rondon9897

Don't make a choice. Have both installed on different drives. Apart from the odd visual, you're getting very little advantage from P3D as far as I can see. I have both and can see no benefit to P3D whatsoever. I shall be keeping the PMDG stuff on my FSX for as long as they'll make it for FSX.

You have to go to the weather configuration tab in ASNext and then save the WX file basically.

Ahh now I understand! That's a relief I'm glad to know that's how the ALTN simulation works. You need to save the weather config file to pick it up in FSX which is then uplifted to the 777 via the datalink function

Your tutorial explains the CREATE AND LOAD TO FSX bit much better than the introduction section and I now have it working Kyle. Also, I've found somewhere else online that you have to save the ASNext weather config file, which the 777 Introduction does not mention. Don't know why but I'm struggling to understand the introduction PDF. Anyway sorted now I think - the ALTN LOAD still doesn't load the ALTNS I set in PFPX though but if I enter my ETOPS alternates in manually, I can load the weather for them using the weather function. Finally I'm using the uplink to its full effect!

Sorry Kyle I do have a photo here but I'm struggling because I'm afraid I really, really don't understand the PMDG Introduction PDF. I'm sure it's my idiocy as English is my native language and there are no complicated words but I simply can't follow it. :blush: I have ASNext and PFPX which is taking its weather info from ASNext. What I want to do is export the PFPX flight plan to the 777 (which is done over networked config as ASNext and PFPX are on my laptop, FSX on my PC), insert my ETOPS alternates into the ALTN page and be able to request the weather for them (or, even better, press the ALTN REQUEST button and have them pop up automatically). Are these things possible or have I completely misunderstood?

Yes Kevin I know what you mean I shall edit my post - I'm just a bit confused at to what Vernon's question really is.

As long as you have sufficient visual reference at DA, you can land. If the DA is 200ft and cloud base is 200ft, it is fairly unlikely that you'll get sufficient visual reference. Edited for clarity.

Jeez PMDG modelling is just outrageously good.

Sorry to confuse Vernon - 1200m is a specific limit on the ILS 04L at LFMN just as an example. Not all CAT I approaches have an RVR limit of 550m - some (like LFMN) have higher limits. The bottom line is that if you do not have sufficient visual reference by the time you reach your decision altitude, go around. You cannot perform more than two go arounds in low visibility, so if you can't get in on the second one, divert. As for the 3 segment RVR reports, not all runways have 3 visibility meters. Some only have 1. From one of my manuals: So presumably the other limits are to make sure you can see the stop end lights ('cos if you can't you may go off the end) and the centre-line during the latter stages of the rollout.

Oh I see what you're getting at now. Visibility and RVR are quite similar, except RVR is the vis in the direction of the runway whereas the met visibility on a METAR I *believe* is the lowest visibility observed in all directions within a certain distance (don't know what that distance is). Now in FSX we don't have the ability to measure RVR so I would use the visibility on the METAR as your RVR limit. So at LFMN again, if the RVR for 04L limit is 1200m or something like that, and the METAR on your AS NEXT dialogue says vis is 800m, you should divert. EDIT: Oh and yes, 550/125/75 will be the minimum RVR limit but as far as I know it doesn't matter what category aircraft you fly. If you have a Cessna 152 with CAT I ILS (unlikely), those really should be your minimum limits for a CAT I apprach (depending on the airport,as I said). That said, the end-point of the runway shouldn't really be relevant to a Cessna 152 if you're flying to a big international airport fitted with ILS.

Isn't that just a vortex generator? Not sure it moves. Might be wrong though B)

Forgive me if I'm wrong but the APU inlet on a 737 isn't a door, it's a bicycle seat-shaped indent below the tail section so it can't close.

Hi Vernon, You can do a CAT I approach in any weather above the RVR limit but then you can do a CAT III autoland in any weather above the RVR limit too, as long as you have CAT III protection. This might happen at a quiet airport where one would wish to test the integrity of the autoland system for maintenance purposes or just practice LVP in good weather, so that you have a CAT I reversion option if something goes wrong. As you rightly say, 550m is the CAT I RVR minimum and below this you'd have to perform a CAT II/III approach, but above 550m the choice is yours. CAT I would be the standard ILS in those conditions so go for that if you want. As for the minima, not quite sure what you mean there. Decision Altitude completely depends on the airport you're going into so you'd have to check the charts. Don't forget, RVR also completely depends on the airport - for example, you couldn't fly onto ILS04L for a CAT I at LFMN with an RVR of 550m (as far as I know, anyway). There isn't a CAT II/III ILS there, so in that instance you'd have to divert (Marseilles possibly).

Excellent thank you!

Hi guys, I was getting an RAAS warning every time I started FSX so I think I disabled it but can't remember what I did or my post on this forum concerning it. My question is: can I turn RAAS for the 777 back on, or do I have to reinstall?

Yes I can cofirm it is a conflict issue. Had it doing ENGM-EDDM today on BAGMI 3A though still not completely sure why. I think the automatically computed descent in the legs page had me going down to FL110 then back up again. Anyway it's the STAR clearance limits that cause it so now I know.

Completely respect those looking forward to an old DC as a more exciting challenge than FMS glass-cockpit jets. I wouldn't go for it oersonally, though a DC3 might tempt me (extraordinary aircraft). Why not meet in the middle and make a 747-200? Man a PMDG 742 would be manna from heaven. If, however, they do a 767 like some have suggested, I shall be very pleased with that too. Just an enormous fan of PMDG all-round really.

Now I'm trying would you believe it I can't recreate it. Next time it happens in the sim I will post it on here but your suggestion is very convincing Kyle if it happens again I will stick 250/10000 into the VNAV section of the FMS and see if the conflict goes.

Why would he call Kyle fat? He looks lovely. On a more important note - would it be impertinent to ask whether the newer NAV panel could be installed in SP2? PMDG are so superb at giving little options such as standby instrument configuration, HUDs etc. I just wondered whether the newer form of 737 VHF panel could be added, as some of the newer -800s are fitted with them rather than the old fashioned dial panel. http://www.b737.org.uk/images/multimodenavpanel.jpg

Nothing it's not for hobbying simmers like us. I love precision and reality in simulation but that's obviously some kind of professional trainer. Costs about as much as the real aircraft too and doesn't look nearly as marvellously aesthetically pleasing as the stuff PMDG produce.

Yeeah do weight lifting as I've started doing. Did some on saturday and I couldn't move on sunday. I too am really excited about the PMDG 747 but then again, I'm excited about everything they do. the 737 and 777 are just magical in my opinion. Really superb. John

Hi guys, Every time I insert performance data after a routing, I get the message "Unable 250kts by XXXX" in the FMS. I can't find a post on the forum or the FCOM and wondered if someone could tell me the exact repercussions of this message. What am I doing wrong, if anything? Is it suggesting that the cruise level for the flight is too high and that, even with speedbrakes, the aircraft will never reduce to 250kts by 10,000ft? It can't be that because I recently did EKCH-OMDB in the 737 and still got the warning. Perhaps it is suggesting that the altitude constraints in the STAR are too close together to reduce to 250kts? Not quite sure. Is there anything I can do to avoid it and am I making some kind of mistake? Cheers, John Price Edited to add my name - for some reason my signature pic isn't working :(

Righto chaps thank you for that. Yes I've seen your photo now Bryan and it's obviously standard. Excellent work! Thank you. John

Absolutely Kyle Here is the aircraft with external power in and ADIRU off. ADIRU is off here and yet instruments on PFD still alive confirmation of ADIRU Switch position: Then I insert the aircraft position into the FMS and instruments then go black. Also, I've noticed that even though I didn't fill the SET INERTIAL POS field, alignment still begins. Is that an accurate simulation or a bug? Once SET INERTIAL POS inserted, instruments are black on PFD as I'd expect My question is should the instruments be present on the PFD with ADIRU selected off and position not inserted? It might well be, in which case that's cool. But just wanted to now if it's an accurate simulation, a PMDG bug or a bug with my setup. John Price

I have now read about the SAARU in the manual but can't quite see how that explains it. If it is an accurate simulation then that's fine but can I just get confirmation from someone that their simulation is doing this too? Just so I know it isn't a bug with my setup. John Price