GusRodrigues

Anybody else noticed that in Bonanza F33A and the C172N, the turn coordinator gauge is way off? in bonanza the 2 minute turn indicator will show a 1 minute turn, and in the C172 a turn of 4-5º/second?

And they shouldn't behave the same way, but they should display the same flight characteristics. Positive stability. and they do. I don't have much flight time in Pipers, but with 30 hours only in archer III (brazilian emb-712) it display the same positive stability than the C172 (but I do prefer the c172, but is opinion).I don't know how much flight models people are that complains lack of "reality" (i do use 4 flight models all the time), but my stalls in the XP c172 are textbook and almost identical to the real deal.but indeed, the X-Plane default C172 it is much more aggressive than a real world C172 would behavior. You cannot swing your controls like you said in the X-plane C172, but the rudder is a lot more real in the X-plane than the FS9 and FSX, but lets take this exemple further.If you try the same thing with the 172N from carenado, the reaction is like the real world. almost no change in bank angle. It is a very good add-on plane. I would say that the lack of momentum in the C172 is the only flaw that I have experienced with XP9 C172. regardless, it is, in my opinion, light years ahead of the ms fs version.the 172 with a cruise propeller is a pain in the butt to climb, but cruise at nice pace with 2100 rpm (around 100 KIAS @ 2000').I flew a c172 with climb prop, but it is no good for cross country or legs longer than 1 hour. 90 KIAS as top speed is terrible.also the EMB-712 with climb was terrible to cross country, 90 kias @ 10000' with 65% of power as terrible. the one with cruise would put 110 kias under the belt easily, but would take a whole life to climb that high.

so I rest my case. As I said with my little 80 hours in command of a C172M, the default C172SP in XP9 and XPX is light years ahead of performance and handling characteristics that a RL C172 displays when compared with its peers (FS9 and FSX).And as a licensed commercial pilot I will easily explain this for you and for a lot more simmers:The behavior in flight of 'FAR 23' aircraft is by far general for all. With exception of few cases, because of its mtow and eow, all GA single engine aircraft will behave in the same way. There is, almost no residual mommentum. If you release control force, in calm air, properly trimmed (by control tabs and elevator trim) it will mantain that condition. Start a turn and release the force in the control wheel, it will remain in that bank. etc. They are light, they are 5000lbs or less.With small corrections in the FM, you can achieve the "fine" tuning necessary to achieve a very close representation of real flight characteristics of a C172SP.But it is a common error for "hardcore simmers" to expect a small amount of the same momentum that we have in a 737. It is like expect the behavior of a cargo ship in a motorboat.In fact, you can expect a very small momentum in heavy weight GA aircraft (I only noticed a small delay in control command and response in a full loaded C210 (2 pilots, 4 passenger, full fuel) and in a full loaded PA-34-220T).and in the 73G simulator, but it was a narrow body jet liner and far off my coments.now, back to your arguments... Does exists, in MSFS's series, one default aircraft that displays the characteristics of flight of a real world aircraft?no.Does exists, in X-Plane series, one default aircraft that displays the characteristics of flight of a real world aircraft?no.But which of them the flight characteristics are more close for the real deal?my answer is X-Plane C172.

in FSX and FS9, without a gauge coded to simulate the engine windmill in a jet engine, shut down the engine will make it stop and that's it. No windmill, no windmill start.and I have a lot of time editing the JT8D-17 for the tinmouse FD.also, I would like to know the Real Life flight time in a C172 of every one here.I have at least 80 hrs in C172 and, even not being perfect, is a lot more accurate than the C172 FM in FSX and 9.

are we discussing here about stalls and behavior of default airplanes, with real world airplanes, in icing condition, T tail aircraft, in a real Stall condition?just checking. try to use your rudder to keep the aircraft straight line. that's what pilots do in real world.try also to reduce power to idle. climb to 1000' agl and then, try to stall.

this is approach to stall recovery. the same thing for the 737.deep stall is a different thing. last time I've tried stupid things in the FSX (fs9, fs2k2, fs2k, fs98...) was to land a full loaded 747 in RW20L in santos dummont.and I made it.so, default airplanes are not supoused to be realistic in all areas. they are more likely to be a small display of the real capabilty. also, goran is right. You have too much spare time to try, capture images and edit a video of a default airplane making loops in the simulador (and I second the music. geez)

...WHAT?if it were at any speed, it would be okay, but... this is wrong.(critical mach can stall a wing portion above a certain speed, reducing the overall Critical AoA, but... wow.)

In real world, even in the clearest day, sunlight will scatter through the atmosphere and let the horizon fogged. This is physics. Light will scatter through the air. The level of moisture, solid particles, etc, will determine the color of scattering and the maximum distance where you will be able to see objects on the ground. the horizontal view distance will also reduce with the increase of altitude.In a humid day, low wind, the view distance at ground level can be around 8 to 10 statue miles, with a bluish tint scattered in the distant objects.With clear air (not so dry, not so humid), it can reach 12 statue miles, with little or no bluish tint scattered in the objects.

the NGX will come with the same kind of PSEU that comes with the real 737?

talking with two captains of 73G/738

Are yu guys factoring the ram drag of a NG with 140 KTAS so you can determine the net thrust output?any way, afaik, the 737 throttle has gates for reverse handle that gives you about 70%, 95% of N1 and full. Never knew a pilot that attempted to put full reverse thrust for no good reason (Good reasons: RTO, EMERG Land) In NG yes, but is Idle Reverse only. RA must be at or bellow 10ft only Idle reverse and for the #3 and #4. Lol, nice one. But today isn't April 1st, mate.

if runway is not a problem, use flap 1. lower drag = higher acceleration rate.

FSX only?

or try x-plane.not full of airliners or complex aircraft, but is much more in x-plane to make you enjoy your ride (like good turbulence with thermals and carenado planes)

Nice to read about that update, bob.the mouse is the only airliner that makes me open the MS FS again. I really missed the 16:9 WS panel. Hope to see you or somebody else take a leap of faith in X-Plane and make a decent version for it.

there is nothing saying to arm the spoilers. this is an Airbus feature for the A320 and after.

Tape Radio Altimeter (dl.dropbox.com/u/9085975/RADIO%20ALTIMETER%20INDICATOR.JPG)New ClockOlder IAS gauge (similar to www.airliners.net/photo/Brazil---Air/Boeing-VC-96-(737-2N3-Adv)/0568310/L/)Fast/Slow Indicatorold height call out ( youtu.be/kbPnuzXYBkI after 08:00, but don't know if will be able to find anything)

Because of the boards rules. You must sign your name so everyone here may be able to adress a reply to you with your name.Give a second try in the English School and study a lot more. Only two months of study in a SL is far from providing you with the ability to achieve a desirable minimum level of understanding so that you can make a reading that involves knowledge of technical words.Also, don't forget that English as a SL in your resume will help you more than you believe.

737 has poor speed brake capability. from the 200 to the 900er.schedule your descent with speeds of M .70/280/250 kias, and keep the ratio of 3:1 - or, 3nm for each 1000ft you need to loosei.e. if your destination is at MSL, and the altitude for procedure is 2000ft @ 10dme of the vor/dme that locates at the airport and you are cruising at fl330:you will need to loose 31000 feet. you will loose that in 93nm from the TOD. you must be at 10 dme, add 10 nm to the distance to your destination. so, 103dme from the station, start to descent.if you need to slow down, put 3nm for each 5 knots you need to loose in level flight and idle.

It is. the biggest deal is the reduced margin for buffet (1.3 turns).Done a sim flight recently (train IFR flying), and flying bellow optimum my expected fuel burn at given altitude was around 3% higher due being heavy and ISA temp above standard.short flights you barelly will notice the difference. Try long flights, even you manage to hold your altitude with a whigher pitch setting, the fuel burn will not be good as espected to sustain a flight at or above your maximum alt.

this will help you out planing cruise in optmum:M72 FF @ FL310/330- 2600/2700pph/eng+1000ft above optimum: 2% extra burn-1000ft bellow optimum: 1% extra burn@ fl350, you can expect 2400pph.for mach 78, expect a fuel burn of 3200pph/eng.

Small chart from the AFM for -17 engines for cruise WT @ optmium/MAX FL:M.7287,000/ 112,000lbs*: FL370¹100,000/ 120,000lbs*: FL350112,000/ 120,000lbs: FL330120,000/ 120,000lbs: FL310M.7485,500/ 106,000lbs*: FL370¹94,500/ 113,000lbs*: FL350104,000/ 120,000lbs*: FL330113,000/ 120,000lbs: FL310M.7875,000/ 90,000lbs*: FL370¹82,000/ 100,000lbs*: FL35090,000/ 108,000lbs*: FL33099,000/ 117,000lbs*: FL310108,000/ 120,000lbs*: FL290*ISA. deduct 750lbs* for each 5°C above ISA¹ Some -200/adv recieved an improved pressurization system that allows the acft to climb to FL370

You can also engage Aileron and Elevator Servos after 1000ft to activate the CWS for AILE e ELEV channels (roll hold and pitch hold)

1505 - CN2 vs CFFalso, the spool lag in those old engines are only between idle and ~50% of N1%. then, is faster than you can imagine.

the two first officers.the the most experienced one, probably, was in the left side.