captdini

I would love to see the big jets maintaining a level turn with the Autopilot engaged using the elevators rather than the Stab trim all the time.

Looks like a very logical argument you make. Dinshaw Parakh.

Hope it is a 737 for Cockpit Builders

Hi Jay, Thanks so much for the feedback. I will try and see if I can get any help on that forum. Regards, Dinshaw.

Hi there, I just came across your post and I was immediately drawn to the line where you said you are running three 4K monitors in Nvidia Surround. I have just built a home cockpit (737) for myself and I am currently running three 4K TV's(55") on a GTX1070 Card and W10. For some reason, I am unable to run Nvidia Surround. Even, when I have reduced the resolution to Full HD on the TV's and then select nVidia Surround, Windows reverts to the native resolution (12228x2096), which is beyond the capability of the GPU. For whatever it is worth, 1 TV is connected directly to the HDMI, another with a DP to HDMI convertor and the third with a DVI to HDMI convertor. Any suggestions? Regards, DInshaw.

Hi Dan, Good day to you. I have just received my Yoke after 5 months. Anyway, I noticed it has not come with any instructions, USB Cable, nuts, etc to assemble the Yoke to the Base. Did you get these items? After a 5 month wait, I really dont look forward to now waiting for Darryl and Ali to send me these components at their own pace, if it is a case of having forgotten to include them. I checked a video on line and that customer seems to have purchased from Aviation Megastore in Holland. It was shipped to him assembled and with the Cable, manual(by the looks of it) etc... Here is a link to the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCkA52-t7rk Cheers, Dinshaw. EDIT: NEVER MIND DAN, FIGURED IT OUT. ALL GOOD!! :)

Thanks EastFB72. Will give it a go and see

Talking about Singapore, does anyone know if the A_A Sceneries Kuala Lumpur is working in P3D v4? If yes, then I might pick that up to go with WSSS when it is released.

For Whatever it is worth. I have been using a Digital Storm Machine which is entering its 6th year now. Definitely not state of the art in today's terms, but not a single issue in all these years. P3D still runs with acceptable expectations and I could not recommend them more if you are looking for a Branded machine.

Hi Emanuel, Very interesting point you make there. Maybe, TFDi have managed to make a partial workaround and implement it. It is like FSL, who have nailed the taxi/friction problem. The 320 taxis and maintains speed without the need to add thrust every now and then to maintain a taxi speed. At the same time, the FSL A320 exhibits the same loss/gain in height during turns. Having said that, the PMDG birds are no less spectacular in what they do. Especially, the new Queen with the curved CRT screens is something so unique and different, it has to be marveled at. I guess, it is up to each developer to choose which boundaries they want to push. With reference to your earlier post, I did do the same with NIL weather(Clear skies) option and had the same results as earlier. Regards, Dinshaw Parakh

Hi Emanuel, I didn't have any weather engine running, just stock P3D weather. Weather was fair, nothing added. I only added winds of 124/12 just to mimic what I saw in the video sent by my friend. This behaviour happens even with NIL wind conditions IIRC. For whatever it is worth, are you saying in your 747, with clear weather, the turns do not lose/gain altitude? I will give it a shot anyway and report back. Regards, Dinshaw Parakh. P.S. Have any of the PMDG development teams noticed this behaviour in the development cycle or is it just happening to me? Just curious, nothing else

Dear Paul, To answer your question, if you see in my Original post, I mentioned that I asked him to specifically get a few turns going in level flight and video tape the A/P behaviour with reference to the altitude loss/gain for me to make a comparison. It was taken after the session was over. Therefore there is nothing strange why they were doing 'significant' turns at 1500'. It may well have been 2500', 5000' or any altitude, which is not relevant here. If you notice the ND/PFD in the video, it is a classic visual circuit pattern they are in. Flap 5, Downwind leg. As you may well know, the 737 visual circuit is normally flown at 1500 feet, you will find this in the QRH. I can safely guess, this was done in the interest of time. It would obviously make no sense wasting time to climb straight ahead to say 5000' and do the same 90 degree left and right banks, which you could do at circuit altitude. It was not part of any Simulator profile, if that is what you are thinking. It was purely to demonstrate my request. I hope that answers your question. And as Rudy says, it is perfectly reasonable use of an Autopilot. Regards, Dinshaw Parakh

Dear Alan and Dan, Thank you for your detailed replies and I appreciate that. As you both have stated, it is to do with an aging Simulator platform, and it is exactly what I felt too, hence the Topic title. I am definitely not comparing costs and level of immersion, realism, etc between a Level A-D simulator and a desktop platform, it would most definitely be foolhardy and immature to do that. Apples and Oranges. Like you both said, I am more than happy and content with how far PMDG and the other's have gone in giving us Sim and aviation enthusiasts these extremely realistic planes to play around with, given the limitations of P3D and FSX :) And I am more than happy with 95 % realism as stated. It was more a comment on the Devil is in the details kind of thing. The above scenario is in no way a deal breaker, and it would be foolish for me to think so. If they manage to find a work around for this, then fabulous. If not, it will not diminish my enjoyment one bit, either way. But once again, thanks for your replies and this discussion, which was very enlightening. Regards to both of you, Dinshaw Parakh.

HI folks, This is something that has been gnawing at me for sometime, and the reason I bring this up in the General Forum is that I have noticed this in all PMDG a/c (NGX, 777, 747v3). It also occurs in the FSL A320X, and I am sure in other payware aircraft's too. I am referring to the aircraft unable to hold altitude properly in a level turn with the Autopilot engaged. By this, let me explain. Assume I am flying at 1500', speed at maneuvering speed for current flap setting, and A/P at SPD, HDG, ALT HOLD. Now if I turn the MCP Heading selector 90 degrees left, the A/P commands a turn to the selected heading. Now as the bank increases(max 25), after a few moments, the aircraft starts descending and loses anywhere between 30-60 feet. After sometime the A/P recovers the lost altitude slowly and levels off at the MCP altitude. Now, when rolling out of the turn on the selected heading, the aircraft begins to climb, once again by 20-40 feet and the autopilot will correct it back to the MCP altitude. I spoke to a friend of mine who is a TRE on NG's and asked him if this behaviour is also the same in the aircraft. He said, he has not ever noticed any such large deviation in the aircraft in the same scenario. The altitude deviation is extremely marginal, if any he said. On one of his last simulator sessions, I asked him to video tape and send me this behaviour from the simulator, which I am attaching. I have also attached a very similar scenario taken from P3D to compare. I hope you can make out what I am saying from observing these 2 videos. You will observe that the Level D sim, the Auto Flight system is much 'quicker' in countering the V/S deviation and the altitude deviation may be hardly 10 feet, if any. The reason I ask this is because I know how much work PMDG and all the other top notch developer's have put in tweaking the flight model "outside" the stock P3D/FSX engine. Therefore, I was wondering if it is a P3D limitation that the A/P is slow in "reacting and countering" what are the natural laws of physics. Thanks for your patience. I would love to upload the videos as soon as I know how, so that you can see what I mean. Regards, Dinshaw Parakh https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxOboTRxOXHtRkZCODJnalZFRHM/view?usp=sharing - P3D video https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxOboTRxOXHtbTdGWnZJSERxbXc/view?usp=sharing - Level D 737 video

I would love to see some Airports in India f possible: Chennai - VOMM Bengaluru - VOBL Hyderabad - VOHS Mumbai - VABB Kolkata - VECC Sril Lanka with Colombo VCBI An updated Maldives VRMM Here are a couple of reasons I think this region could do with these airports: I feel the sub continent is lacking with good airport scenery and is also a nice place for short/medium/long haul flights to and from these cities. You have relatively short/medium hauls to places in the Middle east like Dubai, Doha, Abu Dhabi, etc which have good sceneries available. There are also decent sceneries for places in SE Asia like Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Phuket, Singapore, Hong Kong etc. These are all 3-5 hours away. In addition, for those more inclined towards realism, these flights are EDTO flights, so the fuel and diversion planning comes into play. For those Long Haul lovers, Europe and the East Coast of North America is also reachable along with Australia and the Far East. Not much change in terms of seasonal textures as there is no snow in these areas. For those using Real World weather add-on's the Indian Monsoon time will be a great "fun" time to fly There are also challenging airports in the region like Kathmandu and Paro in Bhutan, which are very short flights from Kolkata, which I am sure will make for a fun sector. Lastly, you can have the option of using your favorite short haul Aircraft like the NGX / FSL A320 / A320-X or the wide bodies like the PMDG777 and the upcoming 747/A330. All these airports are more than capable of handling all sizes of aircraft. Regards, Dinshaw.