First "Heavy" for MSFS?

[Jazz 1,046]

1 minute ago, micstatic said:

The point is the a310 is a long haul plane even if it doesn’t meet your personal standard. I suspect the term you are thinking of is ultra long haul 

Exactly

[regis9 4,013]

For the 777 look at some cargo trips, you can find some short hops there.

[Mace 1,908]

1 hour ago, reignman40 said:

Was that the 747-400D? 

Yes that's the one.  Single-class layout, 600+ pax.

[Bernard Ducret 790]

I am surprised to see how the Salty B748 seems to be ignored or brushed aside as a non entity (perhaps because it is free) although it cannot - yet - be considered as a "study level" plane, it certainly meet the standard of an excellent rendition of the plane. If you have the FBW downloader, try it (I suggest the Development version), you might be asking yourself why you did not do so earlier.

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by Bernard Ducret

[Noel 4,493]

3 hours ago, micstatic said:

True. I’m not sure if that many people use a pilots life. Maybe they do. But it’s testament to my main point. A simulator is meant to be used how the individual wants to. We can all agree on that 

I wonder how others grapple with the fact as incredible as the simulator can be it lacks the teeth associated with RW flying and that world has RW meaning and consequence, so one pays close attention or pays for it.  The scoring piece plus the structure of flying for a company does add back some artificial consequence that def does help add some purpose and consequence, at least more so than w/o for me, in fact I'd fly less w/o it I'm pretty sure.  In P3D it was FSCaptain that played this role for me, so this model I've stuck with for maybe 8 years or something.   One other cool benefit for me is the structure of flying for one company takes me all over to places I likely would not have seen without the structure.  After flying Air France for 3-4 weeks I will apply for a job w/ another airlines.   I enjoy reading about places I will be flying to for example today into Basia, Corsica.  And I stream in French Cafe Radio via Spotify at altitude!  GSX has it's nice French accent ground crew so yes...this simulator can be used in myriad ways 😄

[Max Kraus 339]

I did love the PMDG MD11 and all its retro clunkiness. The 777 would be a nice one to have as it's a nice 2 engine long hauler like the A330.

 

Looks like a couple of A380's on the way though

Edited January 14, 2023 by flyhalf

[MikeH99 156]

3 hours ago, micstatic said:

The point is the a310 is a long haul plane even if it doesn’t meet your personal standard. I suspect the term you are thinking of is ultra long haul 

Yeah they don't even know what they talking about. A310 is a heavy and flies long haul. I've pushed it out to around 11 hours full pax load. Flies well does the job. I'll jump to the Aerosoft A330 next when it's out.

[Bdub22 1,609]

8 hours ago, micstatic said:

8 hours ago, Noel said:

 

Fear it not!  Learning a new aircraft is perhaps the most satisfying thing flight sims can offer you!

Sorry to be replying to an older comment, but I couldn't agree more. I've been into flight simulation since FS95 but seemingly never got into Airbus birds. I think when PMDG came onto the scene around FS98, I became hooked on Boeing aircraft and proud of myself that I learned how to fly such a complex piece of simulated plane. Over the years, I became the classic "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" guy, and this was mostly because the only planes I had to access to, or was at least interested in, were the PMDG Boeing planes (as far as airliners go. One of my favorite addon planes of all time is the FSX RealAir Duke). Fast forward many, many years to MSFS and the awesome guys at FBW, I have finally understood why so many people love Airbuses. It's really simple: they're awesome. I know this is long winded, but I just want to give you props to saying "Learning a new aircraft is perhaps the most satisfying thing flight sims can offer you!", because it completely revitalized my interest in this genre and as funny as it sounds, turned me into an Airbus fan. 

[Ricardo41 5,949]

10 hours ago, BWBriscoe said:

What do people think will be the first "Heavy" for MSFS?

Strange question. The 747 and the 787 are available in the default simulator.

8 hours ago, jpe828 said:

I have a question for a self proclaimed "Heavy" lover. I like the 737 because I can do a 30 minute hop, or a 5 hour hop. In a Heavy, I feel like you have to do long hauls. 

This question has been worked over many times. The answer is always the same: there are companies who fly short-hauls with, for example, the 787 or the 777. Flight Aware provides further answers.

[micstatic 4,319]

5 hours ago, Noel said:

I wonder how others grapple with the fact as incredible as the simulator can be it lacks the teeth associated with RW flying and that world has RW meaning and consequence, so one pays close attention or pays for it.  The scoring piece plus the structure of flying for a company does add back some artificial consequence that def does help add some purpose and consequence, at least more so than w/o for me, in fact I'd fly less w/o it I'm pretty sure.  In P3D it was FSCaptain that played this role for me, so this model I've stuck with for maybe 8 years or something.   One other cool benefit for me is the structure of flying for one company takes me all over to places I likely would not have seen without the structure.  After flying Air France for 3-4 weeks I will apply for a job w/ another airlines.   I enjoy reading about places I will be flying to for example today into Basia, Corsica.  And I stream in French Cafe Radio via Spotify at altitude!  GSX has it's nice French accent ground crew so yes...this simulator can be used in myriad ways 😄

The search for realism is the exact reason I ended up doing so many flights on vatsim.  A busy airspace on approach with vatsim can be a far larger workload than we get with any form of default ATC.  Similarly, shooting an approach that is almost below minimums into an airport with weather/elevation hazards is another super rewarding aspect of flight sim that keeps me coming back.   

 

I think with the programs you mention is also good.  Particularly for those with a heavy video game background where scores (or even landing rates) are perceived as the prize they are chasing.  

[JBDB-MD80 1,473]

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

Strange question. The 747 and the 787 are available in the default simulator.

T

These planes are awful while using Vatsim going across the ocean. its a complete joke. 747 cost me 60$ U.S. and if I want the 787 (which is bad) another 60$ U.S.

Edited January 14, 2023 by jbdbow1970

[micstatic 4,319]

6 minutes ago, jbdbow1970 said:

These planes are awful while using Vatsim going across the ocean. its a complete joke. 747 cost me 60$ U.S. and if I want the 787 (which is bad) another 60$ U.S.

I don't understand why you are paying extra for airplanes included as defaults?  I agree the default 747 and 787 are not desirable.  But atleast we have  a good long haul plane in the A310

[JBDB-MD80 1,473]

6 minutes ago, micstatic said:

I don't understand why you are paying extra for airplanes included as defaults?  I agree the default 747 and 787 are not desirable.  But atleast we have  a good long haul plane in the A310

I understand your post but MS bought the A310 from Inibuilds. Loung hauls for me, mean fly from Los Angeles to Dubai (16 hrs) something the A310 did not in real life. but a 777-2 or 787-9 did. Trust me I have not paid for the MSFS premium upgrade until they fix the 787. I enjoy Fenix. PMDG and Maddog Blackbird C310 for now.

Edited January 14, 2023 by jbdbow1970

[micstatic 4,319]

4 minutes ago, jbdbow1970 said:

I understand your post but MS bought the A310 from Inibuilds. Loung hauls for me, mean fly from Los Angeles to Dubai (16 hrs) something the A310 did not in real life. but a 777-2 or 787-9 did.

 You are using the wrong term.  The term you mean is ultra long haul.  This is per IATA and also ICAO

[JBDB-MD80 1,473]

1 minute ago, micstatic said:

 You are using the wrong term.  The term you mean is ultra long haul.  This is per IATA and also ICAO

I probably am wrong but how do we determine as what is a long haul, mid haul or a short haul? its never be explained to me that clear. Some folks using MSFS want to fly fore a half of day (and Me too) can't do it yet in MSFS because of lack of planes. QW 787 PMDG 777 where are you.