hseilz747

Michael -don't worry, you're not going to run out of fuel short of KSFO ;-)No, seriously: Actually you are right about the fuel adjustment, but, you're normally planning to arrive with about 10 tons of fuel left - which you are, if flying with 133 tons total FOB and using up the contingency fuel of 10 tons. With a fuel load of - theoretically correct - almost 160 tons (including all reserves), you'd end up with more than 30 tons of fuel left for landing, associated with a very high LW and corresponding high approach speeds.I've seen 120 tons used as a real world figure (unfortunately withot knowing the respecive ZFW). So for the tutorial I had a wide range of 120 to 160 tons to choose from... I decided to go the practical way and use whatever figure would end up with roughly the real amount of fuel at landing - hence the 133 tons.Might be something to tweak for an updated version of the tutorial, though :)Regards,Holger.>But I do have a question ...were you really able to fly this>route with this much fuel?. It seems you underestimated fuel>required. First, your ZFW is quite high - below MZFW but still>high. Your planned landing weight is 259 t. which is 43 t.>above the table value of 216 which forces you to make>adjustments. For your distance of 5200 NM you need just about>100 t. of enroute fuel but because of your extra LW weight you>need extra (11 hrs of flight) 0.4*11*(259-216)/4.5 = 42 t of>fuel for total of 100 + 42 = 142 t of fuel. Your 112 t.of>enroute fuel doesn't seem like nearly adequate amount.>>Too bad Lufthansa did not share with you 744 takeoff/derate>data for the Frankfurt/runway airport - it would have been a>nice professional touch and would show folks how such tables>are used.>>Michael J.>http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/for...argo_hauler.gif>http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Steve -I think Cpt. Carter pushes the A/P disconnect switch on his yoke when at 210 feet (decision height), after which he calls something like "Autopilot's disconnected". You have several methods available for disconnecting... you can either pull the disengage bar on the MCP, extensively move the yoke, hit the trim switches or - as seen here - press a button on the yoke. Results are the same. The A/P should, under normal circumstances, never disconnect itself.A similar button is located on the throttles for disconnecting the A/T which he uses some 100 feet above the runway, prior to flare. Obviously there was no aural warning associated to it, but if you listen closely you can hear the switch clicking ;-)Holger.

>Holger - if you'd like to consider adding your tutorial to>Ops as an article, we'd be thrilled!Sure thing, Ryan. Due to the complex formatting I'm not sure if it is easily possible to convert the document into wiki markup language as you outlined in your post regarding Ops. In case it's possible to upload a PDF plus the supplementary files, I'd be happy to do it.Kind regards

>Excellent work, Japanese say "A man, when old, should obey his>son.">>I am 78-year old, a retired textile enginner. I have been>loving Airplane since my boyhood and enjoying lately Flight>Simulator.>>Sincerely,>>Kan-ichiro FushiharaThis is a very inspiring attitude, considering most people in your age that I know wouldn't even touch a computer...Have great fun with the 747!

Well, thank you very much for the kind words, guys! I'm rally glad that most people seem to like it so far.Oh, and did I already mention that time compression or saving the flight are options in case someone wouldn't want to be available for 12 hours? ;)

Fellow captains -First the Type Courses, then PMDG Ops and now here's a third new training resource for your PMDG 747:The Advanced Operations TutorialLufthansa Flight 454: Frankfurt - San FranciscoBased on real airline procedure manuals, this tutorial for the PMDG 747 takes you from Europe to the United States. It covers every aspect of transcontinental airline flying, from preflight planning to engine shutdown. This is the most comprehensive training guide released yet. While primarily aimed at those who are unfamiliar with the PMDG 747, advanced users also may find new concepts. It is the perfect basis for the new Type Course lessons.Actually I planned to finish this project almost 6 months ago, but real life issues kept me from doing so. Since there was a lot of work involved with creating this document, I thought it might still be of interest to many new users - better late than never, right? ;-)As for the required time: 12 hours if you want to do in real time. Take it as a challenge! I decided to base the tutorial on a long haul flight because this allows in-depth discussion of vital things such as fuel planning, alternates, step climbs and in-flight fuel management.Download here:http://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=86332Any feedback is of course appreciated.Best regards,Holger Seilz.

Thanks for pointing this out, Captain Randazzo! I don't know why it never dawned on me that it might be useful to find some power settings for reference... Flying "by the numbers" certainly makes it easier to manage speed and energy during the approach phase. For anyone who might be interested, here are the results of some test flights I did earlier today. Note that these figures are based on ISA conditions (standard atmosphere) with no winds, A/P + A/T engaged. I've chosen 3000 feet as a sensible altitude for these tests. The table should be more or less self explanatory. Power settings are of course shown as N1-percentage.This data allows a number of interesting conclusions. For example, note that on the 747, there are only very small thrust changes required (from 65 - 80% N1) to maintain an optimal speed based on flap setting.For additional comparison, I've included data for the 767 (1/2 the weight of a 747) and 737NG (1/4 the weight of a 747) as well.*** SPEED VS. POWER CHART (3000ft, ISA WX) ***Boeing 747-400 (PMDG)General Electrics CF6-80 C2B1FZFW 222.000 KGsGW 250.000 KGs (~ 85% MLW)Vref 142 ktsLevel Flight --------------------------350 kts 72 %300 kts 67 %250 kts 65 %Level Flight --------------------------Ref + 80 F 0 65 %Ref + 60 F 1 65 %Ref + 40 F 5 68 %Ref + 20 F 10 70 %Ref + 10 F 20 72 %Ref + 10 F 20 + G 77 %ILS Glideslope ------------------------Ref + 10 F 20 + G 63 %Ref + 10 F 25 + G 65 %Ref + 5 F 30 + G 66 %Boeing 767-300ER (Lvl D)General Electrics CF6-80 C2B6ZFW 111.000 KGsGW 125.000 KGs (~ 85% MLW)Vref 135 ktsLevel Flight --------------------------350 kts 77 %300 kts 67 %250 kts 58 %Level Flight --------------------------Ref + 80 F 0 51 %Ref + 60 F 1 54 %Ref + 40 F 5 57 %Ref + 20 F 15 61 %Ref + 10 F 20 62 %Ref + 10 F 20 + G 70 %ILS Glideslope ------------------------Ref + 10 F 20 + G 47 %Ref + 10 F 25 + G 52 %Ref + 5 F 30 + G 53 %Boeing 737-800 (PMDG)CFM 56-7B24ZFW 55.000 KGsGW 58.000 KGs (~ 85% MLW)Vref 140 ktsLevel Flight --------------------------350 kts 74 %300 kts 69 %250 kts 62 %Level Flight --------------------------Ref + 70 F 0 44 %Ref + 50 F 1 44 %Ref + 30 F 5 58 %Ref + 20 F 10 61 %Ref + 20 F 15 64 %Ref + 20 F 15 + G 72 %ILS Glideslope ------------------------Ref + 20 F 15 + G 58 %Ref + 10 F 25 + G 62 %Ref + 5 F 30 + G 63 %

OK gentlemen, let me add my 2 cents here. I have followed this and other topics here with a certain amusement because I think a piece of software simply isn't worth getting angry or frustrated about. Being a long-time PSS customer (started with their 747), I have spent $30 on much worse things than the Triple Seven; however, I will think twice before buying any of their future products. I'm sure PSS is aware that they can't risk another miscarriage like this one or they'll loose the majority of their customers.Though I can totally understand those who are really upset and running out of patience now, this attitude doesn't really speed up the testing progress. So why bother? As long as I KNOW that there WILL BE a patch, I'm fine. Let them do their job and then judge again.I have one big suggestion to make for the team: Change your policy regarding information on current development processes!! I'm sure many people here are sick of reading statements like "Testing continues. Period." for the 10000th time. There would be much more understanding for the delay if you actually gave some details on what the heck you're working on. Post some screenshots of work-in-progress or explain what's causing the problems and how you're planning to fix it from a software developer's point of view. Get some user feedback. WHO is the FDE guy you're talking about, and WHAT can he do to improve the flight model? Sometimes it seems like the support guys simply don't know what the devs / testers are doing at the moment. Quite counterproductive in my opnion.Then, there's that "It cannot be done"-attitude regarding user suggestions (FMC fix page, GPWS callouts etc just to name a few examples). Instead of behaving as flexible as a tax office at Friday afternoon, show some commitment and creativity. Consider adding new features even if they were never planned. At least I would appreciate that. Keep in mind that you're still in the aviation business in a broader sense ;-)So, that's all I have to say right now and I hope this will be taken as constructive criticism. As has been stated by a few others, none of this is to be taken personally. I'm sure PSS still has the potential to rock the virtual skies with a well-patched Triple Seven!So long,Holger Seilz

Forget everything what Cessna flight instructors may have told you. This is a different thing: Higher weight and approach speed = higher momentum = more stability on the approach. Control ROD with combined adjustments on pitch and power and keep in mind that demanded thrust output is delayed. Therefore, use pitch only for short-term corrections.As for the landing technique, it is important to focus primarily on aural callouts (this is true for both simulation and reality). Just fly the aircraft down the glideslope until you hear the "FOURTY" callout. Then:- 40: Begin to retard throttles- 30: Pull back on the stick slightly to reduce your rate of descent. Approx 5

First of all: Very well done, PSS! Took my -300ER for a pattern at KBFI and I must say that I'm quite impressed with FDE and panel. However, here are some observations: Did Boeing recently buy avionics from Toulouse or am I missing something? The GPWS ground prox callouts are definitely Airbus-style. As for the RA callouts, the 50 feet announcement is missing (airline option maybe?). And the master caution wailer doesn't seem right to me, either. Unfortunately we can't change any sounds as they are hardcoded into the gauges as far as I can see.Minor things, I know. But maybe they're easy to fix then as well ;-)Regards,Holger Seilz.

I'd like to second that. I assume that it can't be much of an effort for the developer to remove or replace a few wav-files. And if that really shouldn't be possible, please consider including an option to DISABLE all callouts, so that we can let PMSounds take care of that. For a lot of users, realistic ambient sounds are a major factor for the overall experience. Interestingly, both your 777 and 747 for FS2002 have correct sounds, and so does the competition.So that's my last minute wishlist for the upcoming patch (and NO, this is not exactly a 'new feature' request ;-)) PSS, does anyone copy...? Regards,

LH recommends Flaps 25 for normal operations due to noise reduction and fuel economy. Flaps 30 should be used for wet, slippery or short runways as has been pointed out before.Regards,

Gee, that's 3:30AM Central European Time. Never thought I'd stay awake all night for Bill Gates... :-lolFor everyone else who's wondering:*** 6:30 pacific is 02:30z (GMT / UTC) ***Regards,Holger SeilzBAW0715

I totally agree, James. This is something PSS should take into consideration for an upcoming patch.As already mentioned in my post some days ago which was not noticed (can't really blame PSS here, there are more important issues with the T7), the GPWS callouts and other cockpit sounds need replacements.- Master Caution wailer is too slow, just doesn't sound right in comparison to the real tone- Autopilot and autothrottle disconnect sounds are somehow superposed with the same sounds as in Concorde, Airbus- GPWS ground proximity callouts are definitely Airbus style- As for the regular callouts, "500", "300", "50", "Approaching Minimums" and "Minimums" are missing (I know, airline options allow for this, but I'd prefer to have them ;-))- I'm quite sure that Boeing uses a more modern GPWS voice for their recent 777s. Some people who have seen recent cockpit videos might know what I'm talking about - for reference, have a look at this video (I know it's a 747, but makes no difference in this case): http://www.fsaviation.com/~airvideo/a340/1a/bc/747sfo.zipSo I hope PSS will comment on these issues now, because I think correct ambient sounds are very important for the immersion. I'm certainly not a developer, but I guess it can't be too hard to replace those sounds.Regards,Holger.

Here in Germany I'm paying around

ITVV Cathay is the best 777 video out there (and I have some of them). The captain does a fine job in explaining every single aspect of the plane in a simulator (including fly-by-wire demonstrations such as stall, overspeed, and bank protection). Besides, there are some nice in-flight action scenes, such as a high-speed overpass and approach into Auckland, NZ.As for all ITVV videos, this one is highly recommendable!..Now, where's my money? ;-)Regards,Holger SeilzBAW0715

HAIL TO THE QUEEN!Now... where's that credit card?! ;-)

A nice example for 'saddism': While you are peacefully sleeping, they put HER online. You wake up, and.... oh my god.... SHE has been released for 15 minutes. Dozens of people could get hands on HER first. Time for suicide!So I wouldn't go to bed at all and keep klickin' that refresh button. Have fun!You guys need some sleep. Seriously. ;-)Good night from GMT+2!HolgerBAW0715

Lufthansa is one airline that uses 500ft AGL as a reference point for landing. All LH aircraft have the "500" GPWS automatic callout disabled. Instead, the PNF calls "500" to improve situational awareness. The flying pilot responds with "Checked." If the airplane is configured correctly and lateral / vertical deviation from approach path is acceptable and - most importantly - the runway is in sight, he adds "Continue!". Decision Height can then be ignored. However, if the runway is not visible, they may proceed down to decision height and reassess the situation.So it's basically just a double-check... ;-)HolgerBAW0715

Totally understandable results: LH & BA, two of the best airlines in the world.OK, maybe I'm a bit prejudiced here :-hah I don't know why I join the common hysteria here, but I've downloaded CX, VA and the Boeing demonstrator livery as well.HolgerBAW0715

Hmmm... sounds good to me. All I want is a working IGS, the required radio beacons and that silly checkerboard thing ;-)Could you pleaaaase post links to both?Thanks,Holger.

Wow, thanks again for all the comments. Glad you enjoyed it!@ Chase:Great Idea! I thought about writing a tutorial for the upcoming PMDG747, based on real Lufthansa procedures. Do you think that I could make some bucks with that? $$$ :-hah ... just kidding!

> But, does the scenery not look very much like FS9? can you tell a bit> more what scenery they use?Hi Johan,Of course that highly depends on the age of the simulator. The A320 I'm referring to, is almost 10 years old now. Newer sims like the MD-11 have improved graphics.But since these simulators are used for IFR training only, it's quite obvious that they didn't focus on faithful reproduction of landmarks. The textures used for land coverage look quite generic and not very sharp. As I said, in the vincinity of the airports, they use satellite photos in conjunction with some 3D objects. The terrain mesh has quite a low resolution, but sharp edges and silhouettes of mountains look very realistic. In general, FS2004 has waaay better graphics, believe me.So, what do they do with all the computing power they have? It's those little details that make up the realism. Like moving cars on the motorways. Red lights on the right lane, white lights on the left. Runway lighting that shimmers through the fog. Almost perfect snow and rain. Beautiful grey cumulus clouds at night. And so on...I hope the FS dev team makes some notes here, plenty of stuff that could be included in FS 10. ;-)Holger.

>Hey I definately don't want to steal your spotlight but when>I saw this I had to respond because of how much of a>coincidence it is. >Nah, forget about the spotlight. Spotlight on you ;-) Now, that is reallly a coincidence! Flying in the real thing is even better than flying a sim. It's a rare opportunity to be in the jumpseat or even the captain's seat nowadays. Isn't the MD-11 one excellent aircraft? I really enjoyed it!If you have more pictures... go ahead and post them!

Matthias,AI traffic in a full motion sim is a very unobstrusive experience. You're right, there are some aircraft standing / taxiing on the ground, but that's it. I have not seen one single aircraft in the sky, but I think you can set that up, too. TCAS training must be somehow possible. "WHOOP WHOOP, CLIMB -- CLIMB NOW!" :-hah Du, wenn wir beide wirklich den DLR-Test