Paul_Smith

Members
  • Content Count

    1,893
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

83 Good

About Paul_Smith

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

5,104 profile views
  1. Paul_Smith

    PACK RST sys fault when turning off APU

    Sven, there is confusion about *when* you get the fault. The sentence "What happens is when the APU is turned off I get the PACK RST sys fault and I have to reset it every time I do the electrical power-up" has two meanings... 1) I turn the APU off and *immediately* get a PACK RST sys fault reported on the EICAS (unlikely). or 2) I turn the APU off. Some time later when I later do an electrical power-up, I get a PACK RST fault that I have to reset. If the answer is (1) then the issue is related to shutdown and that is what Dan has been trying to help you with, but I think that is very unlikly. If the answer is (2) then the issue has nothing to do with how you shut-down. Given that you say you get teh same result with default and saved cold&dark, I think this is the more likely option. Can you list the steps you follow from cold & dark until the warning is reported.
  2. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    There are plenty of 737-200's in the air as I type, but PMDG haven't done a steam gauge aircraft since the DC-6 (for X-plane) and before that, the JS-41. They have done the MD-11 and know (knew) how it works.
  3. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    Because: 1) it rewards the pilot who puts in the effort to learn it, but punishes the pilot who doesn't. 2) it is a more interesting and enjoyable aircraft to fly then most Boeings because it requires the pilots to fly it. 3) PMDG already know how to do it so they just have to make it prettier.
  4. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    We keep hearing "there's more people who use these planes than just the people on the forums here" or words to that effect and of course it is true, but is it relevant? Is there any evidence that those on the forum buy differently from those who are not? Is there any evidence that suggests the people on the forum think differently from those who are not? In other words, has anybody got any evidence that a forum poll would *not* be representative?
  5. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    <sigh/> That's what they used to say about FS2004. Next he will say that FSX is not dead, it is just just pining. FSX is not pining... It's passed on! This parrot is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet it's maker! This is a late parrot. It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! Its run down the curtain and joined the choir invisibile! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!! (With all respect and rights to Monty Python...)
  6. Paul_Smith

    Am I too conservative?

    Perhaps... but the dogmatic claim that Chris's suggestions were not just mistaken but "absolutely false" was neither polite nor in keeping with the usually respectful tone on this forum. That Dan was subsequently shown to be incorrect probably didn't help his mood. Throwing in an off topic comment regarding a forum etiquette breach to a regular poster on a thread where the moderator had been actively involved would have been neither constructive nor helpful at the best of times, but not bothering to take the three seconds or less required to check if Chris was actually in breach (I know his name is Chris because it says so in his signature block) pushed the post into the area of being rude and showed Dan making at least two significant mistakes in one short post. I am pretty sure that Dan is aware that he was out of line but I am not sure what you think Chris could have said that would have elicited an apology if one was not already forth coming. I personally thought Chris's reaction was not unreasonable and you must admit it was certainly politer then mine would have been.
  7. Paul_Smith

    Am I too conservative?

    To answer the original question, Yes it is OK to use your reserve if you need to and No, you are not being too conservative. Being able to land at your alternate without having to use your reserve is better then landing at your alternate with most of your reserve gone, but you must admit that both are still better then not being able to land at all. If you are flying a familiar route to a destination that rarely has problems and has lots of available alternates then you can reduce your reserve requirements to the minimums required by the relevant rules, but the reverse is also true. A long haul into somewhere unfamiliar with a poor reputation at a bad time of year and few alternates might encourage you to carry far more then the minimum required reserves. Try hauling freight from Perth (YPPH) to Reunion (FMEE) during cyclone season with the nearest alternate in Mauritius (FIMP) and you will consider pushing your reserves to max take-off weight!
  8. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    Even with identical development environments, equally competent programmers and the same depth of simulation, a Q400 simply has less systems then a big Boeing so needs to use less machine resources to emulate them, leaving more resources for the pretty stuff, so why wouldn't it appear to have 'better' performance.
  9. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    I disagree. If you want cheap high volume birds there are lots to chose from but that has never been the PMDG market. There are dozens of 737 simulations available, most of which are cheaper the PMDG's offerings. People don't pay 80+ just because something is common, though they might pay that if it is rare enough. No, people pay because it gets them what they want. And what PMDG's customers want (in my highly uneducated opinion) falls into one or both of two categories; Cat A customers want the best simulation of a mainstream jetliner on the market, hence the roaring success and longevity of their Boeing range. Cat B customers want the best and most detailed simulations available for their platform. The MD-11, JS-41 and 737NG showed what could be done on FSX that just wasn't possible before, and wasn't possible at all on FS2002, finally putting a long overdue nail in that coffin. However, the problem with setting new standards is that they become the new standard. The things that made us go wow when 737NG was released won't even raise an eyebrow anymore. I don't envy PMDG, they have a successful Boeing range that satisfies their Cat A customers, but P3D and XP offer new opportunities. Cat B customers like me want the things we haven't seen before and we won't know what they are until PMDG gives them to us.
  10. An i9 wont give you any perceptible advantage other then bragging rights and the price for laptops includes the compromises required to make them portable. You *require* a laptop to attend college etc. and you would *like* a computer that can play games and flight sims reasonably well. The obvious point is that for gaming, a larger monitor will be better, but it makes the laptop bigger and heavier and less portable. So budget for a separate monitor; $250 will get you a reasonable 27" display. No point in going for anything more then full HD unless you are willing to think about a dedicated graphics card to drive it. This also means you can think about a smaller lighter laptop which will be better for dragging around lectures and cafes. A reasonably well specified Dell XPS 13 or MacBook Pro are both around the $1200 mark and are much more portable then the options you have been looking at. Since you have now spent less then $1500 of your $5000 budget, you can afford to get a nicer monitor instead, maybe a 30" QHD for ~$500 and a gaming desktop with an i7-8700k and a GTR 1070Ti for about $1500. Laptop, desktop and monitor $3200. Example desktop: https://www.amazon.com/iBUYPOWER-i7-8700K-Motherboard-Slate-9210/dp/B07BDTTQ1M/ref=pd_sbs_147_3?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_i=B07BDTTQ1M&amp;pd_rd_r=38abed96-ecb4-11e8-a464-9d17b534f1da&amp;pd_rd_w=ZNdUX&amp;pd_rd_wg=HXs0i&amp;pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&amp;pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&amp;pf_rd_p=7d5d9c3c-5e01-44ac-97fd-261afd40b865&amp;pf_rd_r=GH1G9BMAPSKEXMDRNPR8&amp;pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&amp;pf_rd_t=40701&amp;psc=1&amp;refRID=GH1G9BMAPSKEXMDRNPR8 Example monitor: https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-PB328Q-2560x1440-DisplayPort-Monitor/dp/B00XI4PAD2/ref=sr_1_16?s=pc&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1542712557&amp;sr=1-16&amp;keywords=monitor&amp;refinements=p_n_size_browse-bin%3A3547808011%2Cp_n_feature_keywords_two_browse-bin%3A6570749011 Example laptop: https://www.amazon.com/Apple-MacBook-Retina-2-3GHz-Quad-Core/dp/B071JNRK1V/ref=sr_1_acs_osp_osp17-b143eb1c-92_4_2?s=pc&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1542713178&amp;sr=1-4-acs&amp;keywords=laptop&amp;tag=digitaltren0b-20&amp;ascsubtag=b143eb1c-9269-4442-a43c-b0e178d68f60&amp;linkCode=oas&amp;cv_ct_id=amzn1.osp.b143eb1c-9269-4442-a43c-b0e178d68f60&amp;cv_ct_pg=search&amp;cv_ct_wn=osp-search&amp;creativeASIN=B071JNRK1V https://www.amazon.com/Dell-XPS-9370-13-3-InfinityEdge/dp/B078MKCPKH/ref=sr_1_acs_osp_osp17-b143eb1c-92_4_1?s=pc&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1542713178&amp;sr=1-4-acs&amp;keywords=laptop&amp;tag=digitaltren0b-20&amp;ascsubtag=b143eb1c-9269-4442-a43c-b0e178d68f60&amp;linkCode=oas&amp;cv_ct_id=amzn1.osp.b143eb1c-9269-4442-a43c-b0e178d68f60&amp;cv_ct_pg=search&amp;cv_ct_wn=osp-search&amp;creativeASIN=B078MKCPKH
  11. Paul_Smith

    What do you do if you lose speed indication?

    As a pilot you care only about how fast the air is moving over your wings and the ATC doesn't know that. They only know what your transponder tells them and if they you on actual radar, maybe they can work out (roughly!) what your ground speed is, but as a pilot, you don't care about your ground speed except when you want to calculate an ETA. As for cute? Cute is pretty puppys playing or kittens cavorting. Knowing what you need to do to stay alive is not cute, its Darwin.
  12. Paul_Smith

    What do you do if you lose speed indication?

    Yes and no. They can and indeed should be on separate sources but that doesn't mean they have to be. The real problem comes when your instrument and your co-pilots are showing different readings; Which one do you trust? A number of accidents have been attributed to the senior pilot trusting their own instrument instead of being suspicious of both. Some people associate this behavior with one of the known issues with IFR training in that it is usually obvious which instrument can no longer be used. This leads people to think that if there is no fault flag (or post-it covering the display), then it is still safe to use. The basic cockpit instruments mean that any and every change should show up on at least two instruments. It also means that the total failure of any instrument is no more then inconvenient since the information lost can be deduced from the remaining instruments. Partial failure (ie a device giving reasonable but wrong readings) should be detectable by verifying every change against other instruments. Say you notice your airspeed starting to drop, you know that airspeed is pitch plus power so one of them must also be changing. Which one and why? If your pitch is changing then that would show up on attitude, altimeter and variometer, if your power is changing (and you don't have engine instruments that show this) then you would still see attitude changes and feel trim changes and hear engine sound changes.
  13. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    I think you might have hit on something there. Automation. I enjoy the planning and programming that goes into setting up a long haul, but I find the bit between engaging AP and pause at TOD to be a bit, well, un-stimulating? However, flying something like a JS-41 or an ATR-72, aircraft with no auto-throttle forcing the pilot to manage energy at all phases of flight, doing a bunch of 30 to 60 minute hops with 10 to 30 minute turnarounds, flying in the weather instead of above it and having actively manage the navigation rather then just rely on GPS as most of the airports involved wouldn't have landing aids, and many wouldn't even have on-site navigation aids. Sorry PMDG, as beautiful and as tempting as the QotS II is, I think it is time I put in a few hours going back to basics.
  14. Paul_Smith

    What will be the next project by PMDG?

    Most Boeings can be flown from V1 to retard with less then one minute of total time hands on controls, regardless of flight duration. It seems unlikely that Airbus could be even more automated then that but it is not the automated parts of flight that interest me. It is the philosophy. At one extreme, being able to fly a C172 means you can fly anything, at the other, being fully proficient on a B737-600 doesn't necessarily qualify you to fly a B737-800. For me, I prefer mastering the philosophy behind the design rather the detailed steps of the procedures. I know how to fly modern Boeings (to my satisfaction), and while differences exist between them, the fact they share the same philosophy makes it quite easy to go from one to another, so I would categorize the differences as quite minor. I know (knew?) how to fly an MD-11 which although it uses the same basic controls and instruments, had a very different philosophy, which meant I could not (easily) step from one to the other and maintain a high standard of piloting. The JS-41 had a completely different philosophy again, remember how much fun you had learning to fly it right? Or even just learning to start its engines? I don't know the philosophy of an Airbus, I have never flown a sufficiently detailed sim to be able to learn it and I suspect having a whole range of Airbus's would be just as boring as the whole range of Boeing's currently is, but Airbus is not the only choice! In addition to (or instead of) the Airbus family and staying with modern tubeliners, there is a huge range of regional jets to look at. Planning a 17hour flight is fun for some, but a bad weather hop from city to city with failure rates turned up high is every bit as much fun, and more accessible to most. Planning a three or four stop out and back (typically of most pilots working day) is possible in the 737, but normal in a CRJ or Embraer. But you have to learn to think differently. Fun.