kevinh

Well it's broken again, either that or search functionality has been drastically reduced. You can't choose what forum you want to search (there is no advanced search any more). Under "Content Search" there is no mention of "forum", let alone a means to select the forum you want to search in, as there used to be. If it automatically searches the forum you are in that's all very well until you search again too soon. Then you get taken to an error page (which belatedly tells you how much longer you should have waited to search again). Then you have to navigate back to the forum and re-enter your search because you can't easily get back to the search page. I understand searches must be limited because of server load but there will be a much bigger server hit if every search looks at all content. Also you get a lot of irrelevant matches that way too. Controls over what area you want to search in are essential, surely?

Where did I give the crew the benefit of the doubt? I was just correcting what you said about the crew getting to cruise before they noticed the problem. Of course the error should have been caught on the ground. Has anyone said otherwise? Surely an unacceptable error requires more action, compared to an acceptable error?

No, the IRS takes it's initial alignment position from the departure airport. But then the crew adjust this lat/long for the exact gate position. They can use slew keys but in this case the Captain entered the data from the keypad, incorrectly. The aircraft didn't have a software mod that checks for sensible inputs, but since the incident all Air Asia planes have been updated. You do have to manually enter the alignment position in a Boeing, though of course you can copy last position or current GPS position to the scratchpad to help you. But for precise alignment you need to enter the gate position. According to the linked report they recognised the problem as soon as the aircraft took off. A gate return is less of an issue than an air return, but a safe air return is still far better than the alternative of attempting to continue unsafely.

Yes. After you uninstall the FSX version, next time you run the installer you will get the option to install both the FSX and FSX-SE versions

That headline you quote is very misleading. It may reduce jet lag effects but it is never going to end it. Even if cabin pressure could be made to be sea level, time zone change would still have a significant effect people.

If there's no entry for it then I think it defaults to settings in cameras.cfg which is located where FSX.cfg is.

Initially you did generalise to all Asian crews. It's good you are qualifying that now. In that case all mistakes are unforgivable. The problem here was the entry was not checked. Surely you would forgive the pilot if the mistake was found in a cross check and corrected? In this case nobody died. Hopefully both crew members, and the operator, learned from the experience. Far better to recognise an error and overcome it safely, as they did, than sweep it under the carpet and risk making the same mistake again. The crew made a mistake and they corrected it. Is that unforgivable? It must be said it is rather easy to upset the Airbus IRS position with a single entry. It does ask you to confirm and the FCOM is very clear about the risk. But I suppose that during preflight they were less concerned about the consequences. Do the same thing in flight and you are in a world of trouble. Easier to correct on ground, as long as you are aware something is wrong....

A more readable font would make it easier to get help.

It doesn't disconnect in that situation as far as I'm aware. IIRC you will get an A/T caution if the difference between actual and commanded airspeed is greater than 10 knots. The FMC shouldn't command an airspeed less than Vref.

Surely the checklists are the same whether you start cold and dark or short turn.

At lower RPM engines have stability bleed valves and variable stator vanes to prevent things like compressor stall. If you slammed the throttles from idle there is a risk a bleed valve might not close or the vanes might not open and that engine would accelerate slower, leading to a thrust differential at takeoff thrust. So the usual procedure let the engines stabilise at around 60% (also known as standing the throttles up) to ensure bleeds are closed before setting takeoff thrust. If you run ignition continuously the whole flight the igniters will soon wear out. So you use ignition in critical phases of flight and when a flameout is likely (in cloud or precipitation). If you save the panel state after each flight and restart from that state, fluid loss will be carried over.

Which AP is selected will also affect which side is master. If AP A becomes master for some reason then the Capt FD becomes master too. If only AP B is engaged the F/O FD will definitely be master and should stay that way.

Yes you're right, but in my defence there was a higher power development, Dectra, which had transatlantic capability. It wasn't widely adopted and INS finally killed it off.

A320s regularly operate there so it's certainly possible for a 737.

Yes the Decca navigator could only identify current position. It's up to the flight crew to plot the course, estimate drift and compensate for it. That's why long range aircraft usually had a navigator in the crew.

Over land they also had the LFR Radio Range system for airways flying. There was also Decca navigator system which could be used over the ocean.

I think he means the raw data LOC and GS pointers around the PFD attitude display. Surely you haven't forgotten the Attitude Director Indicator?

I remembered the topic coming up before so I used forum search to find it. Search seems to be working better these days. No need to apologise.

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that" Must have been programmed in Toulouse. :ph34r:

Take a look at this topic as it covers the issue you describe. http://www.avsim.com/topic/486262-strange-behavior-with-holding-pattern/

That looks great Vernon.

That depends how close you get to a tailstrike. 1.5 degrees could make all the difference between impact and no impact. I wasn't trying to prove any point. Just showing there is a difference in pitch and it is easily visible on the PFD.

Lower speed on approach means more drag and more fuel flow. You are below the minimum drag speed so drag coefficient increases as speed decreases. Therefore flap 40 is a double hit on fuel flow. Try it for yourself in the NGX as I did (see my earlier post). It is only for a few minutes but it all adds up, just like single engine taxi. Other negative effects include more noise and greater wear on the flap mechanism. Clearly GOL are prepared to accept those disadvantages for their own operational reasons.

As far as I know state.cfg is used only within FSX. It also records engine hours used by that type. I suspect that data might be used by the FSX logbook. It's possible some addons might use the data to simulate engine wear. If you are concerned about this possibility edit the file instead, deleting everything except the hours data.

This is misleading. FSX uses tables to compute aerodynamic coefficients and derivatives (functions of AOA, Mach, etc), computes forces and moments and then integrates these using equations of motion. This can simulate the physics of flight very well. How well depends on the FDE designer. Default models are very basic, good payware can produce very realistic handling. In addition PMDG add a fair amount of custom simulation outside the FSX model, further enhancing realism.