Landing Fenix versus PMDG 737

[Stearmandriver 2,304]

15 hours ago, lancealotg said:

The most important part of a landing is where in the touchdown zone you land followed by the landing rate.

What I read somewhere is that a "perfect" landing should be 1250 feet from the threshold at a 250 fpm touchdown rate.

A three degree glide scope intersects the runway at 1000 ft from the threshold.

Accounting for the flare, 1250 is the holy grail with the flare reducing your descent rate to 250 fpm.

 

Landing an airliner at 20 fpm is actually not something to be proud of, it means you floated to get the descent rate that low.

Anywhere near 1250 ft and 250 fpm, pat yourself on the back.

 

 

 

The spirit of this is correct, but the details aren't necessarily true.

Yes, for a landing to be acceptable, let alone good, it must be on speed, in the touchdown zone, and before a calculated latest touchdown point for that plane on that runway on that day.  These are givens, and non-negotiable.

However, within the safety parameters, not only is there nothing wrong with trying to make a smooth touchdown, I don't know many airline pilots that don't.  We're pilots, we all like making that roll-on landing *when circumstances allow.*

Contaminated runway and unpredictable winds into Petersburg?  You bet I'm pounding it on.  Beautiful day to 27C in ORD?  You bet I'm going to look for a brush-on touchdown. Why wouldn't I?  As long as I properly manage energy state to avoid a tail strike and remain within the TDZ, there's no downside. These simmerisms about the spoilers not deploying etc... they aren't real.  

However, to reiterate, no one in their right mind will ever milk a landing for a smooth touchdown when there's a reason not to - short runway, contamination, challenging conditions etc.

 

[Stearmandriver 2,304]

On 2/13/2023 at 1:00 AM, Christopher Low said:

Flawless touchdowns on 3500 metre runways are one thing. Doing it regularly on runways of 1200 metres is another. The shorter the runway, the less margin for error, and the greater the anxiety when on final approach! I am currently doing practice landings at EGWC RAF Cosford (the site of the UK Flightsim Show) in my PMDG 737-600 in P3Dv4 (no passengers; two thirds fuel load).....during early morning twilight......to a runway that is only 1127 metres long, and has no lighting or approach path indicators. The final approach speed is 127 knots, and I limit myself to thrust reverse only until I get down to 75-80 knots, and then full braking after that. This requires an approach more like the one at Skiathos (in other words, skimming the fence and landing short of the normal touchdown zone)

Kind of an odd construct.  I mean of course we should all use the sim in the way that's fun for us, but honest question: at some point, doesn't it become more fun to try landing a different aircraft in a different environment?  A Porter to a sloping jungle strip in Papua for instance.  

The reality is, airliners are the easiest things to fly and land, from a stick and rudder standpoint, that have ever been built.  This holds true in the sim too.  There's only so much challenge you can find in landing one.  😁

[lancealotg 95]

7 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

The spirit of this is correct, but the details aren't necessarily true.

Sounds like you are a real world airline pilot.

Always great to get insights from someone in your position.

Thanks.

[Christopher Low 5,357]

On 2/14/2023 at 9:27 PM, Stearmandriver said:

Kind of an odd construct.  I mean of course we should all use the sim in the way that's fun for us, but honest question: at some point, doesn't it become more fun to try landing a different aircraft in a different environment?  A Porter to a sloping jungle strip in Papua for instance.  

The reality is, airliners are the easiest things to fly and land, from a stick and rudder standpoint, that have ever been built.  This holds true in the sim too.  There's only so much challenge you can find in landing one.  😁

I have landed small planes at lots of small airfields across the UK in my time, and it was fun. However, I have used the PMDG 737NGX to fly "low and slow" for a long time now, and it still gives me a thrill to do so. I have never flown it seriously like many AVSIM members do, but that is not why I use a flight simulator. Cruising at 35000 feet is of no interest to me. I like to have lots of detailed scenery, but I also like to fly a well modelled airliner with lots of system depth, and convincing flight dynamics. Do I use all of those systems? Of course I don't. Nevertheless, it is nice to know that everything functions properly, and that my cockpit environment is every bit as impressive as the scenery outside my plane. I use ORBx TrueEarth Great Britain and Netherlands in P3Dv4 (both of which render the outside world in superb detail).

To be honest, I recently decided to disable all of the AI planes. What this has done is made me focus less on the airport environment, and more on the actual feel of the plane. Flying in to a large airport like London Heathrow was great when there were lots of AI planes around, but at a cost. I tried to convince myself that a few stutters here and there were OK, but in the end I wanted to see what it was like without them. The end result is a smoother, more fluid flight experience, with far fewer stutters. It has allowed me to enjoy the actual flying experience more, and I can honestly say that my current short flights at plenty of airports and smaller airfields in the UK is giving me more of a thrill than I have had in flight simulation for quite a long time. They are barely eleven or twelve minutes long from start to finish, but they are just enough for me to enjoy the flight dynamics, sounds, and scenery.......all in small, neat packages.

After completing a number of these flights, I can already sense that my landings are better. After a few test flights at EGWC RAF Cosford, I have also completed successful landings at other short runways with no lighting. It's a great feeling to be able to get the approach right to a relatively short runway without any lights to guide me in, and I look forward to many more over the coming weekend!

So, with all due respect, I do not consider this to be an "odd construct"

[Michael Moe 495]

17 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I have landed small planes at lots of small airfields across the UK in my time, and it was fun. However, I have used the PMDG 737NGX to fly "low and slow" for a long time now, and it still gives me a thrill to do so. I have never flown it seriously like many AVSIM members do, but that is not why I use a flight simulator. Cruising at 35000 feet is of no interest to me. I like to have lots of detailed scenery, but I also like to fly a well modelled airliner with lots of system depth, and convincing flight dynamics. Do I use all of those systems? Of course I don't. Nevertheless, it is nice to know that everything functions properly, and that my cockpit environment is every bit as impressive as the scenery outside my plane. I use ORBx TrueEarth Great Britain and Netherlands in P3Dv4 (both of which render the outside world in superb detail).

To be honest, I recently decided to disable all of the AI planes. What this has done is made me focus less on the airport environment, and more on the actual feel of the plane. Flying in to a large airport like London Heathrow was great when there were lots of AI planes around, but at a cost. I tried to convince myself that a few stutters here and there were OK, but in the end I wanted to see what it was like without them. The end result is a smoother, more fluid flight experience, with far fewer stutters. It has allowed me to enjoy the actual flying experience more, and I can honestly say that my current short flights at plenty of airports and smaller airfields in the UK is giving me more of a thrill than I have had in flight simulation for quite a long time. They are barely eleven or twelve minutes long from start to finish, but they are just enough for me to enjoy the flight dynamics, sounds, and scenery.......all in small, neat packages.

After completing a number of these flights, I can already sense that my landings are better. After a few test flights at EGWC RAF Cosford, I have also completed successful landings at other short runways with no lighting. It's a great feeling to be able to get the approach right to a relatively short runway without any lights to guide me in, and I look forward to many more over the coming weekend!

So, with all due respect, I do not consider this to be an "odd construct"

I get the sense here as well , Going back to focusing on the HUD in the 737 made it much better in MSFS. Now its off with anything to/from 5000-10000 feet.

Michael Moe

Edited February 17, 2023 by Michael Moe

[BrammyH 447]

I am having a real challenge of a time learning to land the 737-800.

Tonight, I was on final approach. Altitude was great, speed was great (~160). Gear down. Flaps at 25 working to 30.

I hit approach to grab the GS.

Then, about a min later the auto throttle was off, and my airspeed was now 260. It's happened to me a few times and I have no idea what I am doing wrong.

[BrammyH 447]

One thing I realized is when the a/t came off it takes the sim position of the throttle, and my controller. I forgot about that but I am not sure why it came off. 

[Bobsk8 12,750]

6 hours ago, BrammyH said:

One thing I realized is when the a/t came off it takes the sim position of the throttle, and my controller. I forgot about that but I am not sure why it came off. 

There is a setting in the FMC aircraft setting I believe , to show throttle position. You need to turn that on, then you can move throttle when about to disconnect AT, so there won't be any change when you turn AT off...

[BrammyH 447]

Thanks. I have it set, but also I think I have the setting in when I move throttle to disconnect a/t, and I am going to set it to not do that.

On this approach, the a/t turned itself off and I don’t know why it did that. 

[Bobsk8 12,750]

1 hour ago, BrammyH said:

Thanks. I have it set, but also I think I have the setting in when I move throttle to disconnect a/t, and I am going to set it to not do that.

On this approach, the a/t turned itself off and I don’t know why it did that. 

The only way you should disconnect A/T is with the switch on the panel, and I usually disconnect it around 1,000 feet agl, after I set throttle to match A/T power setting. . 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Bobsk8

[Fiorentoni 4,252]

5 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The only way you should disconnect A/T is with the switch on the panel, and I usually disconnect it around 1,000 feet agl, after I set throttle to match A/T power setting. . 

There's a disconnect AT button on the throttles which is used in real life. It needs to be pushed twice like the autopilot to get rid of the red warning light. Functionality wise it's the same though as turning off the switch on the glareshield.

[Bobsk8 12,750]

13 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

There's a disconnect AT button on the throttles which is used in real life. It needs to be pushed twice like the autopilot to get rid of the red warning light. Functionality wise it's the same though as turning off the switch on the glareshield.

Yeah, I don't have that switch on my controllers. 

[BrammyH 447]

Setting it to not have a manual over-ride solved the weird AT disconnect I was having. Now, I just have the usual learning to land issues.

[Bobsk8 12,750]