When I was a student my instructor didn't tell me to Google it. Of course you could only get on the net by modem then and we didn't have all the resources we have now.  But I certainly wouldn't tell my students now to Google it because it was the basics. I would explain the differences and we would move onto the next subject matter.

I mean after we explained the differences he stopped posting.  Then everyone dog piled on him mocking him.  There was absolutely no call for any of that.  The guy only has 10 posts so is obviously new and everyone is going to run new people off if we treat people this way.  And this hobby needs every person we can get.

2 hours ago, thibodba57 said:

Wow guys be nice.  While you guys might not have any idea why some people jump directly into a jet with understanding the fundamentals. I don't understand why people feel the need to jump down people's throats and mock them rather than teach them.  If your not planning on being constructive just move on please.  Aviation sim groups are some of the most hostile groups on he net.  This just proves it.  Aviation is very complex and takes YEARS to learn.  Not a single one of you knew the difference between IAS and TAS at the beginning either.

I'm guilty of that and I apologise to the OP.

However.  Culinary french cooking is also highly complex and takes many years to master.  What the OP has asked is the equivalent of me asking why my souffle hasn't puffed because I used 2 eggs and a spoon of flour (because it's that simple, right?) -  while my actual culinary skill starts and ends with making toast.   

The answer to what the OP has asked, requires the grasp of a number of basic physics/science fundamentals (as you well know).  I spent many years flying more basic aircraft and grasping basic principles before I even bought my first PMDG aircraft. I never assume anything is as easy as it seems and I can't particularly enjoy doing something if I don't really understand what I'm doing.   But that's just me.  Break it down and start at the beginning - I've always maintained that.  You learn alot more that way, and those who actually want to learn will understand that point.

I agree that sometimes the Avsim forums come across as a bit of a niche club - and I hate that kind of thing myself so I apologize if I've contributed to that view.  It wasn't meant that way.

Equally valid counter-argument, Erich.

But unlike the realworld you step into flightsim unaware of the complexities and can jump into something way over your head and not know why.  You don't now even know there is such a thing as TAS, IAS or GS or their differences.  How could you? So it's up to us to help people out that have zero understanding of what's what and not mock them.  What you seem to be expecting people todo is open up the Jepp Private Pilot Manual (880 pages) before they jump into something.  NO ONE and I mean NO ONE did that before taking a spin in the sim.  You'd be bored by the end of the first chapter and never turn the program on.

It would be like me mocking you for not doing your research and failing to program your VNAV profile to an NADP-1 close in or NADP-2 distant departure. I'm willing to bet half or more don't even know what those are and just let the default programming stay in CDU.  But I don't EXPECT people to know what those are or even exist and won't mock them for not knowing.  It's why we have a community so we can all learn and move forward together.

3 minutes ago, thibodba57 said:

But unlike the realworld you step into flightsim unaware of the complexities and can jump into something way over your head and not know why.  You don't now even know there is such a thing as TAS, IAS or GS or their differences.  How could you? So it's up to us to help people out that have zero understanding of what's what and not mock them.  What you seem to be expecting people todo is open up the Jepp Private Pilot Manual (880 pages) before they jump into something.  NO ONE and I mean NO ONE did that before taking a spin in the sim.  You'd be bored by the end of the first chapter and never turn the program on.

It would be like me mocking you for not doing your research and failing to program your VNAV profile to an NADP-1 close in or NADP-2 distant departure. I'm willing to bet half or more don't even know what those are and just let the default programming stay in CDU.  But I don't EXPECT people to know what those are or even exist and won't mock them for not knowing.  It's why we have a community so we can all learn and move forward together.

I couldn't have said it better, except that I have no idea what NADP-1 and NADP-2 departures are!

Of course now that I've heard of them I can google them!  But I don't see how the OP could have googled a distinction of which he was unaware.

Mike

 

 

25 minutes ago, Mike777 said:

I couldn't have said it better, except that I have no idea what NADP-1 and NADP-2 departures are!

But I don't see how the OP could have googled a distinction of which he was unaware.

Mike

 

 

And this is exactly my point.  How is anyone supposed to learn the differences if they don't even know that there is supposed to be a difference.  I think a lot of people need to think back here and realize they didn't come into this hobby knowing everything and they had A LOT of learning todo along the way.  And as is the truth in everything in life there are still tons of things they don't know and need to learn.

BTW, https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Documents/ReviewNADRD.pdf   General jist, close in (NADP1) 3000 AFE accelerate 1500 AFE Thrust reduction, Distant (NADP2) 1000 AFE Accelerate and Thrust reduction at some other predetermined point (747 Flaps 5).

Thank you guys anyway i have figured how much help i can get from u ( some ) but the others if you are not intrested to help please keep your nice fingers relaxed instead of typing some good words you can save for tour selves.

 

 

26 minutes ago, capt.arab said:

Thank you guys anyway i have figured how much help i can get from u ( some ) but the others if you are not intrested to help please keep your nice fingers relaxed instead of typing some good words you can save for tour selves.

 

 

If you are calculating the time yourself, by dividing total distance by the airspeed shown on the pilot's flight display, it will give you a false result. As some others have pointed out, that airspeed reading will be much lower than your true airspeed when flying at high altitudes.

The actual time enroute is available on the FMS progress page. This page will predict the time (in UTC) that you will arrive at your destination, and is continuously updated as you fly. The FMS knows how much distance is remaining to the destination at any given moment, and also knows your true airspeed and ground speed. On a long flight, the predicted arrival time may change somewhat as your ground speed changes due to headwinds and tailwinds - but it is usually reasonably accurate.

No need to calculate by hand - the FMS will do this for you.