My 'scheme' is for those who want to participate. It is not regulation. It is purely to have the satisfaction that we simulate proper check rides. I thought there was room for everyone here......

 

But obviously you seem upset with my idea. 

 

How can I impose my idea on VA's?

 

It seems like you are not short for time on this subject.

 

I'll let you continue to write huge protesting arguments. I don't see the point. I'll still make my forms and you can cry about it.

First you said I felt threatened, now you suggest I will cry about it. You still haven't shown the courtesy to address any of the points I raised.  All of which I find incredibly arrogant and self important.

 

You can't impose this idea on VAs of course, but that widespread adoption is exactly the future you envisaged in your OP.  Before you go much further I suggest you take a straw poll of VA pilots here to see what people think of your ratings and checkrides idea.

 

You're welcome to publish the forms. I'm sure some wannabe pilots will find them useful.  But can I ask your source for this information?  Clearly it's not from you, as you had to ask in this forum what the in flight restart procedure was for the 777.  So who's work are you using?

The idea brought forward is a good one.  Knowing what to do in an emergency is critical and pilots practice, practice, practice until it is automatic.  The differences in flying the airplane in an emergency between a 737-800 and the 777-200 in terms of -what to do- won't vary much...the first thing is FLY THE AIRPLANE.  The differences come in -how to do- which are very different between the 737-800 and the 777.  Mind you, this is my impression based on observation and being taught in a full motion simulator how to do emergency procedures in a 737-800.  

 

I'm not a pilot, just a dispatcher, but I've sat through enough instructional rides in various full motion sims watching pilots sweat out their lessons.  I will ALWAYS defer to pilots who are type rated in these machines to provide guidance, since they are the guys who actually have to do it...and have my enormous respect for what they do.

 

Dave

First you said I felt threatened, now you suggest I will cry about it. You still haven't shown the courtesy to address any of the points I raised.  All of which I find incredibly arrogant and self important.

 

You can't impose this idea on VAs of course, but that widespread adoption is exactly the future you envisaged in your OP.  Before you go much further I suggest you take a straw poll of VA pilots here to see what people think of your ratings and checkrides idea.

 

You're welcome to publish the forms. I'm sure some wannabe pilots will find them useful.  But can I ask your source for this information?  Clearly it's not from you, as you had to ask in this forum what the in flight restart procedure was for the 777.  So who's work are you using?

 

Hi Kevin, no I was asking about how I could 'impose' as you stated the idea on VA's. I was merely 'encouraging'.

 

To answer all your questions: I am not obligated even by courtesy to answer your questions (I think they are unreasonable as you are making assumptions) and secondly I cannot answer your question on whose work I will be using. At this time I haven't even started. But I have a suspicion that there may be emergency procedures in the PMDG manuals? Which I could then in a workgroup with some airline pilots establish a basic set (I am mean basic and not the complete airline requirement) of forms to set as a benchmark for 'knowing basic emergency actions' etc. I hope you have seen my willingness to go some of the distance to satisfying your questions here. I just don't see the need to make a defence of your accusations when it is not needed since I have made no infringement on anyone's liberty nor have I committed any offence (unless expressing an idea is) to justify a defence.

Not sure what the big deal is here? Doesn't seem like he is forcing anything onto

Anybody.

 

Daniel, sounds like a pretty good idea to me, I will be back home in a week, if you need some info on 777 simulator training scenarios I would be happy to help, I have access to all the documentation you need.

 

Regards

What the hell is going on? Are there people in this thread that actually think the OP is demanding stuff?

 

He came up with an idea to add more I. his own way to the hobby. Good for Him. I will be interested in His work and try it out myself.

 

I think some need to take a chill pill and re-read His post.

 

 

Sent from my Apple communications device.

Not sure what the big deal is here? Doesn't seem like he is forcing anything onto

Anybody.

 

Daniel, sounds like a pretty good idea to me, I will be back home in a week, if you need some info on 777 simulator training scenarios I would be happy to help, I have access to all the documentation you need.

 

Regards

Thanks I could use your help. Just inbox me about documentation when you have time.

What the hell is going on? Are there people in this thread that actually think the OP is demanding stuff?

 

He came up with an idea to add more I. his own way to the hobby. Good for Him. I will be interested in His work and try it out myself.

 

I think some need to take a chill pill and re-read His post.

 

 

Sent from my Apple communications device.

Thanks.

 

Will be interesting to be able to carry out emergency simulations, putting our skills to the test.

Yeah, I actually got chewed on coming into MEM one night, but that was because the controller hadn't really grasped the concept of his scope displaying ground speed, and the reg being set on IAS.  The wind was on the tail, and was pretty strong too.  I explained it in a PM to him on the downwind vector.

I got chewed out by a new Vatsim controller for exceeding 250kts below 10,000ft once...

 

and I was flying the Jetstream JS4100.

 

I don't think that thing can exceed 250kts with the wings still attached!

 

I think my reply was something like "I can't reduce speed to a speed faster than the one I am maintaining" or some similar.

 

 

I think my reply was something like "I can't reduce speed to a speed faster than the one I am maintaining" or some similar.

:LMAO:

...because too many of the virtual airlines still believe you can't bust 250 knots under 10,000 feet. Ever.

 

I've already been shot in the foot regarding aviation by the blunders of an ill-informed real world regulatory body (Congress.) I'd prefer to enjoy my sim time without the oversight of the VAs who are too sophomoric with the rules.

 

 

 

 

That said, it's surely an interesting idea, and it should be a fun challenge for you.

Even in real world its annoying,

I always fly in the cockpit in many countries, pilots always complain that its annoying most airspaces are emty and they dont follow any noise abatement procedures as per charts, and still they yell at you if you exceed that speed limit haha

For me, there are three types of simmers:

 

1. Likes to fly a range of aircraft from Boeing to Airbus - will buy the latest PMDG aircraft because it's PMDG. Knowing the quality and realism they provide - but will be first in line to buy something like the (example) FSL A320 after the 777. They don't want to really learn one aircraft in and out and gain what I'd call mastery. It's just another aircraft to have in the hangar to do a particular type of flying with and know the basics of how to get it from A to B.

 

2. Likes to fly one particular aircraft, study it hard and really wants to master the majority of it. It's all they really fly and love it because of the aircraft - not one hundred percent because of the developer. They'll go to extremes to do various failures and assure they use pretty much real world procedures on routine - in both normal and non-normal operations. Thousands of hours will be contained within that one aircraft normally.

 

3. Likes the quality and its "awesomeness" - but no interest in really learning some of the basic things. They'll go fly it and not know how something like VNAV really works and stick to other modes (FLCH, VS/FPA). Once again - it'll be how they fly a various selection of aircraft in their FS hangar.

Believe it or not, there are plenty of people people who do both 1) and 2)   (helps that there's always such a massive time gap between quality aircraft releases for FS)

Hi Kevin, no I was asking about how I could 'impose' as you stated the idea on VA's. I was merely 'encouraging'.

 

To answer all your questions: I am not obligated even by courtesy to answer your questions (I think they are unreasonable as you are making assumptions) and secondly I cannot answer your question on whose work I will be using. At this time I haven't even started. But I have a suspicion that there may be emergency procedures in the PMDG manuals? Which I could then in a workgroup with some airline pilots establish a basic set (I am mean basic and not the complete airline requirement) of forms to set as a benchmark for 'knowing basic emergency actions' etc. I hope you have seen my willingness to go some of the distance to satisfying your questions here. I just don't see the need to make a defence of your accusations when it is not needed since I have made no infringement on anyone's liberty nor have I committed any offence (unless expressing an idea is) to justify a defence.

That's the thing though, the procedures are already in the manuals. If people want to learn them and practice them they already can. What is the value of an external test of this knowledge?

 

I wasn't making accusations, just pointing out practical problems. You can write your own scenarios for these procedures, but I suspect using real airline scenarios (as offered by Rob) will not be legal as they will be proprietary. If you can work with some airline pilots to help you create original forms then all well and good.  As Luke said there are many different types of simmer, and all types exist in most VAs. If you encourage a VA to adopt your ratings system, the more casual simming members will feel shut out if they are required to do a checkride to progress. What's a good idea for some isn't a good idea for all and once it becomes part of a VA's operation it ceases to be voluntary.

 

Allow me to suggest an alternative idea which might please everybody.  Rather than encouraging VAs to adopt this system, why not set up a virtual training centre and offer checkrides and ratings to simmers who were interested. You could provide the forms and run the checkrides within that set up. It would be tricky to combine a checkride with a VA flight anyway as sim training scenarios tend not to flow like real flights.

 

I know you are not obliged to respond to people, but still it's good forum manners to do so, even if you think they totally wrong or making false assumptions. It stops people falling out unnecessarily. :Peace:

Nothing illegal about using the information I have, I wouldn't be giving anyone actual documentation anyway. They are just simulator scenarios that also detail tolerances allowed.

 

I am actually surprised PMDG dont include these themselves along with the FCOM, QRH etc, I honestly think most members would enjoy testing themselves and have a chance to see what real world Captains & F/O's go through every six months. I have seen some pretty interesting and sadistic scenarios over the years which would be good fun if your job was not on the line!

 

Here is one basic example of what a Captain will have to do... ( not my words, from a 777 captain)

 

In the printed scenarios it will show, allowed airspeed/ altitude, G/S, LOC deviation tolerances and obviously ability to adhere to stable approach criteria etc etc...

 

V1 cut after 6 months is in the right seat (severe damage, which kicks out the TAC-Thrust asymmetry compensator--so you have to work to keep straight). You can put the a/p in after t/off, but the subsequent ILS is manually flown, as is the g/a which is manual till cleaned up. They then give you CAVOK and you do a manual visual circuit to land. All done at different airports each time. Once had it at JFK 13L (Carnarsie). Hard work from the unfamiliar right seat! Fail and you have to resit

 

Regards

I got chewed out by a new Vatsim controller for exceeding 250kts below 10,000ft once...

 

and I was flying the Jetstream JS4100.

 

I don't think that thing can exceed 250kts with the wings still attached!

 

I think my reply was something like "I can't reduce speed to a speed faster than the one I am maintaining" or some similar.

The Regs clearly state that deviations north of 250 Kts are allowed if the prevailing operational conditions and aircraft design/type/configuration warrants it. In that situation one does not need to get prior permission from ATC. I see deviations of up to 15 Kts quite frequently but those excursions are generally short and usually when just breaking the 10'000 ft barrier.The  20 Kts taxi speed limit gives me a chuckle. I worked for a carrier that actually had this rule in their GOM for run/taxi mechanics. "taxiing should be conducted at no more than human walking speed" !! Try that at O'hare and see how long it takes to be chastised by ATC LOL!. I can see both sides of the coin. Simmers come in all shapes and sizes experience level-wize. Some are retired wide body captains while others have no relevant experience and don't know basic piloting techniques let alone operational regulations. Regards

I am,

 

just logged another 4 hrs in the WL 777-200ER - X-Plane 10 :-)))), including a CAT3 B !

Yeah yeah, we know....