Lek767

Hey Tom, I could get in a lengthy argument with you about how those ad hominems of yours are completely out of line, and detrimental to the general atmosphere here on AVSIM. Frankly, I think you're a better man that that. To prove my point, I've made a hundred dollar donation to AVSIM yesterday, more or less invalidating your point that I'm acting like a freeloading douche (or words to that effect). So let's see if we can turn these adversarial lemons into somewhat more productive lemonade. I hereby pledge an additional donation of one hundred and fifty dollars, bringing the total up to two hundred and fifty dollars, if I could get a simple thank you from you and an apology for questioning my motives and good intentions. Of course, should you decide to ban me for this gross display of insolence, we'll leave it at the hundred already donated and I'll show myself out. You are regarded as the ambassador of this site and your treatment of its members has a direct effect on AVSIM's financial bottom line; I'm looking forward to seeing your response.

Works fine here... You've probably got Javascript disabled in your browser, are using NoScript, or have set your Internet security settings too high.

1. Open this document: 2. Type CTRL-F 3. Enter "pounds" (without the quotes) 4. Repeat that search a couple of times 5. Profit!

The reason I used such a sacrilegious term is that, of all the sites I frequent frequently, AVSIM is the only one that had to disable guest read access to its forums for performance reasons. Now, I'm sure this decision was made for sound tactical reasons, and I have no intention of playing Monday-morning sysadmin. What I am saying is that, if AVSIM is apparently forced to take such drastic measures to guarantee adequate performance for its registered user base, the amount of headroom available in the site's infrastructure leaves something to be desired. Hence, I stand by my assessment (although I'd love to be proven wrong, by having anonymous access to the forums restored to its former glory). As for the foray into in-line advertising on AVSIM: sorry, but I'll have to maintain my stance that such a choice would be seriously misguided. My first reaction to this development was the thought that 2004 called and that they wanted their IntelliTXT back. Keyword ads linked to in-content popups happened to be one of the many forms of user-hostile, disruptive advertising tactics that cropped up during the early noughties, precipitating the explosive adoption of in-browser popup and ad blocking in response. But don't take my word for it. Here's what usability guru Jacob Nielsen has to say on the subject: Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox now. I wish you all the best.

I'm not sure if it's a bug or not, but it's not just you, as I'm seeing the same thing. Inbound EDUPO, PLN mode, AMOSU selected: Inbound EDUPO, PLN mode, MISGO selected:

If I understand your post correctly, you have added or edited the terminal procedures for your airport and are now getting EGPWS warnings when flying an approach, right? If that's the case, then the following thread might be useful in resolving the issue: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/407634-gpws-terrain-and-pull-up-warning-on-final-approach/?hl=%2Begpws+%2Bapproach Good luck.

It's even easier than that. You can press shift-6 directly from the VC view and the 2D overhead panel will pop up right in front of you. Resize, drag to secondary monitor, and Bob's your uncle. :smile:

The VAS seal? Why would you want to break such an adorable creature?

Unless you've got a very expensive servo-operated throttle quadrant right beside you, you should generally choose the "IN HOLD/ARM MODE ONLY" option for the "MANUAL A/T OVERRIDE" setting. Using "ALWAYS" will lead to the kind of issues you're describing, and "NEVER" will unnecessarily limit the manual use of your throttle during various phases of the flight. You do have to ascertain that your throttles are not returning jittery values at their max thrust setting, or the NGX will interpret that as a valid input and firewall the throttles during takeoff when the thrust mode switches to THR HOLD. If that's the case, and calibrating your hardware throttle with a sufficiently large dead zone at both ends of its full range doesn't resolve the issue, using the "NEVER" mode might be your only viable course of action. By the way, these kind of issues tend to be resolved more quickly when you post a couple of cockpit screenshots showing the problem as it occurs.

Just to let you know you're not crazy, I'm able to report that the exact same thing happened to me once (and only once) a couple of weeks ago. One of the main landing gears remained extended, no warnings, no lights, no failures, ultimately resulting in a "collapsed gear" and nacelle paint scrub job upon landing. I've never figured out what the exact cause was, unfortunately.

Hi guys, Here's a friendly heads-up to let you know I'm seeing a lot of duplicate new topics being created in the past couple of days. In the screenshot below you'll see four duplicates of treads created recently by different people. I'm not sure what the cause could be, but you might want to look into it. Cheers.

Indeed. Just take a look at the description of the YouTube video linked to in post #5, quoted in full below for effect (with some dodgy links removed). That guy has used so many recording and post-processing tricks in order to prettify the video, that comparing it to the quality of a raw FSX recording is next to pointless. They're two completely different animals, that's for sure. Note also that his PC isn't all that great, proving that you can make stunning YouTube videos even when FSX performance on one's system is mediocre at best.

It's most definitely not malware. Here's a snippet of text taken directly from a capture of the network traffic sent from the AVSIM server; it shows how the affected keywords (such as "777") are enclosed in a bit of HTML identifying them as so-called hovercard targets. I've yet to look at this thing in detail, but most likely some associated Javascript will display the annoying pop-up window when a mouseover event occurs. All I can say is: seriously, guys, who in his right mind thinks this is a good idea to implement on AVSIM, a site that's bursting at the seams with clutter as it is and that's even now struggling to maintain an acceptable level of performance? Just try reading any thread on the PMDG 777 forum, for example, and experience how it's littered with dozens of these utterly superfluous popup links, making the process of scrolling down the page akin to navigating a minefield. All for the "convenience" of being told that "The Boeing 777 is a long-range wide-body twin-engine jet airliner", or that "Microsoft’s Flight Simulator X or FSX for short remains the market leading and most used Flight Simulation standalone program"? Honestly: why?

D'oh! Can't believe I've missed that. Thanks for the link; much obliged, sir!

It doesn't on the NGX, because that aspect isn't simulated. It does, if I'm not mistaken, on the real thing, whereby the forecast entry is used to avoid a sudden vertical path deviation when switching between the STD and QNH baro settings (the effect of which becomes more significant the more QNH differs from the standard 1013 mB value, which is what Matt is referring to). Disclaimer: I Am Not A Pilot™, so I could be taking through my hat here.

Does anyone know what those white and green spinning range rings are that show up on the ND just after take-off? They seem to be moving and not be centered around a fixed coordinate, so they can't be FIX page rings, right? I've never seen indications like that before, neither in a sim nor in RW videos. Any ideas?

There should be a forum drinking game that has us empty the bottle every time someone posts "Children of Magenta". :lol: (Don't get me wrong; it's a great video and anyone should see it and most definitely live by it...)

The control surface animations are choppy. It's a bug that's supposed to be fixed in SP2 (source: Ryan).

Well, actually all you need to do on that page is enter the new destination airport using the 1R LSK; there's no need to re-enter the departure airport. But, thanks for the feedback anyway.

By reading the thread on the exact same subject right here on the first page of this forum: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/415526-how-you-manage-an-emergency-landing-with-your-fmc/

It would've been nice if you could indeed select an alternate destination airport and new approach in one go like that, but unfortunately Mr. Boeing has decided against it: In other words, the DEP/ARR "OTHER" function is for reference purposes only. Changing the destination airport still requires a quick visit to the RTE/Route Page.

Hmm... Let's see: Also: And: I could go on, but I hope you get the point by now. The answers you seek are present in not one, but multiple documents that come with the NGX package. If you still think the manual needs editing, I suggest you drop these people a friendly note: Boeing Commercial Airplanes P. O. Box 3707 Seattle, Washington 98124 206-655-1131

Well, you do realize that you can land this thing manually, right? Even if you've got no experience hand-flying a tubeliner, the inclusion of the HGS in the NGX makes the process especially painless -- or at least not as excruciating as it otherwise could be. All you have to do is aim the green thingy for the point in space on the grey thingy right between the white thingies, while maintaining your approach speed, and you're pretty much assured of at least making it to the runway threshold, and being just a flare away from a half-decent landing!

In fact he's done that already a few weeks (months?) back, when someone asked the exact same question regarding the ILS 15R approach into KBOS. So in order to avoid a repeat performance, we'll award this thread's winner's trophy right now for your suggestion #2, which turns out to be the right answer:

If you arm APP mode without a radio signal being received, don't you end up flying an IAN approach instead of using the ILS (so FAC and G/P modes annunciated on the PFD)? I could very well be wrong here, as I've busted my controller and can't test it for myself at the moment, but I do recall ending up with LOC and G/P instead of G/S numerous times when arming APP too soon (before a valid glide slope signal was being received).