Jump to content

JSACKS

Members
  • Content Count

    2,306
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About JSACKS

  • Rank
    JSACKS

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    McLean, VA 22101, USA
  • Interests
    Aviation, history, music, international finance and politics

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Profile Fields

  • About Me
    Retired central banker and consultant
  1. Hey, Johan, Amazing to see your name again, so many years later! Thank you for posting. I hope all is well. Warm regards
  2. Update: Ah, I found it! While in crz flight, I noticed that the RTE pages opened on PAGE 2 with the VIA and TO indicators. So I did a PREV Page and Voila, I was able to change the destination airport to BIKF. I EXECUTED the airport and then the ILS arrival runway 29 and all went fine editing the RTE DISCOs. By the time I completed this exercise for the very first time, I was 8000 vertical feet above the VNAV descent path (!), so I did a 360 turn on FLCH and levelled off with ALT HLD at 26,000 feet because the VNAV vertical descent indicator showed I was overshooting the VNAV altitude by then. I held that FL and went back in LNAV mode as we completed the 360, intercepting the route line normally. Once the vertical altitude indicator showed I was within 400 vertical feet of the VNAV descent track, I hit VNAV again and resumed normal VNAV descent. I re-set approach waypoint KEF 49 for 2,000' and 170 knots in the FMC, and The Queen did a perfect autoland. Thanks to all for posts!
  3. Hi, Scandinavian 13: Thank you for your reply. If I go into my RTE page while in crz flight, before taking this diversionary action, I have 4-5 pages remaining of RTE points, as defined by the VIA and TO columns. The last entry in the RTE pages identifies the ILS approach to runway 31L at KJFK and then has a missed approach entry. Currently I am on ("VIA") jetway G3 and heading "TO" KEF which is the KEF VOR. Where and how should I enter my desired ILS landing runway at KEF in this situation from my current position 80nm east at FL350? Thanks for any further guidance.
  4. In FS2004: I just did an emergency landing at 629K lbs. at Keflavik (Iceland) on Runway 29 during an FMC programmed flight from Europe to KJFK because I wanted to try an emergency landing. So I hit FLCH at our cruise alt of FL350 and did a huge descending 360 turn well east of Rekyavik, and then tried to figure out how to re-program the FMC for Keflavik, but could not find the right way to do it, arghh! I went into the DEP/ARR window, but that didn't seem to work as expected. I tried deleting the active flight plan and that didn't work. I then programmed the arrival runway into the FMC Nav Rad (108.50/292) and it "took". I hit LOC and APP about 15 nm out. However, about 10nm from the arrival runway, I got a RWY/ILS Freq error on the FMC scratchpad! At 9 nm out, I turned off the AP and hand flew. I observed on approach that the aircraft had been slightly south of the correct approach course and that as I nudged the plane onto the approach course visually, the LOC and APP lit up in green on the PFD. I switched the AP back on, but it was too late for a LAND 3 arrival, so I turned it off again and managed to do a textbook hand fly to touchdown. What should I have done to reprogram the FMC for an arrival at Keflavik? Where did I go wrong? I greatly appreciate any guidance, thanks!
  5. I am ready to pull the trigger on a hefty new rig for the first time in 11 years that includes a ton of flying the PMDG 747-400 in FS2004. However, before I do so, I want to check, is the PMDG 747-400 V2 that was in Alpha state in November going to be compatible with P3D V3.0 when it is released? I can't imagine a sim life without the 747 so wanted to ask here. Appreciate any replies, many thanks. Jonathan Sacks McLean, VA
  6. Thanks again for responses. My post was removed because it didn't have a signature block. I've since added one to my profile and wanted to test whether it works by posting. Cheers, all!
  7. Hmm, this isn't going too well. I tried MipMap Manager three times and no diff; still have blurred text in VC mode, especially overhead panel labels with night lighting. I am not sure how to use DXTbmp; the HELP section isn't much use to somebody like me who's got no experience doing bmp work. Any further guidance appreciated, thanks. JS
  8. Mike, Thanks for your helpful reply. Much appreciated. Johan: Thanks for posting. I never migrated to FSX. It was always too much work to contemplate! I still dream of a new rig and migrating, but will probably never get around to it. My FS9 setup is better than ever with a 42" LED for the sim and a 24" LCD for FSNavigator and instruments. Cheers to you both! JS
  9. Excuse my ignorance and lateness to this topic, but I just discovered it and downloaded and installed the replacement VC textures successfully. They look very nice. However, I would like to know how to remove the mipmaps to reduce the blurriness and also how to re-save the textures in DXT3 format as well. Can anybody kindly assist? Many Thanks! (p.s. greetings to you, Johan. Hope you're doing well after all these years!) JS
  10. Hi, Johan:Just use FSNavigator if you have it. I use it for everything. Sometimes it's pointless to simulate reality when there's only one of you when in reality there would have been 3 or maybe even 4 crew in the Classic cockpit. I don't use the INS at all.Happy Landings!Jonathan
  11. No! -- well at least I wouldn't. I'd use my revised fuel scalar of 1.23 for the CLS 747-200 and go from there. I might live with that figure and be satisfied. As long as I remember to always cruise at M0.85. The rest of the technical stuff in this thread I don't know about and have no experience with. But I am not going there because I suspect it requires too much additional homework and I've done more than enough in my 12 years as a fairly avid simmer. I changed a lot of scalars for many BOEING types in my time and mostly they worked very well at least if simplistically. I changed pitch angles, engine thrust, flaps and other factors, and always ended up with improved performance that was closer to book values, but I never delved deeply into models per se and editing tools. I just made changes in the aircraft.cfg files. You need to have knowledge and be seriously dedicated to do more technical stuff and while it is always interesting and gratifying to learn such stuff it takes time and great patience and skill too. Take that 1.23 and stick it in the CLS aircraft.cfg folder. It will work very well for you--at Mach 0.85.JS
  12. _______________________________________________________________________________________________I posted this at CLS 747 forum yesterday evening:The CLS default fuel flow is relatively low in at least one of the 747-200s: in the case of the model I have tested, it is the 747-200 with PW engines rated at 54,750lb.st.t I have run tests in this aircraft with the following data and fuel flow results:Conditions: Standard Atmosphere; "Clear Weather" in FS9: no wind, no clouds, no moistureFlight Weight: Approx. 615,000 lbs (279 metric tonnes) - A VERY important variable that MUST be accurate for testing like this!Altitude: FL350 (typical cruise alt for this weight)Speed: Mach 0.85 (IAS 298) - Cruise range speed varies from .84 to .86 but .85 was very typical in this classic model so I went with that. Fuel flow can vary to a significant extent with certain flight models in FS if you change the mach speed by even a factor of 0.01.Groundspeed: 490 knotsN1: 94% (default CLS--seems like a representative rate)Outside Air Temp: -54CTotal Air Temp: -22C (perfect!)Pitch: 3 degrees nose upResultant Fuel flow: 18,000 to 18,400 lbs/hr.Default CLS fuel scalar in AIR file for this 747: 0.8418The objective is to raise the cruise flow flow to around 23,500 lbs/hr. which is much more realistic.However, the calculation to do this proved to be non-linear; I forgot, I guess, that fuel flow scalars are not in fact linear after all. I experimented with several alternate fuel flow scalars and found that the one that seems to be working closest to the objective fuel flow is 1.23. This means that if you edit you aircraft.cfg file and insert the number 1.23 in the fuel flow scalar field you will get a fuel flow of around 24,000 lbs/hr with the above flight conditions. At present I am getting almost exactly 24,000 lbs/hr at a weight of 612,000 lbs. The weight I use incidentally is based on the BOEING table in the CLS manual (page 21). "At present" means I have allowed the aircraft to stabilize for at least 5 minutes after loading or reloading a saved flight with these parameters. It takes some minutes for speed to settle down, for N1 to stabilize, and for fuel flow to stabilize accordingly.I shall keep tweaking further but in general if one is within the ball park under Standard Atmosphere conditions in the sim with an aircraft model like this, you can't hope to get absolutely precise fuel flow data even if you drive yourself totally nuts. It can be done but it can be hugely time consuming. Also, it may work textbook in cruise, but fuel flow may not necessarily be textbook (but might be close enough) for takeoff, climb, descent, and approach. Nonetheless, for trip planning purposes, the figure of 1.23 should serve very well for any kind of longer distance flights.Hope this helps.Please post questions, objections, arguments, etc. Always good to discuss this stuff on forums!Thanks for looking.Cheers,JS
  13. Hi, Johan:Is the fuel scalar a linear factor in FS9? Just curious. I tweaked a lot of scalars years ago but frankly I've forgotten how a lot of them worked. Sadly, I hardly have time to even turn the sim on these days!Hope you doing well.Thanks and Cheers!JS
  14. I don't even get as far as THR | TOGA | TOGA on my FMA. I get HOLD | TOGA | TOGA every time. Why? I have no frickin' idea ! But I still do get GA power as N1 rises to at least 100% and slightly over every time. It changes to THR REF on the way up somewhere. The incorrect automatic speed bug re-set to Vref minus 20 at TOGA activation is terrifying. The speed bug re-sets itself higher as I climb and the speed might actually climb somewhat above Vref 25 or 30 on the way up. I then go into FL CH mode and bug up the speed to 200-210 knots and manage the flaps.Anyway, good to know it's not just (entirely) me and that this is obviously a bug. I don't mind it that much. It's just that I have reached a point where I wanted to gain some real mastery over certain key functions and it would have been nice if the GA function did actually work as per the PMDG tutorial and manuals.I have learned to control a GA both manually and with automatic flight now so I am reasonably satisfied that I can simulate the condition. This Queen is still a marvel and I am very happy with her.Jonathan
×
×
  • Create New...