Hoping to see in the 777 tutorial.

[EGLL77W 1,508]

I'm just waiting for all of the:

"Can someone make a tutorial for [these two airports], because I want to know how to fly it on a different route?  Is it very different to fly it to airports other than the tutorial that came with it?"

 

No way - has that actually been asked before?  :huh:  :lol:

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

No way - has that actually been asked before?  :huh:  :lol:

 

 

I just bought one of those legacy PMDG FS9 planes just to be able to fly a different route for a change, lol.

 

On a more serious note: I'm really looking forward to the 2nd (incl. ETOPS) tutorial - though it'll be released even after the T7.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Yes I think there is a difference between a quick flight to learn the systems of the plane, and a flight that needs to allow for ETOPS procedures and crossing the Atlantic with NATS.

 

That wasn't what I was getting at.  If I aimed it at your requests, I would've quoted your post.

 

ETOPS would be difficult, because it depends on the level of certification you're simulating.  "Out of the box," the 777 came with 180 min in FAA-land (EASA - JAA at the time - of course, didn't agree, and limited it to 120 initially).  The FAA now allows up to 330 min for the 777, but only select models and select engine pairs.  So, which one do they write the tutorial to?  Beyond that, what else do you need to know?

 

And what's so difficult about NATs?  Steal a plan from FlightAware for that day, or go to https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/common/nat.html if you plan on simulating a flight real time, using the same departure time (NATs change twice a day, so if you try simulating the US-Europe leg 12 hours off, then all you're going to see are westbound NATs).

 

 

 

Are you implying you fly routes, different from the tutorial route, in the NGX, for example?!?

 

What???  They fly NGs places other than London, Amsterdam and Innsbruck???

(Innsbruck, I might add, is ridiculous.  Visiting in person places a whole new perspective on that whole flight, especially because it was hard IFR when I was there.)

 

 

 

No way - has that actually been asked before?

 

Similar has been requested.  You can see hints at it when people ask for different versions of the tutorials, or are asking for generic help.  I'm still somewhat worried that future generations won't even be able to read with how many times people request YouTube versions of tutorials...

 

Many of the YouTube "tutorials" are just some scratchy-voiced 14 year old running through the PMDG tutorial that you could just as easily read yourself.  And to say they're accurate, or detailed, is in many cases a stretch

Why are you flipping that switch YouTubeMan?  Is it always required?

Just do it, because my squeaky voice says so!

[cavaricooper 2,615]

Kyle-

 

"Many of the YouTube "tutorials" are just some scratchy-voiced 14 year old running through the PMDG tutorial that you could just as easily read yourself.  And to say they're accurate, or detailed, is in many cases a stretch

Why are you flipping that switch YouTubeMan?  Is it always required?

Just do it, because my squeaky voice says so!"

 

Agreed 100%- the VAST amount of NGX procedural videos on YouTube are total rubbish.  It's scary how many self appointed Oracles at Delphi we seem to evoke.  That said, there are a few that are VERY worthwhile.... just have to sort through the chaff first!

[EGLL77W 1,508]

Many of the YouTube "tutorials" are just some scratchy-voiced 14 year old running through the PMDG tutorial that you could just as easily read yourself.  And to say they're accurate, or detailed, is in many cases a stretch

Why are you flipping that switch YouTubeMan?  Is it always required?

Just do it, because my squeaky voice says so!

Couldn't agree more. There's one particular set of tutorials for the NGX that are somewhat good - however running over a switch and just saying "That's hardly used" or "Those need to be on during X part of the flight only". Why though? That's what a lot of people miss with tutorials.

 

With these extremely detailed aircraft, I think it's important to have a somewhat solid understanding of what happens behind the scenes of the panel and what effect things truly have. That's something I'm going to be big on during my 777 tutorials - I mean I'm not going to AoA's detail, but I'd like people to have a real understanding and explanation for things.

[masneoquil 66]

Like mine?  :lol:  -_-

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Agreed 100%- the VAST amount of NGX procedural videos on YouTube are total rubbish.  It's scary how many self appointed Oracles at Delphi we seem to evoke.  That said, there are a few that are VERY worthwhile.... just have to sort through the chaff first!

 

I think it's just the nature of the hobby and sector, really.  First, the personality of the person attracted to being a pilot, tends to be very Type A, with sophomoric tendencies (in the manner that the barely seasoned ones often tend to assume they know everything - just look at my responses in the past - I'm a prime example, even recently).  Add in to the fact that a lot of the simmers also have geeky/nerdy tendencies, which often also come with that Type A personality.  Those two combined tend to create this wonderful personality with a frustrated sense of self worth.  Geeks and nerds doesn't really have the chance to show off to people in person (when it comes to doing something on a computer).  Enter YouTube.  Now they can all show off how much they know, and that sophomoric attitude I mentioned earlier is evident in a ton of those videos.

 

 

 

Couldn't agree more. There's one particular set of tutorials for the NGX that are somewhat good - however running over a switch and just saying "That's hardly used" or "Those need to be on during X part of the flight only". Why though? That's what a lot of people miss with tutorials.

 

Yep.  I know I'm probably getting more worked up about it than most others, as I used to do corporate training and understand the importance of the 'why,' but it's definitely an issue out there.

[maukro_1990 38]

I really hope that they include a good fuel calculator in the base package, so i know exactly how much fuel i need for my ultra long range flights!!!

[gman1986 14]

Does anybody know what airports the first tutorial will be between?

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I really hope that they include a good fuel calculator in the base package

 

It's called the manuals, or the FMS.  If you have the NGX, tutorial 2 describes how to use the FMS as a fuel calc.

[masneoquil 66]

I really hope that they include a good fuel calculator in the base package, so i know exactly how much fuel i need for my ultra long range flights!!!

 The best fuel calculator that you will find will be PFPX in conjunction with TOPCAT.

[Richard McDonald Woods 168]

The best fuel calculator that you will find will be PFPX in conjunction with TOPCAT.

This is certainly true. PFPX will provide route calculations (including North Atlantic, North and South Pacific tracks), en route winds expected, fuel burn estimates, flight level changes, and full ETOPS calculations as required by real-world airline dispatchers.

 

If you want something more, then you don't understand flight planning!

 

Cheers, R

[Tabs 2,790]

Does anybody know what airports the first tutorial will be between?

 

I do. 

[Rickie Welsh 27]

Hello,  I hope Tabs is not getting confused between this Forum and a marriage ceremony.   Richard Welsh

[gman1986 14]

 

I do.

 

Oh, being like that now are we?