paracines

you mean nobody is gonna test STOL's at their local grass strip? Where is the adventure? LOL paul

Copa Airlines has the longest flights for 738's if you wanna give it a go. MPTO FNC1A FRANCE AROVI UM419 ASOKU UL655 PPE J93 JLI OLDEE1 KLAX 7:03 hrs 3,044 s miles

UAL49 B772 Chatrapati Shivaji Int'l (VABB / BOM) Newark Liberty Intl (KEWR) 15 hours 49 min ! :blink:

Just to be sure to point out that it depends on the approach one is implementing. A CAT IIIc approach requires crews to let the A/T control the throttle until touchdown and the A/T will auto disconnect when two seconds have elapsed since landing touchdown. Section 4.20.9 of the FCOM manual 2 has all the information about auto throttle use and automation. So there is no one "correct" answer, because its based on the weather and/or how much manual control one wants to have during any phase of the flight. The 737 NG could be flown totally manually if you wish. Usually airlines will have their policies in place about all this, so maybe when/if real world pilots chime in they may indicate the airline policy.

FCOM Manual #2 section 9.10.8 - you will be surprised where the indicator is.

Im not totally sure on this but its most likely a waypoint that the FMC calculates as not possible because of some factor. Whether the altitude, speed, or proximity of a fix or the airport. I remember tutorial #2 as having quite a few altitude constraints on approach and the FMC may just be telling you that its " too late to change your mind" by making the change impossible. In these cases we have to remember that the FMC is designed for safety, passenger comfort, and economy. For example, the FMC will not command a sudden nose dive to runway 8 - you will have to fly that manualy. I make this guess based on the fact that the Line select keys are functioning for you to bring waypoints to the scratchpad. So the button functions - there has to be a problem with what you are asking the FMC to do, but in thinking this through there should be some kind of error message displayed or at least some kind of advisory about what your trying to accomplish that is getting rejected....Im not sure about trying to program obvious impossibilities into the FMC - I never tried it.

The QRH has info about this - but I dont have time to type it all out ;-). I have a great idea - when you have enough time to fly on FSX with the NGX then take that time and do an IRS search in the QRH - you will see what is happening and the soloution.

All real life A320 pilots understand that Airbus and Boeing are 2 very different planes that require totally different training sessions. But both A320's and 737's can do the same things that either ATC or Nav Charts require, they just sometimes achieve it differently. Both Airbus and Boeing are successful aircraft companies. I believe that Boeing planes make pilots more a part of what the plane is doing on purpose. During the Approach and Departure, Boeing planes offer a totally automated possiblility, but reality usually requires pilots to adjust that automation to conform to the weather, traffic, and emergencies. Too much automation at this point is not practical during departure and approach. Since we are flying the PMDG 737 NGX here, we need to fly the 737 as outlined in the manual, not fly the 737 like we would fly the A320. I could ask a few hundred questions here on the fourm about how to do something in the 737 , but I just go to the manual and get my question answered pretty fast and that lesson sticks better because I took the time to read all about it ( true facts - not possibly somebodys guess), and do it in practice and know its the correct way. Even all this talk about totally automated personal aircraft, will never be totally practical because the weather can very quickly become extremely violent. There is always going to be a time when one must take the control of the aircraft away from the computer. I guess we will see how smart computers will get. I look foreward to an awesome simulation of an A319- A380 to learn those systems, but until then the NGX is filling my bill of realistic home PC simulation :-).

There are a bunch of cockpit videos available on youtube for free to see real world ops - and if you want extreme details there are a bunch of cockpit videos you can buy for many different airlines that use the 737 NG series. I often do a search of "737-800 cockpit" on youtube if I have a question about real world ops and most of my questions are answered.

Using FlightAware.com, a good way to see the longest real routes airlines use is to browse by aircraft type then sort by estimated time enroute. There are usually a few flights done by the 737-800 having 8+ hours.

Whether you walk away from a landing is still determined by the weather - so it remains the most important factor in aviation. Just because you want to walk away does not mean you will.

The weather decides if you will land safely or at all - so again nothing is more important than weather.

You will never even start the engine if there is a tornado over the airport. And a quick qusestion, when did you install an engine in your glider? BTW I expect a silly answer. hahaI remain correct from my original post -- *nothing* in aviation is more important than weather.

Who really cares about getting planes and new areas if you cant fly in the weather these areas are famous/known for. MS Flight without real weather will always come 3rd to me behind FSX and FS9. Until real weather is added and the weather acts like real weather in MS Flight its still far below my bar. In aviation, *nothing* is more important than weather.

Interesting, I thought that was the job of beta testers who usually get a free copy of the software for their efforts. To me, its just no longer a wise thing to purchase software until Service Pack "5" is released, and all the outstanding issues are resolved. But, new versions come out before old problems are resolved, and there should be consumer laws in place to prevent such things, but as humans are never satisfied, software companies will get their money and make them beta test....not me. :-)Seems to me that beta tests are getting more and more useless.I dont post this to invite a debate, and I will not be checking this post for any responses. I just wanted to shed some perspective from a consumer standpoint. I truly would like to see HiFi Simulations succeed but not at the expense of frustrated simmers.

To you, success means to release a software title with a price tag and collect money for that title -- then weeks later release SP1 to fix some broken things - and then SP2.... that is success to you because you love money.I hate money.... a successful title to me has no need for a PATCH ....."SERVICE" PACK is named as such to fool people who love money and possesions - it will not fool me because I love when people care about each other even when they are in a company not just at church or a funeral.You need not be fooled by greed. Just put people before money, then you will understand and agree with me.... but 98% of the population of the world will disagree with me -- its ok I'm used to it, but it does not make me wrong.

The problem is that the money and time budgets are the first priority before the project is even concieved. That is why companies have so many problems and have to gamble their way through a project causing all the stress - they put money "before" quality and if the opposite were done money would not need to be an issue at all. It is a certain thing that people will pay top dollar for quality -- just think if every company thought like this - there would be no layoffs - unemployment would be so close to 0% it need not be mentioned..... instead of using time to figure out how to patch a program a software company could focus on better ways to serve their customers -- instead of having repair places the people who would repair are involved in development of greater services and products. This world does things backwards so it remains is a state of fixing failures much more... lots of time and effort wasted because of greed.

Please tell me, if you know where the development team of FSX went and why? -- Please tell me if you know why scores of simmers use FS9 still? Please tell me , since you laugh, that your job or income is 100% secure because you say it is. I tell you that it is not and I'm correct, just like Im correct in saying that FSX failed and the chain was broken -- Please talk to the developer of FSUIPC and how he may need to (if he chooses to) totally redo this interface again - His kindness to the community has surpassed most others because with out his paitents and long suffering most other add on titles would be useless.BTW have you tried Multiplayer? Is the gamespy interface a success? I get dropped every time I wish to change to another host. I say its half done....that is not my opinion it is a fact.I review carefully what I say prior to posting and much of what I say is not understood - you should think before you post and especially think before you mock one you do not know. Well said Will -- I agree and I want Microsoft Flight to be a great success -- even a 9th wonder of the world

Confirmed that the FSX real weather feature is back online -- whew :-)

I speak from the perspective of one who was there from the begining of the beta stage in FSX. Yes there was much imput about new things people wanted -- but I m talking about basic features that are included but dont work correctly or at all because of time and money budgets....one example is DX10 preview, with a bit more time and effort this could be a feature that made FSX really shine. Another example is the B737-800 overhead panel, the landing lights are on when off and off when on - this kind of thing was let go because there was no more time....unacceptable to me but when there is a budget that takes priority, these are the kinds of things that ruin a project. Then FSX ends up a wash hence why the whole program was washed away by a flood of budget cuts leaving a small remnant behind. The phrase "On Time" has killed many people when real pilots do anything to be on time and make a foolish mistake doing so.The phrase "On Budget" has ruined millions of peoples lives when they get fired because of budget cuts - I would guess that many have died from suicide. If the new Microsoft Flight program is developed with time and money budgets as the priority, it will fail, just like FSX.

I will say this -- I have high hopes for the new Microsoft Flight - If Microsoft will keep money and time budgets away from this project then it will be a great success. If money and time budgets are the priority then I promise it will fail.

I was wondering why last night I suddenly inflight to KJAX I got a message in FSX -- "real wx is not available check internet connection" -- well my internet connection was just fine - so I checked FS9 real weather too -- same message. It seems that fs9 and FSX are officially in the back seat before Microsoft Flight is released.I use ASV for real weather too so its not a problem for me - but people who rely on the FSX real weather may be in for a big let down.