ZFW Calculations.

[jcpg 1]

Hi guys, on the 747 V3,    1)  I am a bit puzzled with the on the calculation of ZFW. When I set the weights' on the weights page on the CDU it gives me immediately the ZFW value on the perf init page. So when I add the flaps value, I'm not getting the T/O speeds values, even with the setting on CDU calculates speed values. I think the problem is on the perf init page where you write in the weights for the trip you planning. Sometimes it works ok but other times I can not get the T/O speed values. So in short, when I open the page for the ZFW, reserve, cost index, etc, the ZFW is already there and then, I can not get the T/O speeds.     2)  Is there a way that we can set the flight to a more intricate way like the 737, for example. Cause its a bit too simplified and I dont mean to make it complicated, but more like 737 NGX .

Thanks in advance indeed.

John Goncalves

[PerWel 23]

I depends on if your livery have more weight sensors, if it does you need to confirm the gross weight on top left side in init page. Things that have a '>' next to it needs to be confirmed, GW  and CG  in your case. You can change if you want to have more weight sensors in the

setup pages under Airplane. It is all in the intro guide pdf, check it out. Or best read every page, lots of answers there.

Yes you can make it work like the 737, just set NO weight sensors. Does not recall the exact setting but it is possible.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

2 hours ago, jcpg said:

Cause its a bit too simplified and I dont mean to make it complicated, but more like 737 NGX .

It's not necessarily that it's too simplified. In fact, I'd argue that this is actually more complex, as you're seeing the result of a system that certain airlines have, which senses the weight of the aircraft and provides a value.

The issue is a few things:

1. You're in a habit of checking the ZFW and entering that instead of a GW (but not verifying the GW);
2. You're in a habit of rushing through all of the common items to get through all of the initialization.

The result is that you're missing the fact that the GW on that page has a < before it, which is asking you to confirm the value. Instead of dumping a ZFW in on all aircraft, make sure that you are both setting the ZFW (where you need to) and verifying the GW at the top left. By doing this, you will be in the good habit of verifying both weights (regardless of the presence of sensors), and will also be in a good position to remember to verify the GW by selecting the LSK next to it on sensor-equipped aircraft.

 

Never. Ever. Rush a preflight.

[jcpg 1]

Sure, I understand where I was doing it the wrong. Thanks you guys for that. 

The other question, (2) I'm actually referring to the whole flight. In general. Not the weight part, as I do agree is not so simple as it looks at first. Example, when you coming to land you just have to to set speed, loc, app and the system does the rest for you. I meant, give more info myself to the system. If possible. I mentioned the 737 cause there is a few more things you have to program. On the Queen V3 you do very little. I feel there might be more things. But if it works like that is also ok. 

Thanks for the help. It was helpful.

 

John

[scandinavian13 5,192]

41 minutes ago, jcpg said:

Example, when you coming to land you just have to to set speed, loc, app and the system does the rest for you. I meant, give more info myself to the system. If possible. I mentioned the 737 cause there is a few more things you have to program. On the Queen V3 you do very little. I feel there might be more things. But if it works like that is also ok. 

This is how the real 747 does it. Are you suggesting that we make it artificially less realistic to give you more things to do?

We didn't just throw that in there because we felt like it.

[achutchison 26]

That's definitely not how a real pilot would think jcpg. Just enjoy the plane. Less things to do means more handflying time!

[jcpg 1]

Ok, good. I don't doubt one bit that it is like that.  It is what it is. To be honest, I thought it was simplified to us,simmers. That's all.  I didn't think the things were just thrown in to make us extra work or anything like that.

Of course pilots want it easier like everything else in life.   I just wanted to know more about the real 'Queen'.

Anyway way, it's a pleasure to fly the new 747.  

John.

[Budbud 227]

Hi,

John, I guess you are new to PMDG. They have a long history of releasing the most realistic addons as possible. They never fake some parts of the aircrafts to make them simpler.

They even refusing to implement some features when they cannot assure that they work like the real counter part. A good exemple would be the weather radar which was absent of their addons for sometime because the FSX weather rendering didn't allow to make a weather radar working the same way as the real one. They eventually came to the WX radar when Active Sky found a workaround to depict the weather correctly.

So everything you can see in the FMC or in the systems of the aircraft are as real as possible. The only concessions they do are some extra options regarding the sim itself and the handling of some systems of the aircraft that could be done by other crew than the PF such as time acceleration, autocruise... But in no case does it alter the realism of the addon, it is just to assist the user in functions that woud be done by the FO (or to allow some to perform long hauls without staying permanently close to their computers> step climb auto, fuel balance management, time acceleration...) or the FA (doors open/close commands) or even the ground crew (cargo doors, GPU...).

Welcome to the great world of PMDG!

[jcpg 1]

Hi there Budbud,sorry,  I read your comment only today. No, I'm not new to PMDG. In fact this is my fouth plane, having the 747 V1, T7, 737 and now 747 V3. I, in fact said that maybe the plane was simplified to us due to FS limitations. I fly 90% PMDG, as I think they make the best or just about it. I'm glad I can explain so that you understand what I meant. In fact I don't even know how to fly a fsx stock plane anymore. I learned on the old 747.  Because I said it looked simplified in no way I meant that is not like reality. Don't misunderstand me, pls. I hope that once and for all I make myself understood. As I said I only fly PMDG, well almost. 

Thanks for your input, anyway. I do appreciate it, it's always very helpful of you.

John.

[Budbud 227]

10 minutes ago, jcpg said:

No, I'm not new to PMDG.

My bad, misunderstood on my side.

 

11 minutes ago, jcpg said:

Thanks for your input, anyway. I do appreciate it, it's always very helpful of you.

You are welcome.