thanks bob. william

This is for Daniel and Bob also...Have any of you ever flown with XPLANE (a recent version like 7.x) and compared the flight dynamics of this to FS2004? I have read numerous postings by real-world pilots who attest that X-Plane, while not "amazing", still has much better and realistic airplane behaviour and hence FDE than FS2004.As for the yoke/joystick sensitivies: they DO make a difference with respect to especially the rudder and rudder trim as well as the ailerons which become crucial when landing. I have adjusted the sensitivity of my CH flight yoke to suit the PMDG 737NG (600/700) and realized that it plays a huge role in how much dead zone/null you put and how much you reduce the percent sensitivity. I now fly with around 80% and somethig like 2-4% null zone but Bob's suggestion for looking at the flight control surfaces looks like a great idea which I will try. Daniel, on what do you base your statement that 154KIAS is too fast for a heavy? It isn't. Your take-off speed depends on your MTOW, the temperature and (in real life), runway conditions (which do not really exist in FS2004). John

edited by author..

>Your take-off speed depends on your MTOW, >the temperature and (in real life), runway conditions For anyone who wants to see the difference, take off from KFUL, which is 98 feet... Then, take off from L35 Big Bear City . . . .. This field due to the altitude, has a record of accidents caused by altitude & inexperienced pilots or even experienced Pilot Error. A combination of thin air at 6000' and an airport surrounded by mountains. A lake at the end of the runway, winds at times can be gusting to 35kts, from various directions coming through the gaps. Sometimes from more than one direction along the flight path. Set up with a 35kt cross wind, and land there in a KingAir for a challange. L35 is one of my favorite airfields due to the scenery. With MESH and landclass from http://fsgenesis.net, sliders set to maximum, its as real as you can get, without photographic scenery. It is also one of my favorite areas to go camping, National Forest where you can do "Dispersed Camping." That means, not in assigned camping spots, just picking a good spot off a dirt road out in the woods. You can stay there for a week, and not see another person, but lots of wildlife. Bob

>This is for Daniel and Bob also...>Have any of you ever flown with XPLANE (a recent version like>7.x) and compared the flight dynamics of this to FS2004? I>have read numerous postings by real-world pilots who attest>that X-Plane, while not "amazing", still has much better and>realistic airplane behaviour and hence FDE than FS2004.>JohnHavent flown XPLANE since about V4 . . . which a friend had. But didnt like the limitations area of scenery compared to the MSFS at the time. The difference in flight dynamics was not enough to get me to purchase it. It could be better today, have heard another friend is using XPLANE only, will have to check with him. Don't see either enough, both moved out of Orange County, CA. to get away from the smog. 200 miles is to far with todays gas prices in CA for casual trips. Bob

Checked the B1900 again to make sure, and trim is more like 1.5 +/- a hair or two... :-sun1 Bob

>This is for Daniel and Bob also...>Have any of you ever flown with XPLANE (a recent version like>7.x) and compared the flight dynamics of this to FS2004? I>have read numerous postings by real-world pilots who attest>that X-Plane, while not "amazing", still has much better and>realistic airplane behaviour and hence FDE than FS2004.>>As for the yoke/joystick sensitivies: they DO make a>difference with respect to especially the rudder and rudder>trim as well as the ailerons which become crucial when>landing. I have adjusted the sensitivity of my CH flight yoke>to suit the PMDG 737NG (600/700) and realized that it plays a>huge role in how much dead zone/null you put and how much you>reduce the percent sensitivity. I now fly with around 80% and>somethig like 2-4% null zone but Bob's suggestion for looking>at the flight control surfaces looks like a great idea which I>will try. >>Daniel, on what do you base your statement that 154KIAS is too>fast for a heavy? It isn't. Your take-off speed depends on>your MTOW, the temperature and (in real life), runway>conditions (which do not really exist in FS2004). >>JohnCheck my statement which is somewhat different from your statement above 'rewriting' what I have said."And 154 kts is a high speed even for a heavy. To do 200 kts is absolute lunacy for lift off to occur.I am sure this is soundly based, because I am working off the FS2004 manual."And William you didn't say how much flap you are using. You sound like a dedicated pilot when you can't even state flap settings when you are discussing take off flight tests.......So, we have no idea what you are talking about until you can provide all the data.I found one site saying a 15 degree flap setting is used for 777IGW and 300. I will ask about this tomorrow.Daniel

>>>And William you didn't say how much flap you are using.<<

Your actually wrong John... I'm a real world pilot (Cessna 152,172,182) and I can tell you that the Default Cessna 172/182 is far more realistic than any add-on aircraft. I'm a little late on this discussion but I'll say this little bit. When flying light aircraft in the real world, they are very touchy as far as the controls. When you have to take off in a cross wind it's very challenging at times. Microsoft has captured this very well. The Flight1 172 is way too stable, same goes for their 152. Microsoft has captured well the feel of the real birds especially if you using the CH peddles & yoke combination. Actually I didn't realize what MS had done until I bought the CH controllers. I wish I could have gotten in on this discussion a little earlier because many of you are criticizing a perfectly great FDE. The instability factor in the default Cessna aircraft's FDE's is spot on to what one would get in the real aircraft. Many of you non real world flyers would be surprised... :-roll

If we were always constructive in our responses to others, or original postings, and attempted to help, instead of criticize, fewer threads would be "locked." In my opinion, criticism is always destructive, only constructive suggestions are beneficial, and if you refuse to argue, Trolls will go elsewhere. Ignore negative comments, just give your positive input, or factual information. If there are more positive comments or constructive suggestions, and regardless what anyone says, those who need the information, will get it. Arguements Pro or Con about wording, instead of facts, do not change opinions, and just waste time or bandwidth. English for many in these forums, is not their first language, it is amazing how well many do communicating in spite of that. If we try to be more _friendly_ instead of nit-picking, we can all enjoy the forums more.

5 degrees of flaps and 8 degrees of up trim or where the 8 is on the trim indicator. it gets me off the ground at about that speed. unfortunitly, nowhere is takeoff trim mentioned in any place i've looked and that includes manuals as far back as FS2000. i'm suprised it's left out unless they mean for it to stay in the neutral position. a little to vague for me. let me throw this out here too, seeing the landing touchdown speeds on alot of aircraft are close to their takeoff speeds, should the takeoff trim be close to where it's set for the landing trim? if so then that could be an indication of where the takeoff trim should be set. william

Before disconnecting the autopilot, I adjust my speed so trim is neutral. By doing that, it is a much smoother transition to manual control. Then, I use only whatever trim is necessary for control. Generally, 1-1.5 uptrim seems about correct for landing, and helps control airspeed. Bob