Jump to content

NM5K

Members
  • Content Count

    725
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About NM5K

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,380 profile views
  1. I think they still turn it off at the same appx time they turn off the A/P, but being I don't work there, not 100% positive.. They didn't use A/T or VNAV until around the switch to RNP. Where the VNAV button was usually had a metal cover over it instead. For a good while they didn't use auto brakes either, but started using those a few years back a good bit before the switch to RNP. Myself, I prefer the A/T off when landing, and usually turn it off when I turn off the A/P, which is usually about the time I drop the gear and go to flaps 15, or shortly after. I also prefer judging for myself when to be a retard..
  2. SP1C came out in 2012. Long before Steam was a glint in anyone's eyeballs. SP1D will be the install that will let one install to Steam, and it's not out yet.
  3. As far as the centerline, keep the runway in one spot on the glass. Preferably as close to the center as possible. To make it really easy, use the HGS. That makes lining up a piece of cake. When getting close, you want to visualize keeping the runway right between your legs. Speed is fairly critical, so practice keeping your Vref+5 or whatever as close as possible. Too slow, and you risk a tail strike due to the high AOA. Also makes for a false teeth rattler for the ones in the back. Too fast, and you have to float too far down the runway to bleed off speed. Only flare a small amount. You pretty much want to fly the plane onto the runway, rather than holding off until stall like you would a small Cessna. You flare, but only a small amount, and not until you are below about 20 ft or so. Watch an autoland, and note how the plane only flares itself at the last few feet above the runway. That's how you want to flare. Also, watch down the runway towards the horizon to gauge how much to flare. That will take a bit of practice, but once you get the hang, you can make a decent landing most every time. Don't watch the runway right in front of the plane, watch farther down the runway to gauge when and how much to flare. You will get used to where the horizon is, and you will get to where you can flare the same appx amount every time by watching where the horizon, and the end of the runway looks in relation what you see from the cockpit. Watch the horizon during autolands to show you about how things should look. If you seem to over flare, push the nose forward with the yoke a bit to get back to normal flare right before touching down. That can also make for a smoother landing in the cases where your speed might be a tad slow, and the AOA a bit high. If the speed starts getting too low, keep some power on until touchdown. Will make for a smoother landing. But with the right approach speeds, you should be able to go to idle at around 10 ft or so, and fly it onto the runway. Practice makes nearly perfect.. BTW, I'm not a real pilot, so take what I say with a grain of salt. But I almost never have a truly bad landing with the NGX. It's better to land firm, than to float 1/4 of the way down the runway trying to hold off for a greaser. That's bad practice in a modern Boeing jet and will earn you a spanking by your artificial instructors. lol
  4. A slow 3-4 fps frame rate can make landing a lot harder than with a smooth frame rate. People vary on what is smooth.. I like to see 16 fps minimum to look fairly fluid, and 20 is better. More is even more better..
  5. It's only excessive in the terms that it burns more fuel than the bean counters would like.. :| If you use a high CI, it will account for the change in speeds, and the results *should* pan out just as well as the low CI. I've done flights with the CI all over the map, and never had any problems, even on short routes. That said, I tend to use fairly low CI's these days, just to mimic the usual bean counter induced stingyness on fuel burn. I've been running the Southwest routes pretty low lately. 20-36 depending.. But I still prefer 40-45 with my 600 BBJ.. Anyway, I don't agree with blaming a high CI on not being able to slow down for the approach.. It's not the CI per say.. It's other issues. Or I think anyway.
  6. Looks good.. I think you did the 600 paint that I used for a template.. The one with the curved stripes on the tail.. I left the bottom semi dirty on mine.. I think it looks a bit more realistic with a little soot behind the engines. But not real dirty.. I like the upper part pretty clean.. I used that one in the Toncontin video I did.
  7. That little 600 looks pretty slick.. I d/led that one to add to my collection.. I also run the 600as my BBJ, and this will be the third one for my collection.. " I have two others that I have done"Myself, I'm kind of surprised Boeing never did a 600 BBJ.. To me, it seems like it would be a goodfit for some that might consider a 700 or 800 as a tad bit large for a private jet, but want a bitmore room than the typical Gulfstream or whatever..
  8. I just keep the nav lights on all the time..You still see the shadows, etc, but it's notso drastic.MK
  9. >Yeah, I like the effect, but it makes it difficult to select>items on the cockpit with a mouse when there's turbulence, so>I turned it off with the camera config file.Makes adjusting the heading knob on the 737 real fun...The main problem being the "click" buttons for the heading, and also the bank angle are very close together, and hardto tell apart.. I dunno how many times I've tried to dial upa new heading, but changed my bank angle instead...%$#@Drives me nuts.. Cuz then, you have to get clicked on the right "clicker" to get my bank angle back where I had it..Drives me nuts messing with that in bumpy wx... :(I wish they would place those "clicker" points farther apart..Like say bank angle at the very top, heading at the very bottom.MK
  10. >Umm,>>WAAS depends on ground based equipment. That's why it only>works in the lower 48, since that's the only area in the world>that has the ground based WAAS stations. Europe has its own>system similar to WAAS, however.>>ThomasI remember when they first started talking about using the WAAS systems, etc..I was kinda surprised to see most of the cheaper homeuser GPS's have WAAS capability these days.I didn't realize that system would be usable by alleventually. My hand held Magellan Meridian has WAAS. Sure helpsaccuracy over the older stock systems. They claim a res of 3m or less. In testing mine, if I let it stayon a while and get good and stable with a lot of visiblesat's, it's often good to about 5 ft if you are careful. Not too bad. I've got a few acres up in OK, and I useit to know where my property lines and corners are.Like I say, if you let the GPS get good and stable, I can usually be within about 5 feet, which is less than 2m. You have to be careful though, and it's best to usemultiple readings, and then take an average if you arereally trying to pin down a location as close as possible.The GPS will shift around, wobble back and forth a bit, etc..Due to all the movement of the earth, sat positions, etc..This error is mainly what the WAAS corrects. All the ground reference stations collect the data, and send it to the twomaster stations. They then come up with a correction messageand it's sent by one of the geostationary sats in the system.I think there are two of those.. Not sure though..MK
  11. Cool... I'll try that out. I'd never tried declining...MK
  12. LOL.. I just happened to comment on this in the previous thread.. I wish it would give the optionto actually run the approach you request, ratherthan having to do the sidestep.. Sometimes, I want the ILS, and they won't let meuse it... I'm in jets most the time..So I oftenprefer the longer runway with ILS vs a short stripwith no ILS. But many of the flight plans I run for the lear set me up for the dinky "VFR" runways.MK
  13. One thing that bugs me on some flights is it won't really let you select a new runway/approach.As an example, I was flying the lear from Dallasto Houston, and was given directions to 12L..But I wanted to shoot the ILS approach to 12R..When you do such a request, they will tell youto do a 12L approach and then sidestep over to 12R..That blows the whole point of shooting the ILS approach.. I think they should rig it to also change to the proper approach to the runway yourequest, rather than making you sidestep ontothe one you want.. Yes, I'm quite capable of doing the sidestep approach, but in some wx, I may want that ILSapproach for a good reason..MK
  14. BTW...My original version of FSX has run wellenough for me, that I haven't even tried SP1yet.. And judging from some of the reports, I may not.. I don't have stutters or blurriesas it is, and not sure I really need em... :/Some seem to be having some issues with the patch..MK
  15. #1...None of my old cockpit gauges/sounds work.. IE: I haven't had GPWS or landing calls, etc since FS9.. Flying a 737-800with no GPWS or landing calls, etc, well, that #$%^ ain't right.. :/I guess within the program itself, I likedthe fs9 rain/snow effects better. Alsothe way it streaked off the VC's windscreen..Other than that, not much I guess. Unlike many, I have never really had performance issues. And I fly jets to and fro from bigger cities too..Some of the airports might bog it down pretty good, but I hardly fly to those particular airports so I don't see it much..I haven't actually flown FS9 a single timesince I got FSX..I can't go back to FS9.. The VC's are just not in the same league, not to mention the texture res, etc..MK
×
×
  • Create New...