jcmontagne

Yes it's probably on par with the kind of logic that is used to compare Airbus and Boeing in a few previous posts... :( The best way to prevent a debate from being "objective" is to go on the emotional level...Look at what politicians do...

I have never tried a full motion simulator (or real airliner) but I'm now 25 hrs into my PPL trainingand I can surely say that flight simulation helps. Even though FSX flight models for light aircrafts such as the Cessna aren't that accurate, having a good understanding of all the controls and gaugesmakes a difference. As stated earlier, the "feel" (a hot summer afternoon is going to get quite bumpy...) is definitelywhat lacks the most with FSX.Another thing that helped me allot is flying online (IVAO for me) !If the fantasy situation of being the only one to land a pilotless 737 arose (I just wanted to say...we're all counting on you), a PMDG 737NGX flightsim experience would certainly help you set the aircraft up for autoland thanks to your understanding of the autoflight/FMS logic.As for manual landing...I couldn't say

Harsh competition out there...Maybe JFK is getting saturated ? :(

Back to the future... :(

LOL :(

I'm glad the 747 line has a successor because it is indeed a venerable aircraft.It is, by the way, probably the aircraft (the dash 400) I have flown on the most (back in my teenage hood when I used to live in Asia).Recently, I had the opportunity to fly on the A380 CDG -> JFK -> CDG and I have to say it was a very nice experience : very comfortable (flying qualities, noise and cabin atmosphere), seats are pretty standard in economy class and you do have slightly more leg groom but...Speaking of engineering, I'm not an engineer (I'm a pharmacist) so I won't comment on either of Boeing's or Airbus' engineering.My feeling is just that they are both good at what they do. Their different perspectives of the airline market are perhaps not so different and all this row is after all maybe just the result of marketing : they have to emphasize their differentiation ! So everybody, shake hands ! :(

That's probably due to their website design as far as language is concerned (I'm in France) but it's american made and VERY sturdy !Just type thrustmaster in google and you'll have the english version.The joystick is designed from the F-16 and the throttle/panel from the A-10C (maybe because of the upcoming release of DCS A10C). You can therefore use it for any aircraft and the dual throttle is quite nice compared to the older "Cougar" version, it would come quite handy for the 737...

You could also go for this one :http://www.thrustmaster.com/product.aspx?ProductID=221&PlatformID=5I own the older "Cougar" version and enjoy it a lot. You can map all the important MCP functions (Speed, Hdg, Altitude, VS) on your joystick/throttles so that you don't need to use the mouse anymore (which is pretty annoying).The new "Warthog" version sounds quite promising. So if you don't have the room (and money) for things like column yokes or hardware MCPs it's a good solution !As for the "stick vs yoke dilemma" it's up to you. I find the stick to be more enjoyable than the yoke although it's harder to master (speaking of Sim and real life). I'd say the stick is "sport" while the yoke is "comfort".The desk congestion factor applies once again.Rudder pedals are a must, Saitek's aren't too bad

If you don't go to the forum, the forum goes to you :( Happy birthday ! :(

That's really good news !As I said when you originaly posted about the A320, it would perfectly fit into PMDG's approach to flightsim as I understand it :To deliver aircraft simulaions that will not only satisfy their clients' desires but also surprise them by introducing different conceptions of flying with the examples of the MD11 or the js41 (autoflying for the former ).As for the competition, in my opinion, no one is on the level of PMDG for the moment so this shouldn't be a concern.Let's only hope that airbus will be as cooperative as boeing seems to be with them.Three cheers to the team ! You made my day :(

Sounds like the stuff we learn for the PPL isn't that evident after all...

This website is pretty cool, I used it a few times to follow an AFR flight a relative was oninto its approach at JFK airport. Allong with the NYC port authorities moving map of the flight and flightaware, it's really nice !That's how I discovered that A380s had the "super" callsign suffix for wake turbulence.

Thanks for the explanations, now it's crystal clear !

And what if the super intelligent autopilot computer that canfly the plane without any pilot onboard, make perfect cabin annoucements oreven play chess with the passengers throught the IFE system had just onetiny little flaw.........his name is HAL ? :(

Correct me if I'm wrong but when I said "not supported" I meant that the coding of FSX wasn'tmade with SLI or Crossfire in mind (same for multicore processors initialy ?). With my HD4870 crossfire setup, while running FSX, when I go into the catalyst control center to check the workload of the two graphics card I see that only one of them is working (0% for the other one).I didn't know about the usepools trick so I'll give it a try though !PS : I'm running a single 24' LCD and use high AA although it seems like FSX's AAhas the priority over ATI's AA...

I'm not surprised although this is really going a bit too far.In the end, their methods will turn back against them.

Has no one told you guys ? It has been released for more than 10 years !!!It was back in 1996 on december the 8th...So go grab your dolorian now !PS : For the older version of the 737 you'll have be patient though beacause it's not out yet ... :(, maybe for halloween, a dirty scary 737 ! run away ahhhhhhhh :(

Unfortunately, Crossifre or SLI aren't supported by FSX (a shame really) soyou won't get any extra performance from using a multi graphics card configuration. It does work for most CPU games though.

Yes indeed ! Music to my ears and even though I lack words, the closest comparison thatsprings to my mind is the sound of a washing machine ! :Nerd:More seriously, the engines do have quite a distinctive sound, pretty high pitched.

That's what I call a sound decision. :(

Short cargolux flights that I know of :ELLX -> LIMC and backEGPK -> ELLX and backLHBP -> ELLX Eva Air Cargo operates the md11 on short hauls in asia :RCTP -> VHHH for exampleYou can download their cargo timetable here : http://www.evaair.com/html/b2c/english/cargo/Cargo_Timetable_download/timetable_download.htm

If you like cargo flights you have plenty.AFR with 744F : EGPK -> LFPG EIDW -> LFPG LFPG -> HECA 4 hour flightGEC with the Md11, just download their XLS sheet and filter it to only see the md11 flights (and to only see european flights) :http://www.lufthansa-cargo.com/content.jsp?path=0,1,19199,19238,94143,94234They appear to have a FRA to AMS flight ! that's new ?For passenger flights, you can try the first leg of these two KLM flights :KLM 785 TNCM -> TNCC -> EHAM with a 744KLM 763 TNCM -> TNCB -> EHAM with an Md11

Airliner : the A380 !!! very confortable with a lowered noise level (especialy remarkable during take off) and in fact quite elegant when you look up close ... Military : the rafale is a very impressive aircraft, I also used to be a fan of the F14 (no nothing to do with Top Gun).But I am now getting to appreciate small GA aircrafts too since I got started with my PPL lessons !!! here's the aircraft I get to learn to fly on :( :http://www.mooney.com/acclaim-type-s/overview.html

In the south west of France where I'm taking my PPL lessons it's LFBU.In Paris it's hard to say...LFPO is the closest main airport compared to LFPG, LFPB is pretty close too; the small airstrips are further away !Jean-Charles Montagne

My guess is no more than a regular 744 since the engines are the same and sothe weight limitations must be similar.The interesting part is the added volume.