thibodba57

It's not very "comfortable" but this is how the real aircrafts Alt knob works. To get 100s you need to depress (Tab) the button and rotate. Otherwise you get 1000s. Likewise with the heading, speed bug, and course selection and depressing the button and rotating allows for faster selection of a value while just normal rotation is fine tuning. It's these things that make flying the Mad Dog a unique experience.

If I'm not mistaken...telling someone to do something right is on par as saying they are doing something wrong. There are multiple ways to skin a cat. I gave you the primary method of Navigation. LNAV is the primary HDG Sel is the secondary. Secondly, take a deep breath man. If you spin up every time you read something your going to get an ulcer or worse someday. I was being sarcastic not insulting. However, don't go say, "this a A+B convo C your way out" to someone just because you disagree or whatever the reason is. Its a public forum. Kinda on the rude side don't you think?

If you need a reference. Look at the 777 Procedures profiles document. Page 11. VOR mode: The ND VOR mode is useful when flying VOR or NDB approaches that require tracking of a specific course. VOR CTR mode is most useful, because it places the aircraft at the center of the compass rose and the VOR/ADF needles track can be easily read for bearing to station information. In addition, the VOR mode supplies both heading and track information, which allows flight crews to make simple heading corrections to maintain the correct track for a published approach. If a VOR or ADF approach is to be flown, use LNAV to manage lateral track navigation. If the approach profile is not described properly on the LEGS page, crews may need to use the MCP HDG SEL mode. But hey I guess my years of flying LNAV equipped aircraft have been wrong all this time. I guess I need to go back to the school house.

Sigh.....LNAV is the primary means of navigation on a Non-Precision approach. Monitor the raw data and revert to HDG Sel if the accuracy is not sufficient. That is how we are all trained nowadays. Especially with an aircraft with Integrated Approach Logic. LNAV/VNAV are your friends.

I'm going to have to stop you right there. This is coming from a guy who flies the 747 for a living. The 777 safety rating speaks for itself. Think of the incidents that have involved loss of life with the 777. One we don't know what happened, one was pilot error and the last was shot out of the sky. The plane has been flying for nearly 20 years. The 777 is an engineering marvel quite frankly. The reason the 747 has fallen out of favor isn't just because its less economical to operate but the safety of the engines nowadays is so astronomically more reliable its of little concern. The whole reason for a 4 engine jet was because the engines had a tendency to coming apart in the earlier days. The engineering has come so far its nearly a shock to see anything happen to them now. Not to mention how much we baby them increasing safety and longevity.

I wouldn't say you were incorrect, you were referring to what a developer can do with aircraft. I think its something encoded into FSX itself and applies to all aircraft equally so nothing any developer can do with it. Then again I could be wrong.

Not to argue but I think you need to go land that Maule on some ice, snow or whatever. I'm almost positive that FSX and P3D try to mimic the conditions of landing on them. Anyone want to verify? Take the Maule put the skies down and land on the asphalt then go land on the snow covered tundra and let us know how it goes. Better yet, I just tried it, go to McMurdo. Slip and slide all the way down. Now that being said, this is all the personal observation and is obviously not handled per aircraft as it seems to be integrated into the simulator. So as far as I know no developer would be able to change the characteristics of any of their aircraft to be more/less realistic as to an aircrafts handling on a contaminated runway.

Not that I own the aircraft, but I'm familiar with CDU's. Did you want to go direct to a waypoint or activate a leg so you can intercept an airway for example.

We don't do % of lever movement. All percents are based on N1. I didn't want to give a specific N1 because I'm not familiar with the CFM-56 at all. On the CF6 (What we use on the whale) we spool N1 up to 70% N1 then press TOGA. Stand them up is a generic term thrown around for spool them up. As a physical reference it looks like you stood the thrust levels vertical. Like they stood up. :-) The reason I said be quick about using the TOGA switch is at 50kts the Autothrottle is inhibited until passing 400'. This is in the actual aircraft...I'll have to try the sim to see if it works the same. Giving all the problems I had trying to figure it out a couple years back I'm guessing it is the same. PMDG does an outstanding job of accurately simulating the real deal. What I'm getting at is if your looking for this magical 40% and trying to be as accurate as possible, and you pass up 50KIAS and you haven't pressed TOGA...your going to have to set takeoff thrust yourself. And then passing 400' cycle (turn off then on) the Autothrottle switch. You should be in VNav so that should re-engage the Autothrottle. BTW, I don't remember if I mentioned this, but before you take the runway, Autothrottle on, verify LNAV, VNAV armed and check your MCP Altittude. I hope I'm not making this more confusing as I go.

The way Atlas trains us is to ARM our roll and pitch mode (LNAV or Blank, and VNAV) after your final performance data entry (V1, VR, V2). So your FMA should read <BLANK>| TOGA | TOGA w/ LNAV | VNAV armed (in white). When taking the runway stand the thrust levers up when stabilized press the TOGA switches. Be quick about the TOGA button....if your slow you'll have to control power for a bit. Normal takeoff, and above 250' AGL (this is a 747 number) Autopilot on. Watch the magic happen. 50' above the Barometric snapshot LNAV engages. 400' VNAV engages. As for HDG Sel your FMA should be TOGA with a blank underneath it as you DO NOT arm Hdg Sel for take off. You just press the button when you want to leave TOGA (wings level) for a selected hdg. Standard instrument departures this is 400'. Now this is all based on what we do in the 747. I have a hard time believing it can be much if any different in the 737 honestly.

I'm going to assume the 73 is the same as the 74 as far as system logic in VNAV. During your take-off acceleration at 100KIAS the computer does a "barometric snapshot" of the current conditions for VNAV purposes. These would include switching to LNAV @ 50' VNAV at 400' both two and single engine acceleration and depending if you choose a flap setting or an altitude thrust reduction. It does not use radar altimeter but the altitude sensed at the 100KIAS. That about as clear as mud? I just woke up so I hope I make sense.

Yes in almost every way. The overhead panel and the EICAS system are different. On the overhead panel the biggest difference comes from the Annuciator sytem...I HATE it. All my training to get my type was in the 88, its a mess of a system IMHO. The 82 just uses the older style of lights and covers and they are arranged systematically to figure out whats going on faster. The EICAS on the 88 however is better than the 82's engine instruments. Everything is right there arranged in order. On the 82 its like someone took a shotgun full of engine gauges and shot the panel up with them. Your eyes are constantly moving around looking at stuff. Been a fun plane to fly though, The 82 is second generation automation so it still requires you to pay attention to what its doing. My favorite saying from the aircraft is "Ok, whats it doing now."

No the 747-8 is in line with the -400.

Couple things to note. All pilots Monday morning quarterback. Aviation is a tough career field that requires thick skin. The reason is to question what someone did isn't to belittle them. Its to see what could have been done better. Yes these guys walked away. That's awesome, I never want to see anyone die in aviation accidents. (I've lost numerous friends over the years) But there are things he could have done better. Checklist usage, better landing locations...as pilots you should always strive to learn from others, and more importantly your own mistakes/experiences. You won't learn as much if you don't question what you or someone could have done better? If someone is incapable of seeing what they could have done better...then that person is a hazard not only to themselves but others. Make a bit more sense?