Are you still flying default FSX 747 ?

[Guest JacobKoziarz]

Just curious. PMDG 747-400X is the only choice, really...ahhh - cubicle job...

[Guest NoobPilot]

Sadly, I am.

[Guest JacobKoziarz]

Hahaha - no worries. Have to start somewhere.

[Guest Shalomar]

I just flew KABE to KMIA a few days ago in the FSX default- IFR at departure and arrival.I just downloaded the Ifly, still crunching the manual.Best Regards, Donald T. :-wave

[ryanbatc 12,846]

yuck, no wayI don't really fly big iron in general though....

[PaulM 1]

Well, now with Overland

[rhodges 6]

Not the "only choice" in my hanger.I still love the ifly model and it is free.Good luck:RTH

[deetee 164]

My 2 cts.Although I can and have used more complex aircraft, in a lot of ways I still prefer good quality simpler aircraft like Overland. Why? It's a question of play time; I like to get up in the air fairly quickly and look at the scenery.I've been through the SIDS and STARS thing but I've got to have an ATC. I have Radar Contact and it's very good but it doesn't do taxi guidance; you just have to park the plane like a car in a suitable free spot. The other thing I've found is that without knowing in advance the runway of the arrival airport one has to select a STAR in the air, and some add-on aircraft have no Navigraph SID/STAR FMC data such as the LVLD 767.Then there's the problem of saving en-route progress so you can pick up the flight another time. It all gets a bit of a headache, so the simplicity of the "easy" aircraft is sometimes a blessing. ;)I sometimes see a tendency to look down upon people who use default or relatively simple planes because of time contraints or just out of pleasure. Please remember it does not necessarily mean that one is either a newbie or some kind of flight simulation retard because one hasn't apparently advanced to the complex stuff. :)

[Guest jshyluk]

Well put. I blew an entire afternoon on a sunny day trying to eliminate the DISCO's from a PMDG FMC. What that was was me running flight sim so it could run a flight computer that I then had to program. Wheee. After that, I decided to step away from aircraft that require computer programming just to get it to fly. Well, you can fly a PMDG without an FMC, but it makes annoying noises that attract comments from the peanut gallery. However, what aircraft you choose to fly is a very personal choice. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And what value you place on that opinion is up to you. PMDGs are a lot of fun if you like manuals and procedures. Overland has the very best visual models and textures in the market, bar none. FSX has the advantage of working right out of the box, and you can spend your money on other things. My absolute favourite aircaft of all time is the J-3 Piper Cub. You fly low and slow, and if you like, you can pop open the door as you fly. The best part is taking off and landing on a postage stamp. You want thrills, you take that J-3 up to Scum Lake and you land her on that grass that's no bigger than a short Par-3. Then do it again in a cross-wind...Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

[Guest JacobKoziarz]

I was just curious - no negative intentions here. It's always nice to read some interesting replies. Especially when stuck in a cubicle from 9-5, and at 30 feet only too - not 30000. LOL.

[Guest fsxmissionguy]

David,Here, here!I would add that a person who actually flies the plane, instead of programming the flight management computer and autopilot to "handle that workload" is the type of a person that I call a pilot.That other guy is a systems management engineer. And I just have zero interest in Microsoft Flying System Management Simulator.I am not a pilot, and don't have a license, however I have flown a Boeing 727 for a short period of time. If you've ever wondered what it would be like to soar the heavens in a Greyhound Bus, well, that's what it felt like.Didn't even feel like I was "flying."Give me that P-51, a pair of goggles, and some treetops.Now you're flyin' mate.Cheers,

[byork 2,259]

I have a lot of FS2Crew users for my Default 747 version in both FSX and FS9, but still the overwhelming majority are over on the PMDG 747 side of things.So I guess there are people who actually use the default aircraft a lot, because generally people only get an FS2Crew for planes they use a lot.To each their own as they say. I can see a lot of people like the default aircraft because the high end planes scare them away. We don't all have 3 weeks to read manuals.Bryan

[Guest JacobKoziarz]

Hence the newbie manuals I put together - so you don't have to read manuals for 3 weeks...

[Guest jshyluk]

While a Piper Cub is the reverse of the PMDG medal, there is a lot to be said for being the pilot of a large passenger liner. Most of the time, I would imagine it is like being on a bus or train in the sky. Those big jets will fly in all visibility conditions and in crazy weather, and still they get from point A to point B on time. They fly when the Piper Cub would be grounded and under ties and tarp. The fact that it feels like your on rails is a testament to the engineering and skill that goes into passenger flight. While it is possible to go to sleep on autopilot and wake up while the aircraft lands itself (I recall hearing a story about an air crew that got woken up by the outer marker beacon as their aircraft automatically went in for a CAT III landing -- true or not, I don't know), it's when things get hairy that those pilots earn their points. Bringing in a 747 in a heavy, choppy crosswind on white knuckles, the rudder being so far over that the passengers can clearly see down the runway, well that's pretty exciting stuff. Usually, that's a little too hairy for me, especially if I had simmed a flight for several hours. It feels good to stick the landing, but it can ruin my whole day and beyond if I crash. I hate crashes. As for FS2Crew, I will gladly get FS2Crew for the PMDG 737 for FSX, when that finally gets released. It's been a long wait...Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM