Brakes are too effective in FU3

[Christopher Low 5,353]

I have said this before, but I'm going to say it again. I personally think that the aircraft brakes in FU3 are TOO good ! When I try slowing down the Beechjet entirely with the thrust reversers, it takes a considerable amount of time to slow down to taxi speed. However, if I also use the brakes, I can stop it incredibly quickly.An example of this would be my recent short flight from Flying B Airfield to Aero Plaza. Anyone who uses my modified Aero Plaza package will know that I created a small parking area at the western end of the airfield. I used runway 25 (which requires a rather scary approach right over the top of a couple of trees that are just short of the runway itself), touched down, activated the thrust reversers and brakes..........and slowed to taxi speed well short of the exit to this parking area. Bearing in mind that the runway at Aero Plaza is supposed to be 2015 feet long, then I must have used no more than 1500 feet to stop the Beechjet !Needless to say, using the thrust reversers alone would have seen me crossing the road beyond the runway, and slamming into the trees beyond.I actually have the video of this flight if anyone is interested, but you would also need my Flying B Airfield and Aero Plaza packages (included with Seattle 2002).Chris Low,ENGLAND.

[JimmiG 244]

If you think the brakes in FU3 are too effective, try the default 737 in FS2002 :-lolI can land it virtually anywhere becaue it comes to a stop in seconds..

[Hans_Petter 1]

I don't know whether the brakes are unrealistically effective in either or both sims. However, brakes ARE being used as soon as the front wheel touches the runway. Most jets have an autobrake setting that kicks in as soon as all the wheels are down. The trigger is the front wheel touch-down, for quite obvious reasons. If the brakes were to be be activated the moment the main gear touched the front gear would slam into the tarmac and ruin your day. So, a proper jet landing involves brakes from the very start, complemented by reverse thrust until you've slowed down to about 40 kias. At any rate, the required runway for landing is largely dependent on the gross weight of the aircraft. I believe that an executive jet could stop in "no time" provided you have little fuel left. Further, I don't know what payload (pax and baggage) the Beechjet has been set up to be carrying. If we're flying an empty plane that would help strengthen my case / prove my point. FS2002 aircraft are empty unless you edit the "stations" and add weight. Thus, a standard FS2002 flight does not reflect the true handling of a realistically loaded airliner -- it's more like a Boeing test flight with two pilots and a cabin containing nothing but empty seats :-) The difference in handling characteristics between empty versus fully loaded is very significant when you fly a jetliner -- a fully loaded B747 is totally unable to land safely right after take-off. It takes several hours of burning fuel (losing weight) or a fuel dump to make it "landable". When flying jets I always start out with less than 60% fuel for short hops.best regards,Hans Petter

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Hans,Pete has told me the "proper" brakes to use when landing (I have been using the parking brake), and this is why I thought that they were too effective. The "toe" brakes appear to be far more realistic (at least, based on how I believe that they should work).With respect to stopping distances, I start my Beechjet flights with 50 per cent fuel. This is enough to fly anywhere in the high resolution scenery regions without seriously compromising take offs at airfields like Marin County. Full flaps and full power is JUST enough to get airborne at 2000 feet :-)Chris Low,ENGLAND.