40 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Actually you have that in reverse. Airbus wants you to switch off the AT when you fly manually, whereas Boeing says you should leave it on.

The rest comes down to company SOP.

The older Boeings (737 up to and including the Max, 747, 757 and 767) all mandate A/T off for manual flight. 777/787 the SOP is to leave it in. Airbus (not sure about the A300) mandates leaving it in. Obviously different operators permit different things but that's generally the way it works as far as I can tell.  

6 minutes ago, bennyboy75 said:

The older Boeings (737 up to and including the Max, 747, 757 and 767) all mandate A/T off for manual flight. 777/787 the SOP is to leave it in. Airbus (not sure about the A300) mandates leaving it in. Obviously different operators permit different things but that's generally the way it works as far as I can tell.  

Exactly.

Lufthansa is one of the few operators who want AT off even on the Airbus when flying manually. I believe this policy was instated for consistency with their Boeing fleets (though there are so many other differences that I never understood why it would be important to standardize this one particular thing). 

31 minutes ago, martinboehme said:

Exactly.

Lufthansa is one of the few operators who want AT off even on the Airbus when flying manually. I believe this policy was instated for consistency with their Boeing fleets (though there are so many other differences that I never understood why it would be important to standardize this one particular thing). 

That is quite odd. I'm sure I was told that BA only allow A/T off on the Bus if it's MELd! 

Yeah, I think it's the other way around. Boeing recommends on 737 AT is off when AP is off. Airbus recommends always having the AT on, even in manual flights.

The carriers that do have AT on for the Boeings at all times as mentioned do it for fleet commonality, and maybe some other logic in their SOPs. I think American is another airline that does AT on on landings for the 737.

That said, I do know of at least 1 Airbus Captain (v1) who will fly every now and then with the AT off on the a320 to keep his skills sharp if he needs manual throttle for some reason.

7 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

v2024 is NOT a new simulator any more than the last version of P3D was.

Microsoft and Lockheed Martin would disagree.  They are charging the price of a new simulator for MSFS 2024 and P3D V6, for arguably far less work than their originals.

1 hour ago, BrammyH said:

Yeah, I think it's the other way around. Boeing recommends on 737 AT is off when AP is off. Airbus recommends always having the AT on, even in manual flights.

The carriers that do have AT on for the Boeings at all times as mentioned do it for fleet commonality, and maybe some other logic in their SOPs. I think American is another airline that does AT on on landings for the 737.

That said, I do know of at least 1 Airbus Captain (v1) who will fly every now and then with the AT off on the a320 to keep his skills sharp if he needs manual throttle for some reason.

I had a friend that is a Boeing check Pilot. I flew an Airline Sim with him, years ago, a 767-400, and he told me that they recommended landing with the AT on ( hand flying of course). He said he wanted the pilot to concentrate and looking for traffic close into the runway, instead of focusing on the airspeed reading. I have always flown tubeliners that way from then on, only disconnecting the AT at around 500 feet AGL. 

4 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Yeah, I think it's the other way around. Boeing recommends on 737 AT is off when AP is off. Airbus recommends always having the AT on, even in manual flights.

The carriers that do have AT on for the Boeings at all times as mentioned do it for fleet commonality, and maybe some other logic in their SOPs. I think American is another airline that does AT on on landings for the 737.

That said, I do know of at least 1 Airbus Captain (v1) who will fly every now and then with the AT off on the a320 to keep his skills sharp if he needs manual throttle for some reason.

Boeing recommends this only for the older aircraft (737, 757 etc.) IIRC. For the 777 it recommends AT on for landing (it auto-idles at 20 feet anyway)

Edited December 8, 20241 yr by Fiorentoni

22 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

He said he wanted the pilot to concentrate and looking for traffic close into the runway, instead of focusing on the airspeed reading.

That's interesting to hear. Asiana 214 comes to mind. Autothrottle or not, somehow seems, still gotta watch that airspeed.

Anyway, I might still get the 300ER, but I still have the freighter along with the 200LR package in FSX. I'd almost be curious to get the freighter to compare the flight models between the to sims, but decided to not get duplicates of what I already have. I'm itching to try the 747-100 when that comes out in FS24. I'd consider upgrading my system for that one if it's really good!

Edited December 8, 20241 yr by Antipodeslonghaul
Spelling error, and referring to original topic

29 minutes ago, Antipodeslonghaul said:

That's interesting to hear. Asiana 214 comes to mind. Autothrottle or not, somehow seems, still gotta watch that airspeed

That was human error for failing to understand 777 A/T modes. Search online for the FLCH trap.

1 hour ago, evaamo said:

That was human error for failing to understand 777 A/T modes. Search online for the FLCH trap.

Human error for sure! Another extreme would have been..."Well we crashed into the Bay Landing Hotel where we'd planned on staying anyway. Had our eyes glued to the airspeed indicator the whole time. At least our speed was dead on target."

2 hours ago, Gilandred said:

Microsoft and Lockheed Martin would disagree.  They are charging the price of a new simulator for MSFS 2024 and P3D V6, for arguably far less work than their originals.

I think we have similar ideas tho are sharing different perspectives.

My main point is that v2020 was the only truly new general purpose flight sim to be released in the last 30-ish years (well, the only successful one...). v2024 is an iteration on v2020, just like P3D v6 is on v5, etc.

So now, as you've noted, the developers of the sims and 3rd party addons have a choice: they can give us free upgrades, discounted upgrades, bundle discounts, or full boat re-purchases.

Since most devs have committed to/are delivering free compatibility updates for v2024, that's set the baseline expectation of the community.

In light of that, PMDG should probably just keep their mouths shut on the issue. If JustFlight, Leonardo, Fenix, and others can cost-effectively deliver a no-cost update, then PMDG should assume they can, as well. If they're as competent as they profess to be (and i believe they generally are) 😉

 

1 hour ago, Antipodeslonghaul said:

Human error for sure! Another extreme would have been..."Well we crashed into the Bay Landing Hotel where we'd planned on staying anyway. Had our eyes glued to the airspeed indicator the whole time. At least our speed was dead on target."

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic in your reply, but in any case all that was needed was to check on the PFD that HOLD mode was on and to understand from it that the servos weren’t going to “wake up” the throttles… much less provide any stall protection that the other A/T modes have. No need to keep eyes glued to the PFD. All part of the regular quick scan done in every approach by crews workdwide.

Investigations concluded human error in many levels: lack of understanding the system, lack of proper CRM, failure of training in such scenarios. 

 

 

On 12/5/2024 at 8:43 AM, 737_800 said:

I would be ashamend in the shoes of PMDG considering taking a upgrade fee since they just haven't used the "right" (modern) technology in the first place as other devs did. Why should the customer pay for that?

For the same reason you pay additional costs on any product. Nobody's going to force you to buy the new thing, and it's up to you to determine whether the new thing is worth the additional cost.

So, you have the right to determine whether you're going to pay, but you've NO right to determine if there are costs required.

That said, I'm quite confident PMDG are keenly aware of all the competition they have now, and that they feel compelled to offer a no-fee compatibility update in order to ensure they can convince their current customers to buy their future products.

It's really just another case of RR talking too much - he creates drama for himself on a regular basis 🙂

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I had a friend that is a Boeing check Pilot. I flew an Airline Sim with him, years ago, a 767-400, and he told me that they recommended landing with the AT on ( hand flying of course). He said he wanted the pilot to concentrate and looking for traffic close into the runway, instead of focusing on the airspeed reading. I have always flown tubeliners that way from then on, only disconnecting the AT at around 500 feet AGL. 

I understand why they do it IRL, but I prefer to hand fly the things unless i'm actually at cruise. Hand flying is, IMHO, most of the fun in flight simulation. 🙂

*also, watching computers is my day job, so the less of that in my free time, the better 😜

 

22 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

That said, I'm quite confident PMDG are keenly aware of all the competition they have now, and that they feel compelled to offer a no-fee compatibility update in order to ensure they can convince their current customers to buy their future products.

For me, personally, this is the point. I have paid now 3 times for the NG -- FSX, P3D and the NGXu, better known as the MSFS2020 version as I absolutely would not have purchased it except for the promise of the free update to 2020. Yes, each time they have made some small, gradual improvements and of course they needed to do compatibility work. But, there have been no discounts. That is completely their prerogative.

But, to my point, I will give a lot more thought now to whether I will purchase a product from PMDG, because I do not want to buy into a cycle of constant paying. If they need to charge for each upgrade to every version of a platform then their products are just not that appealing to me. As others have said, there are other great aircraft out there now that fulfil the same role and I get just as much enjoyment from flying the FENIX -- maybe more so because I find it has more character, just like like the 300F versus the dull 777F -- and so I can do without their products. All this to say, I think twice and then three times before purchasing a PMDG aircraft; if FENIX or Black Square released a new product tomorrow, it would be an immediate purchase with very little thought.

Practically, am I interested in paying again for the 737NG series; absolutely not. I first bought that aircraft in August 2011 when it came out and I have enjoyed flying it for 13 years; if I never fly it again that is okay; I am more interested in the MAX now because I fly real world routes and the thing is the NGs are coming to end of service life.

Edited December 8, 20241 yr by Cognita