah right, I'm sure the NGX is a one of the all time commercial failures in the Flight Simulation World :rolleyes: . Really man, I wouldn't be surprised if the NGX hasn't sold more units than the next 3 or 4 developers have sold of all their planes available combined.

 

 

 

This is the second time you've mentioned "some other developers 767." If that one is so wonderful and detailed in its instruction, which it might be, than why is it you have such a problem starting cold/dark or other essentially similar tasks with the NGX? The process is almost exactly the same, and I believe it is a fair statement to say that if you know how to do something on an even half decent simulation of the 767, you can pretty much do the same thing on the NGX without even glancing at the manuals. Yet, for some reason, you profess to be utterly stonewalled, as if you've never seen anything like it in all of your life. Something isn't adding up, here....

 

I still think you are just trolling.

 

That is why I spoke to a dealer. I have told you what he said. In writing a review I am obliged to assume that most users will not have that particular 767 in their collection. I assume that they can only be guided by what is in the box. How do know the 767 - which I have not identified - the be only half-decent.

 

Trolling? I am not Norwegian.

 

Have you even done either of the tutorials offered with the NGX?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone...typing errors imminent

You will see from an earlier response from me that I have.

Oh, so now the story changes...YOU don't have a problem understanding how to use the NGX, because of your wonderful 767, you're just playing ignorant for the sake of others.

 

Uh huh....

I was hoping this thread was going to sink a little but it keeps floating back up.