You are absolutely correct in stating that the main use of the FMC is to provide cost efficient flight. It does provide what if scenarios as well that cover route changes on the fly to insure max performance and staying within specified parameters for engine operation and also provides fuel management and respective cautions where needed. Crossing altitude predictions are nice to monitor the pilot's performance.One thing to consider in FS is that for really complex aircraft where you have a PF, PNF, and possibly a flight engineer in the real world to share duties and cross check/audit the other pilots operations, in FS there (usually) is only one person that manages the entire flight so some kind of assistance really helps.I have been watching a DVD from Just Planes which documents several Bel-Air flights around Europe, mostly cabin operations. It was interesting to see the verification on STARS performed by the FMC but once ATC starting vectoring away we go with twiddling the A/P knobs. The aircraft are B757-200 and 767-300. There was also a tour of the instruments and systems and also a discussion of the planning involved including the computerized briefing and analysis prepared by their dispatchers. Those that want this level of realism would probably desire an FMC.

I did not know that about Tom.Tom: Say hi to Perri Coyne for me at PHX and thanks for their support and name on the Primus 1000 they authorized for us. Not gonna say which a/c yet.

For some reason bringing up the FMC topic leads to discussions whether FMCs are luxury items and whether FMC make sense because real aircraft are flown without any automatic aid.In my opinion, it IS possible to write something like Bendix--King's GNS-X series and implement it in the panel of ANY type of aircraft. Why do I think this is possible? Because the thing doesn't need to fully simulate each and every function the real thing has. And for lateral navigation, it doesn't even have to know any performance parameter of the aircraft, turn anticipation should be possible based on airspeed alone.All I'm asking for is something that allows me to at least use (on an alphanumeric keyboard!) origin/runway, destination/runway, route (airways, intersections, waypoints), user waypoints, SIDs, STARs, holdings and directs together with the common features like waypoint and route editing, return to origin, maybe alternate destination, discontinuities, display of bearing and distance between waypoints etc. And if it is possible by e.g. entering some aircraft performance parameters: TOD, TOC, VNAV in the form of entering waypoint altitude constraints displaying v/s needed to reach them etc. VNAV cannot be exact of course, because it's a generic FMC, but I don't ask for a completely integrated FMC!In fact, the FMC should drive the heading bug, that's all, but with all the comfort of editing the lateral route in every way modern FMCs allow it to do. VNAV is not the big question, though I can imagine to have some support in vertical navigation - nothing that drives the autopilot, but helps me to make calculations in real time easier - nor is fuel prediction and such, that I guess won't be correctly possible even when entering some performance parameters for the FMC unit. For such things to work I assume it needs to be tailored specifically for an aircraft and integrated into the add-on package as it is already the case with so many.The argument that one needs to be able to fly the plane on raw data only is true and I ditto this. But since we have only GPSs and almost no FMCs, I guess most of the planes we have are ALREADY flown using traditional instrumentation, what alternatives do we have? There'll be always people who can only follow a magenta route. But if the generic FMC I'm asking for doesn't have an ND, even this argument is invalidated.Andreas

>September 2005 AIRAC release lately for it as well!Thankyou for the headsup Jean Luc! ...I almost get more pleasure from firing up your GPS units that firing up the a/c :-lolHello Jan, great work m8! that's the first pic I have seen of your excellent work. And thankyou for all your help in the design forum. :)

regardsEd

http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/127324.jpgAMD Athlon 64 3500+, 1024Mb PC3200 DDR, 300Gb HD 128Mb DDR Nvidia 6600GT PCI Express, Audigy 2 ZSCH Products Yoke, Pedals and Throttle Quadrant

phjvh - thats most impressive. I find that mind-blowing that you re-progrogged the FS9 GPS to create an FMS. Wicked! :)

Lou.I want to get the Baron but the old credit card's taken a beating recently. Any chance you can sell me one with a non-functioning AP at a knocked-down price??! You know, so I can practise my flying skills... :DJust kidding..Ian

There is at least one generic FMC, freeware from Scumari: http://fmc.scumari.nl/

All FMCs are "Generic" when they are made - the manufacturer of the aircraft (or the buyer of the aircraft, when ordering it) decides which company's FMC they want in it and it is fitted. Collins, Honeywell or whoever don't make a flight management system for a B777-700 or a Bombardier DHC9-Q100, they make a system which is then programmed with data suitable for the aircraft it is going in. That's usually where all the clever bits come in. ;-)Cheers,Ian P.

I know of 2 freeware FMCs, the one you mention, and "simple FMC" (available in the forum). They have one big disadvantage: they're standalone programs and not gauges, so they don't run in FS9 directly...Andreas

The hardware may be, but the software is customised for the aircraft it's installed in.Performance parameters, weight and ballance data, number and type of engines, etc. etc. all play a role in determining the working of the unit.As said, on top of that a unit can be customised for a particular customer, and possibly for an individual aircraft in a customer fleet.The units in your E-3s might look the same as the ones in a KC-135R but if you were to switch boxes between the types there'd be problems because of the different engines and weight distribution.Not as much as putting the same unit in a 747 (for example) but enough to give people headaches.