Jump to content

MrGreen

Frozen-Inactivity
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    286

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MrGreen

  1. Posted

    I think everything here is normal and you shouldn't worry about it. In FSX (default scenery) the true 01L runway heading in Arlanda is 010.4° and 2010 magnetic variation is E4.8° so the FSX runway magnetic heading is 005.6°. This value is ok (Jepp charts and Navigraph data indicate 005° and a MV of 5°E). ILS heading in AFX is a TRUE value (as runway heading), so do not change it to 005° - 10.4° is correct. Now there could be a problem with the scenery you use I do not have. Also do not expect to have a perfectly centered ILS when using the FS start positions. Usually the heading is correct, but there is often a small lateral offset from runway center line. Enough to have a 1-2 dots localizer deviation, considering the localizer antenna is very close. Finally it is likely that the latest Navigraph release has updated the ILS course by 1°. Jepp charts for ESSA have been updated in Feb-April 2011 and foot-note changes are: Var, Rwy bearings.Hope it will helpHervé
    Thank you Hervé! That answered all my questions nicely.

  2. Posted

    Thanks for the link Ryan. I just installed the updated magvar database and have a question. I just recently (after the magvar update) did a couple of touch and go's at Aerosoft Mega Airport Stockholm-Arlanda in the 747X and found that when loading the aircraft on the active runway (in this case 01L) and without touching anything the aircraft was misaligned to the runway on the ND, but centered perfectly as far as I could see. The heading when loaded was 007 but the ILS heading is 005. When turning the heading knob to 005 the magenta heading bug aligned perfectly with the runway and extended (dotted) centerline on the ND. When checking the ILS heading in AFX the ILS was at 011 degrees. Has this anything to do with the magvar update? Could I just change the heading of the ILS in AFX to 005 or would this cause an offset? EDIT: I just checked the runway true heading in AFX and it is 11 degrees as well, so I presume, that without touching anything, I will have a correctly aligned ILS to the runway. But I noticed a strange thing in Navigraph, before updating the airport charts the heading of ILS01L was 006, but after the update 005. Can anyone explain this?Thanks in advance

  3. Posted

    [ I was of the understanding that Ivy Bridge was going to have the new 3d transistors, which is supposed to bring a big break through in cooling, making even greater OC'ing possible on just air.]
    They will. At least according to this link.Here's also video, that can be found on the link provided above, that is pretty interesting, but of course should be taken with a grain of salt as its a marketing video from Intel.

  4. Posted

    Sorry. I should have been clearer. 66% faster than 2600 is what I read. I checked the article I read it in: Sweclockers (In Swedish unfortunately) But I can't find a better source, so it might have just been a rumour. Anyway the "66% faster than 2600" statement is a bit vague, as I said in my earlier reply, because they are probably referring to it having 50% more cores (6 vs 4). I'll see if I can find more info.EDIT: It seems like sweclockers were the first with the "story" and no sources were stated.Part of the article referring to the performance of SB-E vs SB 2600 translated:

    In time for the Computex 2011 fair, several motherboard providers will show off the first creations for SB-E with the promise of substantially higher performance than today's Sandy Bridge, according to NDA-labeled slides; as much as 66 higher than Core i7 2600.The luxurymodel SB-E "Extreme Edition" has six cores of 3,3 Ghz, 15MB cache memory and quad-channel DDR3. This can be compared to i7 2600 3,4Ghz with four cores, 8 MB cache and dual channel DDR3-memory. Much of the performance increase can be attributed to the extra cores, but thanks to more cache memory and a doubled memory bandwidth, there's even more to get from SB-E. Intel will also add PCI Express 3.0 which can be useful for the next generation of graphics cards.
    Thats the best I can provide, hopefully not too much was lost in translation. (no pun intended)

  5. Posted

    Sandy Bridge E is quad channel, but I wouldn't expect that or those 12GB of RAM to make no differenceand Scott. IB is just a die shrink of SB. Usually die shrinks just overclock a bit higher. This time Intel announced this tri-gate thing that is supposed to improve the manufacturing process beyond the expected reduced die size, and allegedly boost performance by another 20% or so. If it turns out being just a marketing gimmick in the end, expect a 10% more overclock from IB when compared to SB, but that's about it. The real performance leap is in the architecture change (Nehalem - Sandy Bridge in your case, about a 30 - 40%)The next real architecture is Haswell, and you are looking at another 2 or 3 years before it's available. I prefer to make the move when a new architecture is out. If you need an IB or just feel the itch to upgrade, P67 / Z68 boards apparently will support them anyway
    I don't know very much about the SB-E/ivy bridge other than what has been stated by intel (probably less even, because you stated some info I was currently unaware of) but even if the Ivy bridge isn't that much of an upgrade, I think it still is smart to wait before more facts are know, and prices are lower :) SB-E is stated to be up to 66% faster, which; with 50% extra cores, isnt that impressive. But, as I said, my i7 950 isn't exactly making FSX a slideshow so..

  6. Posted

    Thanks William! I just need a new cooler as i´m runnig the original intel one!
    I greatly recommend the NH-D14 by Noctua. It is imo one of the top CPU-air-coolers out there. It is rather big however and also is (like all air-coolers) dependant on the air-flow you have in your case. So if you lack the space or air flow in your case, the H50/70 by corsair would be another good one.

  7. Posted

    I've been very tempted to upgrade to the 2500K/2600K as I bought my i7 950 late (last October) but being a student atm, it just doesn't feel economically viable upgrading 1 generation so close after a full build. Same thing with my gtx480... I think ill wait and see how the SB-E/ivy bridge is before I do my next upgrade, hopefully MS flight has been released by then so I don't put all my money on a dead-end platform again (maybe upgrading the GPU is smarter at that time etc).My i7 950 (d0) is a beast as well, with my NH-D14 I'm getting temps in the mid-60's (core temp) and I could probably get some more juice out of my Vcore (1.32) as I just followed a template without gradually OC:ing and raising Vcore.Nah, I'll stick with my "old" CPU for now.EDIT: Fernando: this is the template I used, with stability testing procedures as well, all from NickN himself: i7 9xx OC BIOS

  13. Posted

    SBSP- 1940 mSBRJ- 1323 mSBSP-SBVT- 1750 mThree incredibly short runways to operate the 738 SFP. GOL airlines operate on those airports with very specific restrictions regarding the runway conditions (wet / cont) and weight. Techniques for takeoff SBRJ for example that should be applied manual brakes until stabilize at 70% N1 and then TOGA. I wonder what these brakes suffer each takeoff. And of course before they take-off they have landed with max auto-brakes. It should behave like the real thing and take off without problems sice we respect the limits of real operation.It will be fun to fly off from there with the NGX...Anxious Nail%20Biting.gif
    Santos Dumont looks like a challenging airport to land at, to say the least :PGOL 737-700 Landing

  16. Posted

    OK, jag tänkte Kangerlussuaq (BGSF) på Grönland vore ett lämpligt ställe då det ligger halvvägs.(OK, I thought that Kangerlussuaq (BGSF) on Greenland would be a suitable stop as its located halfways.The 737-600 has a maximum range (fully loaded though) of 3050 NM and the optimal route between KBFI and ESSA is about 4200 NM.However, the 737-700 ER has a maximum range of 5510 NM.Im not an expert and those values came from Wikipedia.Carl, vart bor du förresten?
    Har SAS beställt 737-700 ER eller var det bara ett exempel?Enligt wikipedia ska 738 ha ungefär samma räckvidd som 736 så jag antar att det blir samma rutt, eller?Has SAS ordered 737-700 ER or was that just an example?According to wikipedia the 738 has approximately the same range as the 736 so i guess those deliveries will take the same route.Kul med svenskar! :)

  21. Posted

    Sorry to wake up an old thread but I'm thinking of buying the Cirrus Saab Yoke from PFC. It cost's 595USD and I presume it is the same one as James was looking at. This was 3 ½ years ago so other people should have bought it as well. Anyone have any opinion to its realism? Especially smoothness, range of movement, the forces of the yoke in comparison to real life yokes. Thanks in advance.

  22. Posted

    Maybe yours had an issue. Mine is nice and fluid.
    Could be the "detent" in pitch and roll that I talked about in an earlier thread. Makes it a lot easier to trim the airplane, but also makes it less smooth when needing to go from negative to positive (over the center). Just my opinion and experience of my piece, ofc.
×
×
  • Create New...