Balint

Ever wondered how small is the place you want to spend your time the most?Tell me it's not an addiction... :)Happy for ya!Cheers,

OK so let's just stay with the /200ER merge for a while.How is that done in your case?I'm reeeeaaaaaallly interested... :)Thanks in advance,Cheers,

Well I recently went into buying a certain 3-letter company's 777, as I'm a big fan of the T7. It was such a bad idea.No, I mean the product is okay, but it's just not THERE. The panel is OK, CDU, and even WRX, sounds great. But still flies and looks like a freeware.The other day I went out to test the flight dinamics, since I usually fly long hauls with full A/P and programmed CDU's, only T/O and landing is my time. I took off and started an uncoordinated hard left turn, stepped on the rudder pedal and 3 seconds later I found myself inverted in a T7 at 800 ft AGL.You have not seen a person uninstalling a product as fast as I did.I wish there was at least 3 PMDG's, so we would have lots of addons that are spot-on. Oh well, we still got one.Ever thought about developing a sim environment, guys? ;)Cheers,

Although it seems rather promising, let's just wait until we see how it performs on our machines really. It is a pity that PMDG will not (how on earth could they, of course) present an Airbus up to their standards for FS9. I am so committed to PMDG, that I would go for their FS9 version, no matter what, if they would do one.Well-well...Cheers,

Kjetil,Not sure how it's done IRL. I usually go for 20 on a normal/heavy loaded aircraft and use 10 when it's really light. Also, whenever possible, I use derated thrust for takeoffs and climbs to keep the engines durable for a longer time (I suppose as they do it IRL).So even if the aircarft is not fully loaded, I tend to use Flaps20 as it gives me lower V1, VR, V2, and eventually helps compensating derated thrust.Cheers,

Err,Excuse me... Can you repeat that, please?.. Err... it's quite loud up here in the L1 of this '47.. ;)Cheers,

Hi all,Search on the forums did not result in a topic on this just yet. So what's the deal with AI in FSX? I have seen them taxi and some flying as well, but had little time to watch. They seemed "smarter" somehow, yet I still don't know whether there are any developments on separation, runway exit speed, head-on taxi instructions, and so on... You know al the things that bothered us in FS9Thanks for the replies in advance!Cheers,

MS always tends to bring no-die-hard PC users closer to flightsimming with each new FS release. They always try to cover more and more of this flying stuff to make it sellable to other than hardcore flightsimmers.The point is that if they leave things unchanged, BUT establish the possibility to change things you don't like (make it a NAV light size, autogen, default planes vs. commercial addons, etc.) we should all be happy. Beginners WILL buy the product and eventually populate our ever growing virtual sky, and experienced users will welcome the possibility to tweak this, change that to own liking.Now what if MS chose to "lock" things down and wipe out the possibility for us to tweak FSX? We would be all griping about that. What do we do now, that things are in fact far away from "locked"? Gripe about wrong default but easily changeable things.What we need to focus on instead, is how we can get the max out of this new platform. Remember, families buy the same car as racers, but racers mine out the parts they don't need and replace the ones they need with better performing ones. They focus on buying a good platform to build on.FS-ing will always be like this, whether you like it or not.No offense intended.Cheers,

I see a great improvement, however, in the area of flight modeling, weather simulating (ever noticed how those clouds sit on their base altitude with their bottoms straightened out?) and scenery.I would not go into commenting default planes that will be re-done by other developers anyway. Other aircrafts, however, such as the glider, the ski-equipped (I can't recall ist type) or the trike, is really enjoyable.Cheers,

Randy,I, for one, am with you. I very much prefer to simulate flying, rather than the surrounding it happens in.

"Anybody knows about its quality ?"Somewhere around PMDG beta. Just not what you would like to be treated with after the Queen. No, not at all. A few years before I would have loved it so much, though.Cheers,

Gents,Sorry for disappointing those expecting an announcement; this is rather a question here. :)I was just wondering if anyone was attempting to make an Air Force One livery now that we have a visual model (F) closer to the AF1 than the original -400?I know there are at least two of them on Avsim, but that's for the -400PAX version.Cheers,

Although I tend to think that there's really no need for wing views ever since a freeware tool named "recorder" came out, I do believe PMDG should (and probably will) consider an option to choose whether you would like VC, WV or both.And yes, maybe FSX will solve our problems. (And maybe induce some more:))It would be so nice to know some more about FSX...I would, for one, go for a fully customizable environment. You know, where there is no preset way of how things work... Giving full steam ahead for developers such as PMDG to brighten up our lives with products that are really as real as it gets. Maaan....Went a little O/T, sry.Cheers,

Robbie, I do not know right now how much fuel would be needed for such a flight, although I have recently completed a route just like that. It all depends on distance, payload, predicted wind direction and speed along the route, the distance of your alternate(s) and your choice of minimum landing fuel. I have made a decent little fuel planner for the 400 that will even tell you the fuel distribution among tanks, possible time until TANK/ENG and so on.You cannot have full pax and full cargo load as it will, indeed exceed the MTOW by some. Try, for instance full pax load with 4 to 6 palletts of cargo. Also, when setting up FMC, pay close attention to VNAV page 2 where, after input of fuel amount, ZFW and Cost Index, it will present you with OPT ALT, referring to the optimum cruise altitude given your current weight. Round up this value to the closest 1000 and enter it as your CRZ ALT. Also set this altitude on the MCP and after takeoff, turn VNAV on and let it manage thrust and climb in order to reach your altitude safely.Also, there is an extraordinary document made by Holger Seilz here:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...13344&mode=fullGo and check it out. It's definitely worth the time, and most probably you will recognize the answer to your problem.Cheers,

Well-well,Did you by any chance use FS native tools (fuel/payload) to set fuel and payload? Don't do that. Use PMDG's own fuel/payload manager and you will be all set.This tool should be somewhere in your Start Menu, where PMDG747 installed itself, but you will most probably be able to find it in the installation folder.Ignore me if you are using it already.Cheers,

I recall that Airbus A340's main center wheel has been designed just like that.Take a look at this shot:http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0414986/L/and this one as well:http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0224774/L/Cheers,

Holger,That was absolutely fantastic reading. Congratulations on this one. I really felt like I was there at all times. Although I have many hours logged in this brilliant sim, as always, I have learned some new stuff again.Cheers,

Mark,In order to start the engines, you have to- either have ext. power/air on (do not forget to check this option in the PMDG menu) or APU running and APU bleed ON- have the engine bleed switches ON- Fuel cutoff switches ON- Autostart ONIf any of these are missing when you attempt to start the engines, all you will hear is a click sound without switch movement.Also check Secondary EICAS display for system status.Cheers,

I guess there's quite a few of us now who keep refreshing PMDG's website and this forum every once a while just to not miss the moment...Keep hitting the buttons, Gentlemen...Cheers,

Nick,Just did the exact same thing...Can't wait.. Well, I guess there aren't any other options...

John,Very well said. I can truthfully second that. On occasions, when there's a nem PMDG product coming out and being reviewed, I mostly check the review out just to get feedback on just how magnificent product I have bought.This post of yours, John, already validates the pinning of this thread.Cheers,

I have bought the 737NG, later on the 800/900 expansion pack. Bought the propper series. Now own a mighty Jumbo 1.10 and will soon become a dog too.I wish PMDG had the resources to develop a whole FS up to PMDG standards....Cheers,

Team,Looking at the results you guys seem to rock... Keep the pace! :)

Geez,Sorry, I used a different login name last time (icike) without any signatures.Paul, I know there is a very good tutorial out there for the PMDG 737NG. Try to search for it, I believe it was made by Timothy Metzinger, and it is called something like advanced operations tutorial. If you go through, you will have most of your questions answered while learning. I think this is the fastest way to get you up in the skies. ;)Cheers,

Mike,The good-old 1024x768 res. is the most I can take out of my 5-year-old 15" LCD monitor. Now guess how many times have I been flying using the main panel... I am planning to replace it with a new one, though. I was wondering if I should get a 17" LCD or a 19" (or 21") CRT.Are CRT monitors really that much harder on the eyes than LCD's?Any comments are welcome.Cheers,