Landings

[Bill A 68]

I yet have to see an PAI plane land...I only see them texi and take-off...they do land, right?...lOlRegards,Bill

[Guest]

I'm with you, Bill. Lots of takeoffs (maybe they're all landing in Dallas -- someone said *that* airport was extremely busy :>)

[Bill A 68]

Hmm, I have not seen to much traffic at KDWF...wait till they release American Airlines's flight plans and planes.Bill

[brandon 0]

I have had a problem with one of the 737s when it was landing at KLAX it kept doing what looked like "dive bombing". The plane would appear like it will hit the ground, then it shoots back up and goes the same thing over. Finally about 2 miles out from the runway it crashed into the ground and disappeared. I have not tried replacing the air files but I may have to unless someone else has any other suggestions?

[Guest tcable]

I have not had any issues in Charlote or PHL- both US Airways hubs. All of the aircraft that I've seen have landed.I'm using a mix of PAI and my own flightplans (US is one of PAI's) I'm using the A330 flights from world AI and the POSKY A330. At least there are not many of them :)Tim

[Guest]

I have seen them land at KSFO.

[Guest Martin]

This is exactly what I've seen happening at LAX (Simflyers) too! But I have seen the 737s land fine at other airports.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

[Guest]

>I yet have to see an PAI plane land...I only see them texi >and take-off...they do land, right?...lOl >>Regards, >>Bill With all due respects to PAI for their effort, there are some serious problems with the flight behavior of their aircraft. I spent many hours over the weekend replacing and modifing all the PAI .cfg and .air files so that these fine looking aircraft would actually fly.I know that PAI went through a "beta" testing period, but I'm a little confused about what they were actually testing since the majority of their aircraft had either very eratic flight behavior or were totally disfunctional.This post is not intended to be a flame of PAI. I just think these guys need to take a look at their quality control and testing potocol so that the users can enjoy their product. The whole PAI idea has great potential, but right now it needs work.

[Guest Coneman]

I haven't seen erratic flying and have also seen them land. There were three on approach to KATL, with 2 landing and 1 go-around. In fact the landing phase seems somewhat better than the slam/bam MS AI. Are you making them flyable? If so, I'm not sure that was what they were intended for.ToddKCOE

[Guest]

>I haven't seen erratic flying and have also seen them land. >There were three on approach to KATL, with 2 landing and 1 >go-around. In fact the landing phase seems somewhat better >than the slam/bam MS AI. Are you making them flyable? If so, >I'm not sure that was what they were intended for. >>Todd >KCOE I'll bet those aircraft you observed were not 767s, 777s, MD11s, or A330s. The 747s and the A340 will also be very unpredictable (multiple go-arounds for no reason) because PAI has used the notoriously buggy default 744 air and .cfg files. Some of this also depends on how you define erratic. Aircraft that undulate continuously on approach and do pop-ups when they flair, in my opinion, have erratic flight behavior. Heavy jets that require only 1000' of runway to take off have erratic flight behavior. Aircraft that crash shortly after take off have erratic flight behavior. As for your second statement; I'm quite sure PAI intended all of these aircraft to actually fly, land, and take off.

[Guest Martin]

>As for your second statement; I'm quite sure PAI intended all of >these aircraft to actually fly, land, and take off.I'm sure he meant flyable for the user.When they behave correctly, PAI aircraft does behave more realistically than the default aircraft. For instance, their approach speeds are more reasonable (at least for the 737) at around 135 knots instead of 165. And watching them take off, they have much longer takeoff runs (a 757 will take at least around half the runway to get airborne).Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

[Guest]

For me 733, 734, 735, 738 and 752 all taxi, takeoff and land fine.744 takesoff and taxies fine but when it comes to landing u have to pray a lot. Sometimes it will land (at KORD for example) other times it will just fly over the airport and continue on who knows where to.MD11 i saw taxi and takeoff but i never saw it land.767 used to be crazy too but since i replaced the air file with the B777 default it works alright but i cant stop tinking how its not realistic to have 767 behave like a 777.And now for the buggiest of them all. A330 and A340I have no idea who did their airfiles but these planes taxi ok but they dont takeoff, they do a new thing called takeunder. They actually go into the ground while taking off. And as far as landings go i lost all hope i will ever see them land like a plane.So my question is: Who beta tested these aircraft?Other than the things mentioned above, i love PAI and i hope they come back real soon.=)

[Guest]

Does anyone think the MS default 777 file would work on the A330 and A340? It may not be realistic but it may be better than seeing them divebomb and cartwheel!

[Guest]

Hm, I was lucky to get PAI before shutdown, and I've spent some time an EHAM. Looks ok, their KLM aircraft come and go... the only thing here is, that a few of them throw an anchor on landing or decelerate at 10 g's... poor pax... I've had a 737 having a shorter landing than a STOL Dornier 228 on max reverse+brakes. Some secret Boeing plans? Okay, I don't blame PAI for that, I guess it's just a weirdness of fs2002 ai handling.TM

[Guest Martin]

>I don't blame PAI for that, I guess it's just a weirdness of >fs2002 ai handling. It's not - it's bad air files.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing