Orlaam

Members
  • Content count

    2,383
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

85 Good

1 Follower

About Orlaam

  • Rank
    Member - 2,000+

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    KPHX

Recent Profile Visitors

3,607 profile views
  1. Orlaam

    Good First Airliner

    I truly think the newer NG will be a long wait. I'd be shocked if we saw it before 2 years.
  2. Orlaam

    Good First Airliner

    I don't think you'll ever get company routes. Overall, most airlines have their route posted on flightaware. It's also important to know that ATC will vector aircraft and sort of change the route in the flight. Don't get too hung up on routes. Additionally, I prefer the -700 variant due to the slower approach speeds. But the -800 is more popular/common. i can land the -800 just fine, it's just a good 20 knots higher typically, so you have to be nice and stable.
  3. Orlaam

    Good First Airliner

    The NGX is likely the easiest, however, I say that because my first complex add-ons were the Dreamfleet 737 and Level-D 767. The NGX still requires a fair amount of learning to set up the flight. Most people probably find the FMC the hardest to figure out, but it is the most intuitive of all the FMCs I've used. The Dash-8 is a wonderful aircraft in the sim. Handles well, very few, if any noticeable bugs, very low frame rates, high quality visuals. The Dash-8 is very complex though and the FMC is not intuitive at all. It has a steep learning curve. To me, the Boeing are the easiest to learn, and in some ways are so similar between each variant that transitioning is simple. The PMDG 747 and 777 are not that dissimilar from the 737 that learning is like starting over. Program the FMC properly, set up the plane, and press CMD with LNAV and VNAV after take off. It's as easy as that. Turn off the lights, retract flaps, turn a couple knobs and just monitor and set up for arrival. The Dash-8 is much different. Turn off aux pumps, fuel pumps, lights/flaps/gear, bleeds, and more. Not impossible but challenging.
  4. Orlaam

    Farewell FSW

    I called this as soon as it was announced. We all knew it would fail. No 3rd party, open development support, geared towards novices, no true updated integration... Only a fool would believe that taking a previously open development model and restricting it would work.
  5. Sounds like you have a pounds and kilogram issue. Are you sure you don't have LBS set to KG or vice versa?
  6. Other add-ons have the ground-lighting effect in FSX. PMDG aircraft do, so no reason the Maddog shouldn't.
  7. Orlaam

    Old-school version?

    How about the blue background but same instruments? IOW, just the color change? I have to think they retrofitted the blue panel versions with new avionics. That would be easy and nice for the updated features I saw mentioned by the team. In the Maddog "Pro" thread, he mentions an expansion pack in the future, so that would be a nice little change.
  8. Documentation on their site regarding setup and manager/config options. Looks pretty nice so far.
  9. Allegiant Air World Atlantic Airlines
  10. http://www.flythemaddogx.com/
  11. Orlaam

    PMDG 737

    Don't have the iFly. You just have to look into your options and make a choice. Everyone is different. It may be fine for you. But you always take a risk with add ons working and performing well.
  12. Orlaam

    PMDG 737

    It might be a little choppy. You could be forced to turn down some eye candy. The Q400 isn't a good reference, simply because it is programmed a bit differently and certain aspects of it are modeled outside the sim. I don't think the Q400 performs bad for anyone to be honest. Complex plane but excellent performance. I've never really seen a slow down with the Q400 but the PMDG aircraft have given me a minor stutter in busy areas. Nothing that ruins the experience, but you will see some degrading flying into places like LAX or EWR.
  13. Orlaam

    This is interesting...

    A certain F/A 18 WSO says he's seen the same thing multiple times, always over the ocean off the coast. He also said he asked many times to his fellow pilots about it out of curiosity, but was eventually told to stop asking questions. He does know he has seen them in the same area before and heard of other pilots had as well. It's clearly a government project of some sort is all. For perspective, NASA accidentally released this photo in the early 60s from an X15 It turned out to be a secret A-12 Oxcart used by the CIA and a precursor to the SR-71.
  14. Orlaam

    Maddog X Tutorials

    Awesome! The old version was so good at not diving all over the place in a turn and easily maintaining pitch in different phases of flight. I guess the ease of hand flying it was what was best about it. Just very stable. Hope the documentation is just as good. I had all that stuff printed last time and I think I tossed it, not expecting to come back
  15. I do both almost equally. I prefer part 121 simulation though. I don't personally think the prep takes much longer in an airliner than a GA though. You still have to find a flight plan, check weather, and set up the plane. Unless you are just taking off and flying aimlessly. I can get the PMDG 737 in the air in about 20 minutes, which is almost as fast as I get the A2A Comanche up. I pick a flight plan from Flightaware and run PFPX with the parameters I want and use it for fuel and other calculations. Takes like 5 minutes. Then open the sim, load a short state and program the FMC, push back, start, and fly. I suppose you could spend a great deal more time planning and simulating procedures if you wanted. The Dash-8 (Q400) takes a slightly bit longer just because the plane is more complex to set up. Either way it's maybe 10 extra minutes of prep. I load the boarding phase on the Q400. In the A2A Comanche you still have the walk around, GPS setup, and other little things to get it going. Not much faster IMO. I personally like the complexity of them, but in reality they aren't that complex IMO. I don't do flights longer than 2 hours, 3 at the most. It just takes too long. My time of real enjoyment is takeoff and landing. During cruise I monitor but also look at other things on my laptop. I think they're both equally as challenging in their own way. The GA is a simpler aircraft usually, but the actual flying phases are the same. You just go slower into smaller airports.