AirbusCG

That's not exactly what I am looking for though, in SOP3 the FO says "holding at flaps" in the landing checklist when the flaps are not extended to the landing setting yet. Once the flaps are set you then say completet the checklist and the FO will ask for the flaps. Many other airlines do that in real life which otherwise rather match SOP 1 or 2 rather than 3. That's why I would love to see this implemented into the SOPs 1 or 2.

Hi Bryan, would it be possible to add the "Holding at xxx" in a checklist that is already part of SOP 3 into SOPs 1 and 2? It might not be done in the real airlines SOPs, however I would highly apprechiate it to have that option as many airlines still do this whos SOPs come closer to 1 or 2 than to 3. And those who fly "correctly" according to SOPs 1 and 2 will never see it so it would not have any negative effect on them either Any chance that his is possible?

On my 34" screen I'm always using 1.0 as zoom as that still gives me the PFD, ND and EICAS plus about half of the windscreen. With a TrackIR that's everything you need though. There is no such thing as a "realistic" viewpoint since each human has some differences in what he/she is able to see clearly and what not. Medicals make sure people have a certain minimum of what they can see, but the maximum is not defined. Then the next question is what you define as "realistic". Does realistic mean you want the things on your screen to be as big as in the real plane? Or rather have them very tiny to be able to see more of the panel? Issues over issues you see, just make sure to set the viewpoint itself up based on the info in the FCOM of the particular plane you fly (not that real pilots would always do that...) and then descide which zoom suits you best based on what you feel the most comfortable with.

I don't think so, you can get a used 747 for about that pricelevel, so a new one might cost even more. Better buy it now before the raise the price at release!

I have both, TOPER and TOPCAT and while for the 737 TOPCAT is definatly the better one for the 777 both aren't very good. Speeds are inaccurate, flapsettings aren't very precise, heck TOPCAT often even tells you you're not allowed to take off while you're perfectly fine... TOPER isn't any better though lol

If course the easiest for high minima is simply to use the FMC to set it instead of holding down that knob for minutes Works like a charm!

I see, so you indeed have to refill oil after each and every flight ending at your homebase? wow, I wouldn't have thought that it's so maintenance intensive! Oh well, if that's how the 777 is like in real life then why not. In the end I don't pay the oil Any chance for a comment on this part, too? Just interested if it's indeed that unlikely that a failure can be resetted as in the example with the generator, or if this is something not modelled entirely. You know, I tend to say in a PMDG plane you indeed have to ask twice whether that is a bug or a feature haha

True on the maintenance status of the systems, the fluids are indeed part of the panelstate though, so if you do not save your panelstate after each flight you'll always start with them completly full. mmh, the LO indication is displayed from 6 down if I'm not mistaken, however as the oil quantity lowers quite much when you pull the thrust levers back when initiating the descend and this is what triggers the failure. Thus my question, is the LO indication also valid for dispatch? There surely must be a value somewhere in some document that outlines how much oil you need, is there not? Perhaps a real world 777 pilot knows? At this moment my systems have 22 hours left for maintenance, so that's not the issue. After the next trip she'll end up in the hangar for a D check though!

I've tried a different panelstate, but the same happened. The problem is since the 777 doesn't save the used oil if you load the default panelstate one has to save the panelstate after each flight and then reload it on the next flight (or just set it as default state) if you want the "wear" of the aircraft simulated properly. Perhaps also an idea for the 747v2? Could you tell me what the minimum oil quantity for dispatch is? As said, I've found 15 in my sources, but that seems to be wrong judging by the way the 777 reacts to it.

On two of my recent 8 flights in the 777 I had an engine shutdown due to the rise of the oil temprature beyond the limits. This always happened when reducing engine thrust at the start of the descend. The oil qty goes down to about 5-6 and this causes the oil temp to rise. As soon as I notice this I bring the thrust lever of the affected engine to the mid position to allow better cooling of the oil, however this has no effect at all. According to my source 15 is the minimum oil quantity for dispatch, however this also happens with oil quantities up to 18. Unfortunatly I can't find any hard data on the minimum oil quantity in the FCOMs or FCTM. I get similar impressions when handling other failures such as generator disconnects, etc. I take the corrective action as advised in the QRH, but it never has an effect. Thus my question if it is possible to fight a failure or if failures are "definite" and can't be corrected (unless by turning it off in the FMC menu of course)? Ps.: If it's not possible to take action against a failure at the moment, might I suggest it as a feature for the upcoming 747 v2? That'd be great!

For the planning point of view PFPX has them, what it doesn't have are actual charts for the procedures - but it's a flight planner and no EFB.

It's interesting that everyone says the 737 is simpler. In real life it's exactly the other way round and in fact I think so, too, in flight sim. The reason why most of you say the NGX is easier is because most of you started on jets right away. The FMC of the Dash for example can do everything you need and that the NGX FMC can do, too (of course within the boundries of the real Q400), just like the one in the NGX. You only need to invest some hours into learning it, but if you haven't flown a Boeing before it'll be equally hard to learn either. If you come from general aviation I'd definatly go for the Dash 8. The logic behind it is a very different one, but once you're into it it's just the same as the 737. The missing Autothrottle, well, so what? In cruise you basically always keep the power levers in the detent and it'll maintain the speed. During approach and landing yes, you need to manage the power yourself, but so what? Ideally you'd constantly be checking the speed in the 737, too Both planes have a failuresystem, but the one of the NGX is a little more advanced (more failures are supported). Now here comes the real reason why I'd recommend the Dash 8 oder the 737 at any time: The Dash 8 is shared cockpit capable so you can fly togeather with friends who also own the aircraft. In the 737 you always have to fly alone (or use FS2Crew, which in my opinion however is a lot less intuitive than flying with a real person!). As for the manuals, both are very good, but I prefer the Q400. PMDG delivers the full set of manual of the real 737, however do you want to read 3000 pages? Also keep in mind you can easily download the real Q400 manuals from smartcockpit.com. The Q400 got the nicer tutorial flight and in the end that is how most simmers learn to fly an aircraft. The NGX also got a very good tutorial though, so this is rather a matter of personal taste. So, as a small comparison for the two planes from my point of view: Better VC textures: NGX (the Q400 got icing effects on the windows though!) Better VC model: Q400 (why does no one complain that the NGXses windows are about 30% to big compared with the real plane??) Better Exteriour: Q400 Better Systems: Both are about equal, but the Q400 features Circuit Brakers which the NGX doesn't have (descide on your own if that's important to you) Better FMC: Both are equal Better Sounds: NGX Better Manuals: Both are very good, but I'd say Q400 Better "Features": Q400 (Shared Cockpit) And finally a few words about the features simmers seem to care about most: Weather Radar: Both feature ASN Radar Terrain Display: Both are very close to the real plane (but the Q400 has the nicer one in real life) Other Systems: Both are very detailed; of course the 737 in its nature is more complex than a Turboprop Handling, flying characteristics: Both are pretty awesome, but the Q400 is groundbraking with the 125Hz flight controls! Bugs: I'd say the 737 got some more (preparing to run after I hit the "Post" button); None got severe ones

But where is the AI traffic in that video? All I see are the same static aircraft that are also shown on the UK2000 advertisement screenshots which are fixed build into the scenery and no AI: I do not see a single moving AI aircraft in your video.

Gentleman, I would like to set a few things straight here. The OP requested a refund for Mega Airport Rome and Mega Airport Heathrow Xtended because on these airports AI Traffic would vanish when using instant replay. FSX:SE does not show aircraft in replay, on no scenery. This is simply a limitation in FSX:SE. Anyone feel free to try this on any airport yourself. Therefore the reason why this customer claim a refund has nothing to do with the products he bought and the refund has been denied. I took two videos for you to underline this statement: The OP suggests we would have provided bad customerservice. I have checked any conversation with him and can unfortunatly not second his opinion. Please make yourself a picture. First of all he wrote us a mail which we answered: And afterwards he started a livechat. Obviously he changed his opinion on posting this chat though and thus I will paste it, so that you know both sides of the story: Chat gestartet am Dienstag, 8. Dezember 2015 13:36:35 (13:36:35) *** Visitor 50952672 ist dem Chat beigetreten *** (13:36:35) Visitor 50952672 ist jetzt bekannt als vc. (13:36:35) vc: refund (13:36:44) *** Fabian Boulegue ist dem Chat beigetreten *** (13:36:49) Fabian Boulegue: Hello? (13:37:10) vc: hello i purchased mega airport rome and heathrow but it doesn show any AI aircraft in replays (13:37:20) Fabian Boulegue: Hello this is a know FSX bug (13:37:26) Fabian Boulegue: and has nothing todo with the scenerys (13:37:38) vc: but it works with orbx and uk2000 airports its just your products (13:37:57) Fabian Boulegue: as i sad this is a know fsx bug, this has nothing todo with the scenerys and there is no work around (13:38:08) vc: i would like a refund on these products as this is not stated whenyou purchse (13:38:21) Fabian Boulegue: there is no way to refund in this case, sorry. (13:38:30) vc: i dont think its an fsx bug otherwise it wouldnt work in my other airports (13:39:45) vc: what a load of crap (13:39:55) vc: cowboys (13:40:09) vc: it is a fault with your productys as other products work fine! (13:40:13) vc: its just yours (13:40:41) Fabian Boulegue: As i sad before its a know fsx bug and has nothing todo with these scenerys (that are not made by us just sold by us) and made by diffrent developers (13:41:06) vc: i dont buy that, why would you want to buy scenery wheere no ai is visible in the replays! (13:41:20) Fabian Boulegue: to fly on it ;-)? (13:41:41) Fabian Boulegue: As i sad Sir, there is no way to refund your order. (13:41:50) vc: im sorry but your service is dreadful, i will take this further and post reviews about you r terrible service (13:42:08) vc: i work for a review magazine and this is just terrible custoemr service (13:42:22) vc: i will you smug arsehole (13:42:31) Fabian Boulegue: you better watch your language (13:42:33) vc: i will paste this conversation in the forums too! (13:42:38) vc: or what! (13:42:39) Fabian Boulegue: for sure you can (13:42:53) vc: what a prat you really are! (13:43:38) Fabian Boulegue: so i ll close this Communication now - as i told you, you better watch your language (13:43:45) vc: you threatening me?? (13:44:00) vc: its my opinion you are an arsehole so sue me (13:44:07) Fabian Boulegue: no i just informed you (13:44:19) vc: no you are lying about the bug (13:44:28) vc: have you got any IT qualifications? (13:45:29) vc: i will report you too for lying and not providing any evidence of the bug (13:45:51) vc: no law against calling you an arsehole (13:45:53) Fabian Boulegue: so we will now block you from the chat, have a nice day. Bye. (13:45:55) vc: becasue you are (14:05:42) *** vc hat den Chat verlassen ***

Most definatly, I already had one gear not retracting because FS2Crew told me the pins would be removed while they were still in place.

Makes sense, thank you! Since the PMDG 737 has the old ones I think FS2Crew should model this procedure then.

Mainly SOP2, but in the past I also used 3. I took this information directly out of the Boeing FCOM though. In the old FS2Crew it was the same though and it also only turned the pumps off at 0. For some reason I'm not allowed to attach pictures here, but on page 123 of the FCOM PMDG delivers with the NGX you can find the procedures on the fuelpumps.

According to the FCOM the center tank fuel pumps should be turned off when there are 1000lbs/500kg fuel in the center tank. The FS2Crew FO only turns them off when the tank runs empty though. This has the danger of the pumps sucking air and running hot since they're cooled by the fuel running through them. Could this be changed for the next update?

HT off gives me around 1-2 fps more on my I7 4790k @4.5GHz, but my VAS didn't change.

I am very sorry to hear this Tom. I'm speachless you still care about AVSIM and our little hobby in such a time. Spend your time with your family and friends and keep in mind if there is anything you need a whole community stands behind you!

Simply install SP1, that corrected this.

1500fpm around FL300 is far far far far far to much for the S550! Have a look into the Performance Manuals, in there you will find the speed schedules for it. Out of the head I think around 200kt are the cruise climb speed around FL300, which leads to a VS somewhere near 800fpm or so. The speed for the best rate of climb is indeed going to be somewhere near 150kt I believe. Have a look into the manual to find it.

I experience the same issue here. It also happens if I change the standart audiodevice in my computer while FS2Crew is running, for example when I want to play my electric guitar enroute (which is not very rare on longhaul flights) A fix for this would be highly apprechiated.

I would gladly wait for a V1.2 if you descide to include them (btw, I wouldn't mind if you port them over to the NGX and Airbus versions too ).

Bryan, any comment on these suggestions?