• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

43 Neutral

About Emi

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

4,085 profile views
  1. Emi

    Falcon 50 HSI CDI not tracking GPS

    I had something similar with an outdated version of the GTN when I did the update from P3Dv4.3 to v4.4 Did a total reinstallation of the GTN (with a new download from Flight1's website) and then it worked.
  2. Whoopsie, I only saw the update notice in your shop and that it told to redownload from your vendors account. Sometimes reading before posting surely wouldn't be a bad idea 😅
  3. Seems like the updated installer (anything beyond 1.0!) is not avaiable through simmarket. Could you check with them? Hopefully of course just a timezone difference issue and they'll have it soon, but just to be sure 🙂
  4. Thank you very much, looking forward to get my hands on the update!
  5. Dear FlySimWare, first of all my congratulations on a great Falcon 50, it is really a joy to fly. Just one small request however which would make an already good plane even better: Would it be possible by all means to improve the VC windows a little bit, especially the textures around them? The mainpanel looks really excellent, the window frames however sort of turn it all down a bit again as they look like a leftover from the good old glorious days of our beloved FS2004 (not offense intended). If those could be improved and brought up to the standart of the rest of the panel your Falcon would immediately become a whole lot more joy to fly! Thank you very much for your considerations in advance already!
  6. Lufthansa got some nice -8 routes out of FRA: Bengalore LH754 Boston LH422 Buenos Aires LH510 Chicago LH430 LH432 Johannesburg Washington Mexico City LH498 Sao Paulo LH506 Tokyo Haneda LH716 Los Angeles LH450 New York JFK LH404 New York EWR LH402 Rio de Janeiro LH500
  7. Hi Paul, I really apprechiate your research! Your resources are, apart from Wikipedias definition of coffin corner, not wrong, however easily misinterpreted. Wikipedia says the following: What they mean is the maximum mach number, not the critical macht number. Those are two different things, critical mach number means the mach number where locally on one point of the aircraft supersonic speed is reached, usually on the top of the wing. Modern jets cruise far above this speed however. On the 737NG for example the critical mach number is .615, cruise speeds are around .76-.79 though. All aircraft cruising in the transonic range have a Mach Trimmer installed to compensate for the effects when passing the critical mach number and therefore safe flight is possible above Mcrit. I'd love to give you some quotes here, but I'm afraid all my ATPL theory books are in German language only. That's right, however the fact that coffin corner can limit service ceiling does not mean that service ceiling can limit coffin corner. Keep in mind that the service ceiling is not defined for an aircraft at the maximum takeoff weight. A fully loaded 747 will for instance by far not be able to reach its service ceiling. Yet you can encounter coffin corner regardless of the weight of the aircraft, but the heavier the aircraft, the earlier you will encounter it. Depends on what he means with modern jetliners, from what I have seen in flight simulation the 787 and 747-8 indeed have some very good margin, so do most Airbus aircraft. On some Boeing types things look a bit different though, take for example the NGX, fly it up to the Opt+1000ft and you'll be only a few hundret feet below the maximum. Now fly a 30° angle of bank and take a look at your speed tape. Margins to both sides will become quite low there! The top of the amber band provides overshoot protection until 45° angle of bank to stick shaker, which in return again has a small margin to actual stall. So at the FMC MAX you are just about okay. But if you take it any further... If you do this at MTOW with the -900 you will see this effect long before you fly at the service ceiling of FL410. Some newer FMC revisions will even indicate whether the max altitude is limited by thrust or buffet margin. Unfortunately this is not the case with PMDGs FMC revision. Anyway, we start drifting offtopic here 😄
  8. Hi Paul, Coffin Corner will also appear at lower altitudes than service ceiling if the aircraft is heavy enough. In simple terms it looks like this: Higher weight -> More lift required -> higher AoA -> Faster airflow over wing -> earlier shock induced seperation on the wing due to shockwaves. You can easily try this yourself: Simply load the 747 fully up, set full thrust and keep it climbing. After a short while you will see high- and low speed limits getting closer and closer until they are equal. That's coffin corner and at full load it will be reached much earlier than service ceiling. The critical Mach number has nothing to do with Coffin Corner as it is constant for a certain wing profile and does not change with weight. For a 737 for example, if I'm not mistaken, it is M.615.
  9. Depends on what you classify as getting close to the limit. We're getting to about 10kt below Mmo at 1000ft above the OPT, for the guys in the HQ making out SOPs that is close enough to want us to fly lower. With turbuelnce you want greater margin anyway, no doubt about it! Looking just at particular flights I certainly agree with out, no way to tell anything without numbers. That's why I wrote I got that impression by just looking at the sheer number of flights over the last couple of months where the majority just cruises lower. Sure enough, not sufficient data to make any certain statements, enough to get wondering and asking though 🙂 Fully agreed, those EU planning constraints can be a pain in the a**. Luckily most of the time we still get out prefered cruise level though!
  10. Hi Kyle, thanks for your quick reply! I agree it may sound a bit overly cautious on the first thought, but seeing that 1000ft above the OPT we're usually just a few hundret feet below the max (at least in my aircraft that is) it actually makes sense if you do not constantly want to have a hand at the speed brake lever in case even the slightest turbulence kicks in. I guess on the 747 it's not that much of a problem since the max is usually still some 2000ft or higher above the OPT: Yet looing at many 747 flights on FlightRadar they are usually some 2000ft lower than what I'd get to if I follow the FMC step climb suggestions. I konw I know, you can't compare without having the actual numbers, but the sheer number of flights flying so much lower just makes me think there must be something going on in the 747 which I am unaware of. I share your thoughts on the OFP, on the other hands side though I see it quite often in real life that the OFP FL (LIDO based sytem we use) differs quite a bit from the FMC. Now obviously LIDO takes a lot more factors into account than the FMC does, no doubt about it. It might just be our lovely european airspace screwing it over 😉 I'm really impressed by the wind accuracy anytime I see though. It's usually within +-5kt and degrees which is quite amazing seeing that most flights are planned some 12 hours before the actual flight.
  11. Good morning/afternone/evening/night everyone, do we have any real 747 pilots in here to shed light into the question when to start a step climb in the 747-400/-8? In my airline it is SOP to step up only once the OPT FL is equal to the step level to avoid getting too close to coffin corner. Looking at most altitudes flown by actual 747's on FlightRadar it seems that most airlines actually do the same (judging from the altitudes flown vs what PMDG gives me as OPT using the maximum realistic ZFW for such flights, aka full pax load plus a few tons cargo). But then again in the PMDG 747 the coffin corner does by far not get as close as it does on my real aircraft when flying 1000ft above the OPT level, so I see nothing that would really warrant using my airlines SOP on a 747. That's why I started to wonder what procedures are used in real 747's. Do you just follow the FMC step climb suggestions? Or rather your OFP? Or something completly different?
  12. There was a case where the pilot passed away in a Cessna some years ago where the passenger had to land the plane. They called up a flight instructor who then talked him down. Very nice docu of it available on YouTube, even including some real world footage of the accident.
  13. JustSim are for me a little bit like low cost airlines (only that JustSim isn't really low cost compared with other addons). I can only judge from their EDDL and EDDH sceneries since I know both airports from real life rather well. In both cases you can see that they reused textures from other addons, expecially on the aprons. Their attention to detail is rather small, however if you don't know the real airport you can live with it rather well. If you know the real airport you might be disappointed since colours and such often don't match. Their night lighting is also.... well. EDDL for example has wrong colours on the apron and the whole GA area is just plain wrong. But that's stuff most simmers hardly care about, so if you only want HD textures and good fps and don't mind attention to detail JustSim may be just right for you.
  14. I just tried your settings, it gets me a really dark cockpit though. I prefer mine above, I only just need to get the lit up areas affected by the shadows brighter. If anyone has an idea that would be highly welcome! I'm using the Matt Davies Preset, edited the VC part though with the above results. I would love to use other presets, but I'm getting error messages about cloud shaders (which result in all my clouds vanishing) with other presets. Wrote Matt about it, but never got a reply. Seems their supportaddress given on the simmarket productpage is not staffed anymore.
  15. I tried that, but it still keeps my cockpit really really dark. Here's a picture: If I turn up the Ambient light it gets brighter, however that kills the shadows. At an Ambiet Sunlight of 2.0 it starts looking better, however it also really makes the shadows weak (or rather the bright areas that should be lit by the sun weak). Here's a pic of what I mean: Any idea how to make those lit up areas from the shadows (yeah... sounds stupid, I know :D) more pronounced without having to turn down the general brightness in the flight deck?