16 hours ago, Joshua757 said:

Dear fellow simmers,

First off – Happy Holidays and a very Happy New Year to everyone! 🎄✈️

I've just uploaded my second L-1011 masterclass, specifically created as preparation for the highly anticipated iniBuilds Lockheed L-1011 TriStar.

 

 

This video takes you from cold & dark startup all the way to a flawless CAT III autoland at Heathrow, with a scenic autopilot cruise over the UK in between. It’s packed with real-world procedures, intuitive cockpit flows, and transferable classic-airliner logic – no endless checklist reading required.

Why the prep now?

Simple: I want to level the playing field. When the iniBuilds L-1011 finally drops, I hope everyone watching this will be ready to jump in and enjoy it from Day One – instead of getting buried in 300-page manuals or long pre-release streams.

And if you're an ambitious flight sim YouTuber or streamer like me, this gives you the tools to go live with the TriStar on release day, rather than watching a privileged few dominate the spotlight.

Raised on classic airliners, I'm comfortable with 60s/70s architecture and can confidently fly (and teach) the Boeing 727, 747-200, DC-8, and even Concorde – yes, all three crew roles including fuel management!

My teaching style is intuitive yet rigorous – focusing on flows, systems understanding, and transferable skills that bust the dreaded "steep learning curve" myth.

I work hard to create high-quality training content alongside my studies and other commitments, and I’d truly appreciate your support on this journey.

 

Happy flying, and see you in the skies – hopefully mastering the TriStar together soon! ✈️

Quick clarification: This video demos authentic L-1011 procedures drawn from publicly available flight manuals, training materials, and accounts from former TriStar pilots/flight engineers. It's filmed on a legacy model (not the upcoming iniBuilds version which everyone knows is not out yet) - purely as prep to help get familiar while we wait for the study-level release in MSFS. Not official training or type-rated, as are most flightsim videos anyway – just hobbyist sharing! Hope it's useful. ✈️

 

4 minutes ago, Joshua757 said:

Thanks for the feedback – I appreciate you pointing that out.

You're right that the iniBuilds L-1011 isn't out yet - and everybody knows this, so we can only prep based on what's known so far. The title is meant to highlight it's preparation using authentic published procedures and systems knowledge:

 - From manuals -  the addon's manual and theres an excellent one on the Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/lockheed-l-1011-training-manual/page/n121/mode/2up

 - Pilot accounts - An intuitive Flight Engineers explanation on the L1011 systems is available here (filmed in the L1011 itself), which I used to improve my understanding 

 - And historical docs) on a legacy model – not claiming it's the iniBuilds version itself. 

On "real world procedures": These are drawn from publicly available L-1011 flight manuals, training materials, and accounts from former TriStar pilots/flight engineers as shown above.

It's not type-rated training or official CRM instruction – Its a flightsim video: just a hobbyist sharing flows and logic that have helped me and others learn classics intuitively. Most Flightsim videos are not CRM or type rated anyway. Its understood without the need for a disclaimer every time.

No misleading intended – purely to help folks get excited and a bit familiar while we wait. Hope that's clearer now.

 

Regards and wishing you a Happy New Year in Advance,

 

Joshua757

What are those AI-written answers?

It stays the same  just a cheap method with no real value, only meant to get clicks. Once we get the TriStar, there will be enough videos from people who actually have experience on the type, and not just from JustPlanes videos.

1 minute ago, MaximumN2 said:

 

What are those AI-written answers?

It stays the same  just a cheap method with no real value, only meant to get clicks. Once we get the TriStar, there will be enough videos from people who actually have experience on the type, and not just from JustPlanes videos.

If you claim no value, it probably means you haven't seen my advanced Concorde, 727, 737-200, DC-9, MD-80 and DC-8 tutorials and more which point otherwise. I have made it clear already why my video is prep indicated. Also, I am not the only simmer who posts his content on forums. Besides most of my views don't come from forums anyway in reply to your comment. Again, thankyou for reaching out, you have free will whether to see my videos or not.

1 minute ago, Joshua757 said:

If you claim no value, it probably means you haven't seen my advanced Concorde, 727, 737-200, DC-9, MD-80 and DC-8 tutorials and more which point otherwise. I have made it clear already why my video is prep indicated. Also, I am not the only simmer who posts his content on forums. Besides most of my views don't come from forums anyway in reply to your comment. Again, thankyou for reaching out, you have free will whether to see my videos or not.

No, I haven’t, because I am rated and prefer to read the manuals provided by the company that released the add-on or the OM of an operator. That’s where you can see the limitations and how it should be flown. There is absolutely no need for a video that is not made by someone who knows the aircraft by heart or is rated on type.

Especially when you boost your content with titles like these, which are clearly incorrect and do not represent your actual level of knowledge. It’s simply misleading.

7 minutes ago, MaximumN2 said:

No, I haven’t, because I am rated and prefer to read the manuals provided by the company that released the add-on or the OM of an operator. That’s where you can see the limitations and how it should be flown. There is absolutely no need for a video that is not made by someone who knows the aircraft by heart or is rated on type.

Especially when you boost your content with titles like these, which are clearly incorrect and do not represent your actual level of knowledge. It’s simply misleading.

Well, most simmers are not real pilots or had the privilledge to fly the L1011. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

Perhaps there should be a moratorium against self-promoting click-bait posts like this.

These are the forums for the discussion of MSFS 2020 and 2024. Continually posting video of aircraft that don't yet exist within the sim, made with a completely different simulator, using aircraft made by different developers seems tenuous at best and certainly seems to border on self promotion of an individuals YouTube channel to many.

Perhaps these belong here...

https://www.avsim.com/forums/forum/322-aviation-and-flight-sim-video-forum/

...and perhaps @Ray Proudfoot could adjudicate for us?

 

Edited December 26, 2025Dec 26 by DD_Arthur

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

and perhaps @Ray Proudfoot could adjudicate for us?

Agreed. Moved.

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Agreed. Moved.

Thanks Ray and DD_Arthur for providing a constructive resolution. I really appreciate that. I'm new to the forum so I didn't know that other subsection existed so my apologies. 

My video was posted here in good faith to allow others to benefit and understand the L1011 in advance to make the most of their experience when it arrives to MSFS2024.

On the whole, it's been received overwhelmingly positively and am grateful for all the kind, appreciative comments whether on discord, Reddit DM and here.

However, I have been at the receiving end of several negative comments, alleging clickbait and no value in the content I provide, despite the user behind the allegation admitting on the record he has not watched my video, and hence is in no position to conclusively say such unsubstantiated claims.

Furthermore, as we all know, flightsimming is a hobby and fun recreational experience - the closest thing to actually flying in the cockpit - an experience few of us can afford...

Yet unconstructive comments still persistent, knit picking on wording and procedures, giving the impression that ONLY type rating credited individuals can make flightsim content under real procedures which is neither correct or just.

Claims of self promotion are unfounded and not unique to me as a content creator. 

That's it, I've said my piece. My description clearly rectifies misconceptions from the start and repeated messages claiming the above are proof of having skimmed through my description, or not having read it at all.

I have been polite and attempted to come to a common understanding the whole day, but certain users see only ways to provoke. However, I never have and won't let one or two negative and toxic comments dissuade me from helping others and sharing flightsim techniques that help.

For now, the greatest power in my hands is to ignore toxic comments. 

Wishing you peace and prosperity ahead in the new year.

46 minutes ago, Joshua757 said:

For now, the greatest power in my hands is to ignore toxic comments. 

Thou doeth protest too much.  Quit while you are ahead and a simple Thank You is more than sufficient.  MHO. Blue skies,

-B

55 minutes ago, Joshua757 said:

Thanks Ray and DD_Arthur for providing a constructive resolution. I really appreciate that. I'm new to the forum so I didn't know that other subsection existed so my apologies. 

My video was posted here in good faith to allow others to benefit and understand the L1011 in advance to make the most of their experience when it arrives to MSFS2024.

On the whole, it's been received overwhelmingly positively and am grateful for all the kind, appreciative comments whether on discord, Reddit DM and here.

However, I have been at the receiving end of several negative comments, alleging clickbait and no value in the content I provide, despite the user behind the allegation admitting on the record he has not watched my video, and hence is in no position to conclusively say such unsubstantiated claims.

Furthermore, as we all know, flightsimming is a hobby and fun recreational experience - the closest thing to actually flying in the cockpit - an experience few of us can afford...

Yet unconstructive comments still persistent, knit picking on wording and procedures, giving the impression that ONLY type rating credited individuals can make flightsim content under real procedures which is neither correct or just.

Claims of self promotion are unfounded and not unique to me as a content creator. 

That's it, I've said my piece. My description clearly rectifies misconceptions from the start and repeated messages claiming the above are proof of having skimmed through my description, or not having read it at all.

I have been polite and attempted to come to a common understanding the whole day, but certain users see only ways to provoke. However, I never have and won't let one or two negative and toxic comments dissuade me from helping others and sharing flightsim techniques that help.

For now, the greatest power in my hands is to ignore toxic comments. 

Wishing you peace and prosperity ahead in the new year.

None of our comments were toxic, and it’s quite a shame that you’re framing this situation as toxic with absolutely zero self-reflection.

You received plenty of good advice and constructive criticism, such as that you’re spamming your videos on every platform, that you’re using misleading titles, or that you’re relying on an add-on that is not capable of showing proper procedures.

But sure, we are all toxic and you’re right. You can continue doing your thing and spamming the entire internet with clickbait and spread some negative training. 

24 minutes ago, btacon said:

Thou doeth protest too much.  Quit while you are ahead and a simple Thank You is more than sufficient.  MHO. Blue skies,

-B

🙏 interesting words of wisdom. Thanks, my friend. Have a great new year 

Edited December 26, 2025Dec 26 by Joshua757

On 12/26/2025 at 10:18 AM, MaximumN2 said:

No, I haven’t, because I am rated and prefer to read the manuals provided by the company that released the add-on or the OM of an operator. That’s where you can see the limitations and how it should be flown. There is absolutely no need for a video that is not made by someone who knows the aircraft by heart or is rated on type.

Especially when you boost your content with titles like these, which are clearly incorrect and do not represent your actual level of knowledge. It’s simply misleading.

What rating do you have?

10 hours ago, alanw2005 said:

What rating do you have?

777/787

On 2/13/2026 at 1:11 PM, MaximumN2 said:

777/787

Thanks!!! Much respect!!! Nice to have real life pilots in the forum!!