machine2035

Will this thing be able to calculate EVERYTHING for me if I select my airplane, cost index and dep/arr airports? So for example, it will calculate my fuel required, reserves, endurance, EET, cruising altitude, etc... 

Yes. Everything you mentioned + thousands of more features.

It is truly amazing what Christian, Carsten and the other fellas have been able to develop.

What does this mean:

 

 

One can extend subscription at what price?

EUR 14.90 including VAT. If VAT doesn't apply, EUR 12.42.

Was discussed heavier in this thread here

Or have a classic 747 retrofitted with an FMC and ND Ive flown that in real world. It's amazing and surprisingly easier

Yep, many were retrofitted with Universal FMS' and EADI/EHSI. Pretty neat.

Atlas also had the Penny & Giles EIDS (Engine Instrument and Display System).

Just doing some pre-PMDG training on the 777CBT, this evening, particuarly on the ECL. Came across this NON-NORMAL checklist

I present the PILOT/COPILOT DISAGREE CHECKLIST :He He: :He He: :Nerd:

...and before you ask, no it is not in the real aircraft's checklist database (In particular the BOEING datbase, however the airline could add it if they wanted to their own db ).

My FS9 seems to lose time over the course of a flight. I set the sim time to my computers time and after an hour and a half, the in game time is about 15 minutes behind real time.

 

What's going on here?

Yep, one of those 'unfortunate' features.

Some 3rd party programs to fix the issue, one of them being FSRealTime (both a free and registered version available).

If you fly on VATSIM, and happen to have FSinn/FSCoPilot installed, there is a TimeSync feature included (May need to be turned on in FSCoPilot Settings).

FSRealTime is probably better due to its ability to have DST scenery files (to allow for local times during daylight savings etc.)

I'd hate to have one of those "classic" airliners. It's very difficult to fly single-handedly, what with the engineer's panels, old-style navigation systems, etc. Just my point of view.

There's always the ability to have an auto flight-engineer - Similar to what FSLabs did with their concorde.

Whilst I would love to see a Classic 747 in my hangar, I just don't see it being viable for a developer such as PMDG. Their time can be better spent on other projects especially with aircraft that are seen at airports - Which is what they seem to be aiming for.

Weird pics. I've never seen a 777 with 2+5+2 rows, only 3+3+3 or 3+4+3. Not even in seat guru. Is it normal?

Yeah weird. Not even a high-density airline like Air Austral (who ordered a A388 full Y) have 2-5-2.

Although a 3-4-3 still provides a higher density then 2-5-2 so makes sense.

Anyway operators don't get Boeing to fit the plane out, so I wouldn't be suprised if Boeing's layout is rare on most birds. Virgin Australia, for example, got their T7's fitted out at Victorville, CA (Large boneyard located at VCV aswell).

A nice morning back in Heathrow (for a change) successful Denver trip complete.

 

PMDG_777_Beta_Minimums.png

Not Raining....In London.....What's going on???!!! :He He: :Shocked:

I am wondering how the PMDG777 compare with PMDG747 performance wise. Should I expect a boost in performance due to new programming techique? I don't have NGX.

I didn't recieve any significant boost with the NGX compared to the 74'. However, many people reported, due to the new techniques and technology available at the time of the release of the NGX places it's performance ahead of the 747. I therefore assume the same we will be the case for the 777.

I suppose if you compare the quality of both the 747 and NGX, and then see that both are recieving similar FPS, it is fair to deduct the NGX is performing better as the quality is top-notch with the same FPS as a product with lower texture qualities/lower resolution modeling etc.etc.

Awesome Luke!

 

Sorry to be off topic guys but Luke where and how do you get the best routes for the FMC? Not just for the 777 but for any PMDG FMC... Any help would be awesome and sorry for the noob question.  :ph34r:

He mentioned for his Emirates flights he had access to the real OFP's... So he was using the route that the real flight he was simulating was using.

For flights in the US and other areas which are covered, I suggest FlightAware.

There are also numerous websites which upload real AFTN messages which include flightplan information (edi-gla for example).

If you feel like a bit of a challenge, have a gander at Kyle's excellent flight-planning tutorial(s); Basic and Advanced

Otherwise wait 6 days for PFPX to be release and used the automated route-builder which is included B)

I need to reinstall GSX, but it gives me problems somehow. So I was using the pmdg pushback and this question comes up. But I love GSX!

Definately try and fix your GSX issues. The folks over at FSDT are usually very quick in helping you get it up and working.

EDIT: Just saw Pete got in before me :He He:

Maybe the anwser is simple, but how do you know how far you should push your aircraft in the pushback menu? You can enter a distance, but how do you know what the right distance is at a particular airport?     

I don't use the NGX pushback feature, instead use either AES or GSX.

However you could use the length of the aircraft (For example, on the -800, 40metres) to judge how far you need to push etc.

Normally transponder is set to a non-TCAS, Mode C mode (i.e XPNDR in the T7) after clearance is recieved so that ATC can see the aircraft on the ground-radar (ASDE-X) system. Switching it over to TARA is in the before-takeoff items.

After landing and vacated of the runway, back to XPNDR until parked up on bay. Then switched to OFF.

Obviously varies with different operators/airport environments (if airport doesn't have ground surveillance systems, transponder is usually kept off until takeoff).

Cool, I didn't know that. Would any one happen to know what the specific requirements for it to switch to TA only mode are (flaps, altitude AGL, etc)?

TCAS RA's are inhibited when below 1000" Radio Altitude.

Per the post in the aerosoft forums, PFPX annual subscription will cost €14,90 (incl. EU VAT)

 

There have been some – legitimate – concerns about the so called ‘server subscription‘ in PFPX.
I’ll now explain what this subscription is required for, why we have introduced such a subscription and what it will cost.

General

PFPX uses several types of data to provide real-time information directly into the program. These data are collected from various sources, processed and formatted by our servers and automatically distributed to your local PFPX device.

These data are: Winds, METAR, TAF, Tracks and NOTAMs.

Providing this up-to-date real-time data produces quite a large amount of server data traffic.

 

Server Subscription

Beginning with the initial activation, a (free) server subscription for 365 days is automatically configured. After this period, the subscription can be extended by purchasing additional server subscription time.
 

What if my subscription expires?

If you elect NOT to extend the server subscription, PFPX will still be fully functional, but without real-time data such as Winds, METAR, TAF, Tracks and NOTAMs.
Other sources, like ActiveSky, RealEnvironment Extreme and your saved weather data and tracks will still be functional!

You can elect to extend your subscription at any time, even if it already has expired!

Subscription cost

The price for an additional 365 day subscription period will be €14,90 (incl. EU VAT)

See more here

I wish there would be an option to have a clean aircraft. I.E, no potato chip crumbs, and definitely no finger prints on the LCDs.

Guess these won't be allowed anymore then - damn!

Here we carry paper Airline Operations Manual, QRH, Route and Airport Information Manual, FCOM Vol1&2, PA Handbook and Dispatch Deviation Guide.

All must be checked are the current revision during the check of the flight library in the prelim preflight checks.

hello 

i have just got an email from navigraph informing me that they released cycle 1309 and it supports pfpx . which means that we are 100 % getting pfpx within this month and preferably within days 

 

AT LAST  :lol:

PFPX has also been on the NavDataPro coverage for over 3 months.. Doesn't neccesarily mean it will DEFINATELY be released (however as you may have seen unless any major disruptions/bugs around, Mathijs anticipates it's release as advised by Carsten @ PFPX).

FOC was a great program in its 'heyday'.

However years on, it has suffered severe isolation from the developers and is now just gathering dust on my HDD. After using PFPX, I am happy to say that I am happy with FOC gathering dust and PFPX being dusted off everyday by my extended use of the excellent software.

how does the fueling work? Does it automatically do your fuel ?

In AES the fuel truck is just a visual addition and does not prompt any fueling.

With GSX, and the appropriate setting selected in the Couatl settings, the calling of the fuel truck will bring up the default FS Fuel page when the fuel truck arrive. You can also just use the GSX fuel truck for visual addition by disabling a setting. This will be useful when PMDG bring back the refueling option in the 777 (was present in the MD11).

Wasn't there supposed to be the 737-900ER at some point in consideration, too?

IIRC, the ER and BBJ models were in the pipeline, with a possibility of the military versions aswell (Wedgetail and P8-Poseidon).

Can we expect to see a update for the NGX with the split scimitar winglet ??

I would assume since there would be some sort of performance difference, unless PMDG obtain access to that such data (which most likely would cost money), then no. While I would like to see it, for the time it may take to model the 3D wing itself and then tune in the performance differences, I rather the team spent that time on other projects such as the T7 and 747v2.

But you're still going to have people on vatsim trying to fly the westbounds tracks at 0300z , the eastbounds at 1100z on the nat tracks from 2 weeks ago with a flightplan that was run and  based on winds from 2 weeks ago.

Well if a controller was online, they should simply issue a re-clearance for the appropriate route.

If there is no controller online, who really gives a toss what the other pilot is doing...Just let them do their thing. Does someone filing a wrong route when your not the controller really play on your concious that much? If im the controller and there is a pilot with a stupid route, yeah I get a bit worked up cause I have to get the right one for him, but if theres someone on the otherside of the world with a wrong route I really couldn't care less.

Eh...depends on your definition of cause and problem.  The vast majority aren't there to intentionally cause problems, but there are a ton who are drawn to events who:

-Don't pay attention in general

-Are off blabbing on their VA Teamspeak; or

-Just generally can't control their aircraft enough (or quickly enough) to really be in an event

 

You need little more proof than the video I already posted.  It's clearly manageable, as you'll note that scatter didn't cause any CAs for me, but that's mostly because I stratify the altitudes a lot more than I would in the real world...specifically because I know the general caliber of sim pilots.

 

Don't get me wrong, there are some who are great, and many who want to learn, but the quality really isn't there in some cases to the point where I'd relax my scan to a more real world level to accomplish other tasks.

Probably doesn't help either when your a frequent flyer/controller in the US. Just on the few flights I do over there, it is a considerably noticable difference in the amount of 'newbies' and people with no idea compared to the likes of Australia etc. (Obviously due to the fact that there are simply more pilots and controllers in the US, so therefore new pilots are attracted to those areas with lights lit up).

There was always seems to be that person flying AF1 with no idea etc. etc. (Probably doesn't help when your home ARTCC is controlling the home base of AF1 :He He: ^_^ ).

*They avoid ILS13L at JFK like the plague, because 13s at JFK forces 13s at LGA, which forces EWR and TEB to timeshare for departures and arrivals)

They all seem to have a huge knock on effect at every airport in the TRACON. I still giggle every time I see the way aircraft are vectored onto the 13's when coming from the west (via LENDY from memory, all the way past the airport and then back around, when they could be just gone straight in...obviously conflicting with the tonnes of airports within N90),

With over 90% yes vote on the 'Do you want a 200er?' thread, i think the community has spoken