Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About MDChase

  • Birthday 06/26/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines
  1. As both a real world premiere lot and software engineer I think the simple answer is the fact that a plane like the DC-6 is sophisticated and nuanced. Both of those things require expertise and attention to detail. While a jetliner has a sophisticated FMS a DC-6 pushes the limits of propellers, oil, imperfections, all of the things that are much harder to do than drawing a Nav screen which they have before. I fly an older model C-130 and replicate it for fun in my free time and the challenge of replicating an antiquated system often seems to be harder then replicating a computer driven one.
  2. I do quite a bit of flying in this region as a Coast Guard C-130 Pilot stationed out of Hawaii, as other people have mentioned there is not much out there, we can often get away with filing Lat Lons direct if we don't take one of the airways, other than that you spend most of your time talking on HF and doing position reports. Definitely unique flying, and airports! Explore some of the islands in Kiribati where 737s operate, it will definitely be a change of pace! -Matt
  3. Andy, your sim is excellent, I'm jealous! As soon as I'm not moving anymore I'm building a shed just for one of those. that looks great, must be a blast! Like I said, if you're going to go that direction you have to do it like that! And as an Electrical Engineering grad I can appreciate all the work put into that beauty. -Matt
  4. For what it's worth I am a real world C-130 pilot and I prefer the Virtual Cockpit. I of course have a hardware yoke, throttles and pedals but I'm limited by space because I live in Hawaii currently, however I also like the ability to cycle through different aircraft which will have every switch you need simulated unlike a hardware cockpit (unless you're willing to shell out some serious dough). I still find the virtual cockpit to be very immersive and since I primarily hone my instrument skills in the sim its very functional. I have written my own apps to extend a few things to my iPad just to make multi pilot scenarios more realistic. Cheers! -Matt
  5. As a real world H Model Herc pilot I've gotta go with the Herc
  6. Most SID/STARS are based off VORs, they are just a form of terminal navigation. I would recommend flying some STARs off the needles in a less complicated aircraft(even though the Airbus guves you a lot of help) so that you understand it first. Try the CAMPS3 arrival into Maui (PHOG) which picks up the ILS to runway 02 -Matt Chase USCG HC-130H Pilot
  7. Just a plug for Milviz's quality, I had a 150 hours in the airplane and probably another 200 hours in the sim flying with the Proline 21 system and they nailed both the feel look a feel of it in the cockpit, its a challenging system to take on and it looks great. So if you're looking for as real as it gets its hard to argue with the work Milviz is putting forward. -Matt Chase USCG HC-130H Pilot
  8. Afternoon Gents, The 737-200 is currently my favorite aircraft to fly because its got character and my real world plane still has steam gauges so it's great practice. I was wondering if there was an SDK for the 737 or if I could get access to the CDI variables from the FMS, the universal FMS in the plane is a little rough and I have built my own with a little more capabilitie that runs on my tablet. The autopilot PID controllers are spot on, I just wanted to hone in the navigation for myself a little more. Thanks for your time guys! Can't wait for the J Model. -Matt Chase USCG HC-130H Pilot
  9. I agree that's what you're going to see 99% of the time, a faulty relay in a bus or something along those lines and I know PMDG does cover this spectrum and that's what I'd expect to see, I'm just saying it must be a hard balance for them to try to accelerate things that aren't that common, because I think you know most minor glitches are typically handled by an airplane system and the procedures are typically just to ensure it was handled the right way. We do a lot of slow developing malfunctions where a generator out light (benign) is actually an indication that the gearbox is coming apart so there is validity to troubleshooting procedures, but my experience is the same as you, normally small glitches we write up and move on. I am not discounting the expectation to handle emergencies, I was just curious from other simmers why they want to see them so frequently, but you raised a great point talking about glitches and small malfunctions. -Matthew Chase
  10. I understand, my point being even real Airline pilots very very rarely see malfunctions. -Matt Chase
  11. I completely agree, it is making sim time a microcosm of real flight time, that in itself is not realistic though, and not how line pilots practice to handle emergencies, that's my only point. I agree, having system failures modeled does make the more mundane parts of flying (checklists) much more pertinent in the sim environment and adds a realism factor not present in other simulations. I think this discussion itself is evident of the layers of complexity PMDG brings to the table. -Matthew Chase
  12. It's additive, and a good model to replicate service based failures but that doesn't necessarily mean realism, that is simply adapting the sim environment to be a microcosm of real world flight time. I do training sim's all the time where I get compound emergencies, engines out on the same side while a bleed air valve won't close etc... That is training but it's not really realistic, most people will fly their whole careers without seeing things like that, however we train for the worst so it is an instinctual reaction. I hope that makes sense on my perspective of realism. Nobody does realism better than PMDG but there is just simply some things a simulator won't replicate. That being said I also completely understand why people want failures, it tests their system knowledge and ability to manage the aircraft, however I just got the tone that people want to see failures all the time, and that's just not the case, and please correct me if I'm wrong. -Matthew Chase
  13. Can we find it in the avsim library? Thanks for your work! -Matthew Chase
  14. I completely understand training for failures, that's what we do in our sims, my point being that real practice in the aircraft is done by simulating the emergency and in the sims they are all triggered, while the idea of waiting for them to happen is practical in a simulator sense I don't think it's realistic to expect PMDG to make them occur more frequently than they do in the plane. I have been playing Flight Simulator my entire life and I completely understand the quest for realism. -Matthew Chase
  15. What is the obsession with failures, as a pilot who flys a very old aircraft (albeit with great maintainers) we never hope for failures or care to see them. If you want things as real as they get you're probably not going to see a failure. I went 20 flights in a row simulating engines out but I've never even seen an oil pressure out of limits. Yes things happen but typically maintenance just wouldn't let a plane go flying if it wasn't to standard. -Matthew Chase HC-130H Pilot
  • Create New...