Slick Willy

You really should have described why you thought they were hacked in better detail. My first thought was exactly what Efrain said in his first reply. You would be surprised how many people complain of ad's at web sites/forums, only to have it explained that those ad's are based on browsing history.

LOL "clearence" Whats your vector Victor? I should quit typing while i'm ahead.

Yikes! 2 gigs of ram on Win7 with FSX. I almost think this would lead to some odd behavior in sim, no matter what settings are applied.

1. None other then the crossing restriction prior to crossing the SMO R154. Yes, ie you might get take off clearence to climb and maintain 6000. 2. No, you would more then likely be vectored direct to VTU then "as filed" 3. your assigned altitude 4. Yes, Minimum Enroute Altitude (MEA) 5. At RZS or DINTY, depending on where you are going. If you pull up the airway chart, RZS and DINTY are more then likely on the airway and you follow it from that point on. The ceiling would be what ever has been assigned by ATC. Errrr...ya what he said. must have typing at the same time

Ben is correct. You would have to run in windowed mode. If you ran full screen on 2, it would minimize as soon as you clicked on the third screen. Your options are to either get the 680 and another monitor with the same specs as your existing 2 and run a triple setup using the Nvidia software or a good low cost solution would be to just run windowed mode, dig out that old 8800GT you have laying around and take that old monitor off your neighbors hands. Buying a decent card for undocking would only help the economy and provide no benefit to your FS experience. Willy

FS bug. Hit F1 after loading into sim Willy

Go with the triple! I am running with 2 GTX570s and did not suffer any performance loss after upgrading from single card/screen. The cards do occasionally hit 80% now, where the single rarely hit above 60%.

Agreed! Didn't hesitate to buy this because I knew what I was getting with PMDG. I'm the kinda guy that would enjoy reading an in depth manual about any plane. This just provides an opportunity to see it it work in a simulated environment, AKA the cherry on top. Not to mention, the family very much enjoys the constant drone of loud turbo props The fact that few carriers operate it never mattered to me, most of my flying consists of odd stuff such as doing failures, gusting crosswinds down to DA/minimums, difficult dep/arrivals etc. The J41 simulated very well, fly's great (under normal conditions) and looks good. Willy

LOL! Yes there are other games. It's those other games that clearly show the disadvantages of using a tv for gaming. IMO, the only place the tv's beat out a monitor is the native contrast ratio. In the world of FS, where 30fps is considered very good, there differences are not as apparent.

one bad politician LMAO, well at least the TSA keep's the herd/media from focusing on them.

As I said before, that won't work with your current setup. You will have to keep the scenery on the main monitor (only 1) then undock the 2d panel and FMC to your other monitors. IIRC, there is a program called SoftTh, that may provide a solution to your problem at the expense of FPS. I looked into it a while back only to discover it was easier to run down to Microcenter and grab a second 570GTX and 3 new screens.

Nice shots! I was excited to see that Delta liv released only to find out I would have to sign up for FB to get a key :(

Yes, you can run 3 with that card. Keep in mind, a big tv just makes the same old view bigger. With proper placement, 3 screens provide a much greater sense of motion.

But can you hold 210kts with a decent rate of 5285fpm? This is what would be required after averaging the true airspeed between 23,000 and 4,500. Add in the wind in and it only increases the decent rate. I never said that the NG can't descend at a higher rate then standard approach profiles. Based on the numbers provided by the person I questioned, I believe it would be fair to say that they are stretching the truth a bit. Off the top of my head, the Avro RJ would be the only commercial passenger jet that would have a shot at that, not EVERY aircraft arriving from the NW and they certainly don't do it at "a little more then 2000fpm." The math doesn't lie. If my numbers are wrong, then please do correct me. Willy

I may not be understanding your problem. Are you trying to stretch the FSX window over more then one monitor? If so, you can not do that with your current setup. You can undock a 2d window and move it to a second monitor, ie place an overhead panel on a second screen.

I'm actually about 1.5 West of FGT, So they are still pretty high and most traffic seems to get vectored in North of me, except that FedEx flight. I swear I could set my watch to it. Congrats to the OP on purchase. It's well worth it! Willy

LOL I used my Fanatec GT3 wheel just messing around once, it felt good until I needed to pull back. Maybe you might consider the joystick just to get your feet wet again. Most have twist for rudder, so you can basically get up and running for 30-40 bucks. Then if you start getting into it more, start throwing more money at it.

I don't have to ask anyone, based on the numbers YOU provided, you are flat out wrong. Even if the pilots had there hands hanging out the windows, there is now way the NG could hold that speed with the decent rate required to descend 18,500' in 15 nautical miles. Willy

I am not confusing anything, you need to know what the ground speed is to determine what the average decent rate will be over a given distance. In fact, I intentionally error-ed in your favor by assuming the ground speed was 210kts. The reality is that at 210kts indicated at 23000' would be roughly 295kts true airspeed on a std temp/pressure day. As of this posting, winds aloft at that location at 24000 are 252@28. You mentioned flights from the NW, so the upper winds will more then likely increase the ground speed. 23000 down to 4500 = 18500 we need to descend 15DME @ 210kts = 4 minutes (actually is 4:17) 18500 feet/ 4 minutes = 4625 feet per minute (should have been 18500/4.25=4352fpm) Figure the ground speed into all of that and the decent rate would be more then 5500fpm Willy

Doubt it if the 737 would be approved for such a maneuver in any situation. Doing so would probably create a much larger emergency. Such maneuvers place an extreme amount of stress on the vertical stabilizer at the speeds turbine aircraft approach at. A good example would be that AA airbus that had the FO hammering on the rudder. Willy

Little more then 2000fpm. Assuming your ground speed was 210kts it would require 4625fpm to meet that. Have a link to the chart? Willy

Exactly! Holding at PETIS would be considered a resource available, whether they do or not. Look, my point here is that the OP is clearly doing something wrong if they are trying to go down from 16000' to 3000' while trying to get established on the LOC and rather then say it, I asked for the STAR they were referring to. Dan had mentioned ZIGGY4 and stated the NG (i assume he meant the first PMDG release) couldn't do it. After looking at the chart, the only reason it would not be able to do it would be because the info is not entered into the FMS for what the aircraft can do. If you select a STAR on the FMS, by default it would set up the aircraft to cross DAWNA at 12000' and in excess of 250kts because you are above 10000'(by default in NG/NGX). The "good pilot" on the airline you refer, more then likely are not steaming ahead at 250+kts crossing that intersection and would properly program the FMS to meet the decent profile desired. whether it be descending down to the published MEA's, reducing speed sooner(as Dan correctly pointed out) or both. Holding at PETIS is still a viable option, especially if there were conflicting traffic not allowing a "good pilot" to maintain the desired decent profile. Bottom line here is, don't assume that all is good because the approach is in the NGX data base. Willy

Still does not negate the fact that it IS published on the chart and available to be used if necessary. A good pilot starts with being able to read and comprehend the information published on the chart. Proper planning is what allows the pilot to bring the plane in to land, NOT their ability to shove the yoke thru the panel. Willy

I'm not sure what the the NG couldn't handle with ZIGGY4. Obviously, landing on 8L/R more time/distance to get down, but if you were trying to just follow the magenta line with one click of the mouse and fly straight in to 26, sure it is steep. But if you actually read the chart you would notice that there is a holding pattern published on the arrival at PETIS. Also take note of the MEA's, "expect clearance to cross at 12000" does not stop the PIC from requesting lower. Willy

Normally the arrival first. Often times you will not know the runway until you are closer to the airport. A good rule would be to enter items in the order you will fly them.