Loading wind data into FMC

[edpatino 1,960]

5 hours ago, 737Andi said:

Hi,

I'm not sure if I'm correctly loading the wind data into the FMC. I have sucessfully activated the ACARS system on the center CDU. It says DLNK ACT* on the bottom right.

Then I'm going to LEGS - RTE DATA - REQUEST SEND - wait until LOAD is displayed and click that - then I click EXEC.

However I do not see the wind directions in the right column under wind. For example a letter W for wind coming from the west.

Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks!

Best regards Andreas

Have a look in youtube. There are videos explaining in detail the use of the FMC on different PMDG aircraft.

Cheers, Ed

[BlueStar 323]

3 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

I've operated with all the branches of the US Armed Forces

I went on a couple of camping trips with some Sailors and Marines when I was in Vietnam so I do have some real life experiences with members of the other military branches.  🙂

Grace and Peace,  

[vc10man 732]

17 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

in the Maddog

Thinking of getting it, Marc. Is it really as the good positive things said about it?

[Budbud 227]

21 hours ago, 737Andi said:

However I do not see the wind directions in the right column under wind. For example a letter W for wind coming from the west.

Am I doing something wrong?

The only thing you are doing wrong is to wrongly interprete the "W". It doesn't mean wind coming from west but that Wind entry is present. Click on the arrow next to the W to see the wind entries.

[Ephedrin 418]

1 hour ago, vc10man said:

Thinking of getting it, Marc. Is it really as the good positive things said about it?

Absolutely, but completely different to anything you‘ve probably flown yet... there‘s no tutorial so make sure to work yourself through the manual.. I had the Ultimate Airliners DC9 so I felt a bit t home. But it really is a lot to learn. The MCP/FCU/ what ever it‘s called on an MD80 is very different too. But once you feel comfortable with the flight deck it‘s a real pleasure. 

But to be fair, let‘s stick to PMDG here 🙂 haha

[vc10man 732]

30 minutes ago, Ephedrin said:

But to be fair, let‘s stick to PMDG here 🙂 haha

Good idea, except I saw the bit you mentioned, 'word=not-allowed'😀, hence asked.. Thanks for the reply anyway.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I'm coming into this thread very late, but wanted to offer up some comments because I'm really baffled by the commentary here...

"Read the manual" is technically an answer. It's not as specific and potentially helpful as "here's a step-by-step guide to solve your issue," but this is a user-to-user support forum. I find it hard to believe that any answer - that anyone providing is volunteering to provide - would be rejected so bluntly. Again, I will re-state that every single answer in this thread was provided for free by the person providing it, and from having a look, none of them were incorrect.

As loading wind data can be done more than a few different ways - and simulated on different levels in various ways - I fully support those who said "read the manual" because it is a pretty complex topic, deserving of pictures, and step-by-step instructions. Given that this is provided, I would find it unreasonable for someone to ask that someone basically re-create that work here. My counterpoint would be to ask the following:

Someone enters this thread and says "open up this page: https://www.aviationweather.gov/windtemp/data?level=low&fcst=06&region=all&layout=on&date= , and then go to your LEGS page, click on RTE DATA> and then hand enter the wind data closest to each fix. You might want to interpolate for the fixes between those major wind data points." That, as an answer, is technically correct for the question asked here. Is that more or less acceptable than the decidedly more comprehensive (and understandable, due to the use of screenshots) approach in the Intro Manual?

The rebuke of people volunteering to step in and provide any answer, to me, is completely unacceptable. This user to user forum format means that every person chose to take time out of their day to post an answer. A trainer/instructor is being paid to provide answers - that is a completely different scenario.

You can have a field day debating the relative helpfulness of giving someone a reference to their answer, or writing a novel about the subject they need information on - be my guest. I'll even listen to your Ted Talk. If you want feedback on your arguments, I will gladly provide it. Take a shot at me for saying "read the manual, please?" Sure. One could make an argument for that. As soon as anyone snipes at another user for the answer they volunteered to provide, however...

I won't stand for it.

 

If you need to be a(n) [adjective] to someone, aim it at me. If your interest is to receive help from people, my suggestion would be to avoid taking shots at those offering help - regardless of your own personal opinions of how helpful it is (or isn't).

...and for the peanut gallery: I notice that none of those criticizing the "read the manuals" group actually offered an answer to the OP's queries. Food for thought.

Edited February 18, 2019 by scandinavian13

[vc10man 732]

Superbly put, Kyle. Thank you.

[737Andi 6]

Having read through all these posts and re-thinking about what I have written, I would like to sincerely apologize for my quite rude statement, since the  answer was obviously really meant to help me further!

At the time of posting I actually misunderstood the reply thinking that Rick just did not want to give the answer, because he felt I was not worthy enough to receive a direct and detailed reply since I have not read the manual at all. Actually I did read the manual but must have obviously missed the point that the "W" is not standing for the wind directions.

Nevertheless I have to emphasize that there are unfortunately a lot of forums in the internet, where new users often only receive the answer "RTFM".
These replies are to my personal opinion not always very productive, because I think forums are there for unexperienced users to ask questions and for experienced users to give an appropiate answer. Sometimes the advise to read the manual is definetely justified, but sometimes a direct answer would be more helpful. Otherwise you could just make a sticking topic at the top of the forum: "In case of any questions regarding the PMDG 747 please read the manual".

Therefore I'm actually a person who rather prefers to give a short and direct answer to a specific question like mine was instead of using the "read the manual" option, which is admittedly not wrong, if it was meant sincerely as a good advise!

But this might be my personal way of dealing with such things and should not defend my wrong behaviour of being so rude.
So therefore in the end a big sorry to Rick!

Best regards

Andreas V.

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by 737Andi

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

Very nice post my friend, we all need to try to follow your example!

Best wishes!

 

[vc10man 732]

3 hours ago, 737Andi said:

So therefore in the end a big sorry to Rick!

Andreas, I do not know if you are Italian or not. If you are, then a Big Grazzi from me for that.

Far from NOT wanting to help you, as I am a total novice, of sorts here on the PMDG 747-400/-8i, rather than giving you misleading help, much as I wanted to help, I thought the safe bet was to recommend the Intro Manual, FCOM, etc, etc. Hope you understand where I was coming from.

2 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Very nice post

Quite agree with you there Dave.