tnorton776

I found out what enables DUAL LAND mode in the FMC. Auto Thrust must be engaged in order for the MD-11 to perform a full autoland/flare/roll out. If AT is not armed and set properly the autopilot will cut out a couple hundred feet above the runway. No where in any of the MD-11 manuals is this stated, however. I understand that this is not a "Boeing" aircraft, which do not need A/T armed in order to perform a AUTOLAND 3. That was what was confusing me. Hope this helps to anyone else scratching their head.

thanks for the last reply it was very helpful, I notice the problem occurs if I dont have Dual land as you say or if my auto thrust is not engaged i have these issues. The dual land thing seems arbitrary, even with correct ILS at a major airport it only activates sometimes. In boeing planes you can land the plane with autoland 3 and manual thrust control, is that not the case with the MD-11?

I have read it, but the FMC guide isnt very clear on this aspect of the AutoLand system. Full autoland Flare and rollout has nothing to do with the ILS frequency, it is some other setting. Perhaps there is a Land type setting somewhere that the FMC guide is leaving out? I dont have this issue in Boeing planes, which are in general more user friendly than MD.I will further look into the ILS approach type.

Can anyone explain to me what settings I have to engage in the FMC to enable a full autoland? everytime I get about 100 feet above the runway the autopilot cuts out.

WWW.NEWEGG.COM ------------- MY PERSONAL FSX DREAM MACHINE (AND COULD BE YOURS TOO) Intel Core i7-960 Bloomfield 3.2GHz 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80601 $579.99 ASUS Rampage III Formula LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard $299.99 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM (quantity 2 @ $84.99 each) Intel X25-M SSDSA2MH120G2K5 2.5" 120GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) (quanitity 2 @ $199.99 each for raid 0 extreme speed and reliability) MSI N580GTX-M2D15D5 GeForce GTX 580 (Fermi) 1536MB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card (quantity 2 @ $524.99 each) Antec Twelve Hundred Black Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case $149.99 ASUS Black 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 12X DVD+R DL 24X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 12X DVD-RAM 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 32X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM 2MB Cache SATA 24X DVD Burner - Bulk - OEM $17.99 SAMSUNG P2450H Rose Black 24" 2ms(GTG) HDMI Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 DC 70000:1(1000:1) $229.99 SPEND 3G'S AND WEEP NO MORE (OR SOME LESSER VERSION OF THIS MONSTER AND WEEP LESS) /KUNGFU BOW

Fast, high, wobbly, unprofessional, extremely left of center, extremely uneven touchdown with 500,000 lbs... scary... a landing like that could potentially damage the 747 landing gear.

Over the past couple of years, several fired Boeing engineers including former phantom works and 40 year Boeing vet Vince Weldon - a man who literally played a key part in making the moon landing possible, who designed critical components on the 727, Apollo vehicles, and space shuttle- vehemently opposed the lackluster testing that has been done to the Boeing 787. He holds degrees in aerospace engineering and is a composites expert, having worked with composites for over 20 years. Weldon joined Boeing in 1960, in what was a 46-year career with the firm. He was first involved in the wing design of the Boeing 727 airliner, a design that incorporated high-lift devices such as triple-slotted flaps, which enabled the 727 to be one of the first jet aircraft capable of operating from relatively short runways.In mid 1962, he was assigned to the Apollo program, where he designed the support and release system for the lunar module. He also designed a new thrust structure for the Apollo service modules’ main engine, which would be 100% stiffer, yet not increase the weight of the service module.While working in collaboration with the RAND workshop, it was Weldon's research that showed titanium would be better than Inconel as a honeycomb structural material for building metallic Trans-Atmospheric Vehicles (TAVs) and X-33 spacecraft. Later, Weldon became the Senior Aerospace Engineer at Boeing Phantom Works research center.Part of his complaint was about a partial scale drop test of a partial 787 fuselage compared to a full scale test in 2000 done on a 737 fuselage. He and other colleagues make strong arguments that upon impact the plastics are brittle and do not bend like metal, therefore they shatter, not absorbing nearly as much of the impact as metal planes do. Weldon and others claim the 787 can shatter, and on top of that burn with extremely toxic fumes and create sharp inhalable carbon fiber slivers, and cause a calamity on the ground in what would otherwise be a survivable incident in a metal plane.To make a more direct comparison between the crash performance of a plastic fuselage versus a metal one, Weldon had called for the 787 tests to mirror the details of a drop test done in 2000 on a 737 metal fuselage section — dropping onto concrete a complete circular fuselage section with stowbins overhead and instrumented crash-test dummies in the seats."While there are merits in conducting a full-scale test, there are other approaches using tests and analysis that can actually yield more data than would a single test," the FAA responded.- This statement is manipulative and makes no sense. Let me rephrase what the FAA really ment- "While there are merits in conducting a full-scale test, there are other approaches using tests and analysis that can actually yield more data than would a full-scale test," the FAA responded.- I hope you can pick out what the FAA criminally did here in the statement, they changed “full-scale” to “single test” deceptively changing the entire sentences subject and original predicate.- What could possibly “Yield more data” than a full-scale test? Full-scale tests are the most thorough and complete tests you can possibly conduct.Other concerns about the questionable 787 include lightning vulnerability, toxic smoke, and severe impact shocks from crashing. Rather said his show doesn't determine whether Boeing or Weldon is right. But referring to the e-mails from Weldon's peers, he said, "There are others who are still within the company who are concerned ... that Boeing could be destroyed by taking the 787 to market too soon and brushing aside these safety concerns too cavalierly."Given the extraordinary credentials and work experience this American hero has, I cannot believe that Boeing is taking a huge risk on their very future and people’s lives by non chalantly waving off all of his well substantiated concerns and complaints. This is not the first time a company has cut corners for profits and fired its dissenters. Yet to do so is simply criminal negligence of the worst kind.

Will there be a fully functioning EGPWS in the new PMDG 737NGX ?

:( Hey everyone and PMDG, Just saw those pretty screenies of the new 737NGX CDU and all i can say is what a beauty! Im extremely excited to buy and start flying this baby! The only thing that gives FSX away is the lighting, and thats mighty impressive! Island hopping around Hawaii especially with all the FSdream team airport add ons is gonna be so fun and sexy in the new 737NGX.Realism question about sound:Is this realism going to be across the board, such as, will the engines/flaps/wheels/ground roll etc all be as realistic as the CDU? Or are we going to need to install TSS CFM56 7B sound pack and such to get the sound reaslim? You see, You've truly spoiled us rotten now giving up those screenies, and now you must know we're going to be expecting all aspects to be that epic :(

rofl. it w/e means whatever. Thats the funniest thing ive heard all week. u made me crack up. FSX + single core pentium.... rly? i mean... rlly.... are you stooping to the some ppl r still plying on single core lvl.. rlly... i mean reellyy...../facepalm

Captain sim's boeing jets all have high poly objects and resolution bitmaps for their large lengthly cabinshttp://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....p721_16.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....p721_13.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....p721_21.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....p721_12.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview..../p721_8.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview..../p721_9.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....p721_18.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....v767_33.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview..../v767_6.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview..../v767_3.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....v767_14.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....v767_23.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview..../p721_7.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....57_vc_9.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....7_vc_22.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....7_vc_27.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview...._sal_12.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....7_sal_3.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....7_sal_8.jpg;x=1http://www.captainsim.com/cgi-bin/imgview....7_sal_7.jpg;x=1 and I dont see ppl complaining on their forums about it. As you can see from Captain sim, IMMENSE ATTENTION TO LEVEL OF DETAIL ALL THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PLANE. Their passenger cabins are in fact quite beautiful and fun to view part of the flight from at times. You all can bash me as much as you want, but its your money too, and 2bhonest in response to the funny youtube video, its pretty irrational to not stick up for quality that you should be receving. o well ur money i guess w/e.

While you guys turned my post into a joke, Which I dont really care cause this post is addressing PMDG directly and non of you really, so w/e. Thanks for the reply PMDG, But it really was not a good explanation of why you should not make your product wholly complete and basically cater to people who, from one perspective, really have no business playing this game in the first place if their computer cant support it. This game is not meant to be played at half settings in 2010. Maybe in 2006, not 2010. Basically I did pay 50 bucks for this addon, as you all did AND I was planning on buying ALL of the PMDG FSX addons because I was so impressed, that is until I saw the cabin views for JS and it made me extremely skeptical. Now idk about you people, but im running a self built i7 monster with 3 way SLI geforce 400's that could run super computer algorithms for National Geographic's scientist models for global warming. Do I expect most people to have a computer like this? Hardly. Do I expect people should have a good enough rig to be able to enjoy a Wholly graphically satisfactory 50 dollar addon at at least 15 - 30 FPS (which is satisfactory for flying)? Yes. Now, I get between and never less than 150 -200 FPS in FULL FSX settings + REX active and while in the JS VC cockpit. Let me ask, when you pay for a new expensive car, say a beamer or benz, (This relates cause PMDG are all expensive FSX addons in relation to the mainstream) how would you like it if everything about the car was great, but the backseats and backseat area looked like utter garbage, like it was from a 83 used up hatchback? I highly doubt you would appreciate that. It is not my fault/problem/responsibility that some of you dont have the computer set up to handle this demanding game in all its glory. Now I dont know what kind of corporation PMDG is, but at my manufacturing corporation we manufacture products that fit the needs of EVERYONE, and offer numerous performance options and sizes that fit all. The professional and responsible and good business practiceand good faith thing PMDG would do, is to allow for an option to scale down certain graphics settings for their addons, not just screw anyone over that has a half decent rig. Bottom line is this: PMDG, this is not 2006 or 2008. This is 2010. Stop hampering your own addons! Unleash the beast! If people cant spend 300 - 500 dollars on a decent enough graphics card to play FSX w/ addon's correctly then thats not who you should be catering too. there are Plenty of people who have high quality rigs. This is not FS9 either. You should at some point stop making your newer products scaled down graphically to the level of 2 - 4 years ago. Most of our computers arent babies, and the new i7's and graphics cards have no trouble handling your "demanding" addons. I expect to get what I pay for. This " ADDON " cost the same price as a brand new console/computer video game! It is truly unfortunate that you can not enjoy ALL aspects of the airplane, and what I paid for. I dont know how good of pilots you all are on here or irl, but I like to at times watch my plane land from the passengers seat and test my skills and how well I set up the approach/autoland etc. I also enjoy watching the beauty of REX vs. 2 from the passenger cabin of my beautiful captain sim boeing 700 series aircraft while flying over gorgeously rendered hawaii and reefs etc. Captain sim's flight models of their 700 series aircraft ALL have highly detailed outer/inner plane & VC and flight interiors and cabins, are highly detailed complex procedural simulators, and their addons are less money.

I dont understand why the interrior cabin is lacking in quality so badly. It is utterly disgustting graphically. Utter blaspheme to be a part of the rest of the plane! How can the same addon contain one of the finest VC cockpits in the history of Microsoft Flight simulator... and then have the gall to include an interior cabin view but have it look like a garbage dump of some of the crappiest textures ive ever seen? Whenever I change my view to inside the cabin I feel like PMDG robbed me of 50 dollars. As a paying customer and one who stands up for how I spend my money I would like an answer from PMDG Simulations as to why the cabin interrior is lacking in quality SO Utterly, and if anything is being done in a future patch to correct this farce. Tom Norton

Yes, my logical guess is that in the turboprop style plane it has something to do with the power/energy/amp from the start up sequence somehow damaging the avionics... awaiting an offical answer though. Do cessna Citations and small jets have the same issue? Or is it just turboprops

Simple Question. Why must the Avionics be turned off right before you start up the engine? Are you not allowed to start up with the avionics on and aligned?Tom Norton