Tyrion

Thanks for the update Robert! My first reaction to the NGX SP2 information was disappointment. But then I thought a bit more about it: - The NGX is, in it's current state, an amazing product. - We're comparing it to the 777, which is quite a bit newer. So, my current opinion: 1) I would LOVE (yes, all caps!) a free SP2 for the NGX. 2) If the price is right, and the added functionality is worth it, I'd be willing to pay a small fee for an updated NGX. 3) But even if it doesn't come, I still love my NGX as it is now! :wub: In the end, the NGX is amazing. The problem is that the 777 is even better, and we all want to the NGX raised to that level. Dear PMDG, this is a luxury problem that is entirely of you own making. Apart from my going on on the NGX, looking forward to the 747... Keep it up!

Probably not much point in yet another thread like this... :unsure: But I agree, a PMDG-quality 757 is the number one on my personal wishlist. Sigh. :wub:

You can assign a spoiler axis in FSX without any problem. But be sure to look under axis, not buttons... Big difference. At one point in the past I had my X-52 Pro slider assigned for the spoilers/speedbrakes because I needed finer control than on/off for gliders. So I'm sure it works perfectly without the need for FSUIPC. Also note that both the NGX and 777 have a clickspot on the pedestal for the spoilers 50% position. Just click where the lever should be in that position. Hope this helps...

Yes you can... I had no problems with feeding the right engine of the left tank with the APU running. It's just when I added fuel jettison in the mix, that I got results which I didn't expect. (But that may be more to do with a lack of knowledge on my part than anything else)

Thanks for the input Rob! Indeed, landing the aircraft at MLW with about 3000kg imbalance proved to be no problem. Handling the thrust asymmetry was much more of a handful. ^_^ Still wondering about this situation, but I'll live.

Hello, First of all, yes, I used the search function on this forum, and yes, I searched through both FCOM's, the FCTM and the QRH. That said, I still don't have an answer for the following situation: Tonight, I was testing the 777 (using the freighter version). I was all set up for a long flight at high load, but ran into a (programmed...) severe engine failure shortly after liftoff. My first priority was to keep flying the aircraft. No particular problem, despite the alarms and sudden loss of thrust on the left side. Once I got everything under control, I went through the appropriate checklist on the ECL. So far, so good. Now, my plan was to land back at my departure airport, but to do so, I had to jettison about 80000kgs of fuel. I entered a hold over the sea to do just that. The problem I ran into here, is that with only one engine operating, dumping fuel caused a quickly escalating fuel imbalance, and no matter what I tried, I couldn't get it to stabilize. By the time the center tank was empty, the imbalance had reached about 3500kg. Roughly what could be expected without cross feeding. I kept the fuel jettison going for a while to see whether the auto jettison function would turn off the right jettison pump when the right main tank (the less full one) reached jettison goal/2 (which it didn't). No idea whether it should stop here though, it was just an idea I had while flying so I tested it. a couple of notes: 1) fuel jettison with 2 engines running seemed to be working perfectly fine in a previous test flight. 2) cross feed also worked perfectly when fuel wasn't being jettisoned. As it was, I manually stopped the fuel jettison a bit early, and then kept flying in the hold while cross feeding to reduce the imbalance a bit, before landing. Anyway, what I'm looking for: What would be the correct procedure in this case? What went/did I do wrong? Feel free to reply with references to the correct sections in the manuals... I didn't find what I was looking for so far... Thanks in advance...

Nice rant Kyle... I actually found it very informative as well. Personally, I've been surprised by the accuracy I get out of PFPX, in combination with both the NGX and T7. But then again, I considered it common sense to match the numbers. If both the planner and the FMC ask for something called a 'cost index' or a 'Gross Weight' they should probably, just probably, be about the same in both applications. B) And using the same weather source both for flight plan predictions, and flying the actual flight, couldn't hurt either.

The font Tui uses is a custom one called TUItype. I've been looking for a while, but I have been unable to find it myself. TUI themselves had it available for free download from one of their websites in the past, but that link (found it in an old archived page) is no longer working. If you need it for a repaint, your best bet will be to use a high resolution logo, or even better, a good vector logo and work from that. Or you can google it, and hope you have more luck than I. ^_^ EDIT: Or make your own vector logo from a low-res example, if you have the necessary software.

Hey Chris, The best way to learn is: practice, practice, practice... Like you say: taking off, circling around and landing (or just doing a touch and go and repeat) is a great way to learn, and in fact common practice in real life as well. (I live near an airport that's sometimes used by several airlines to do just that...) As for how far to fly: make it easy at first, and do this at an airport that has an ILS. but fly manually nonetheless. Just use the ILS for guidance. This also tells you how far to fly back: fly downwind until well below the glide slope, with enough room to turn, line up on the localizer, slow down, lower the first couple notches of flaps etc. Doing this with ILS will train you on how it should look when you do it without ILS. Another way to train yourself that you can use while still doing full flights, is let the autopilot handle everything until established for landing, and then take over. For example, turn off the autopilot at 1000ft AGL, after the landing checklist. All you have to do is keep the aircraft on the localizer and glideslope, flare and land. It might not be pretty the first couple of times, (it wasn't for me...) but it'll be in your fingers in no time. Also remember: most real world pilots prefer to land manually... They're pilots after all... Now, I'm not a real life pilot. I'm not claiming this is the best or most realistic way. It's just how I like to do it, and what works for me.

I had the same thing happening to me some weeks back, but it was the captain's IRS not aligning in my case. When I turned both IRS's to NAV, the FO's aligned normally after the expected amount of time, but the Captain's side didn't. I even let it run for 30 minutes once, no progress. Using the CDU failures menu to 'clear all' failures fixed it for the running flight, but the problem returned the next flight. (although no failures were indicated at any time in the menu). The next flight I 'cleared all' failures, but also ran a full maintenance on my airframe, and the problem went away and hasn't returned since. Note that I did have service based failures enabled.

Are you sure this is an issue?To me, (without more information) this sounds like a problem in understanding the difference between heading and track (heading up or track up on the ND is an option in the NGX)the heading is the way the nose of the aircraft is pointed.The track is the direction over the earths surface the aircraft moves.Generally, if there is no wind, heading and track will be the same.If there is, the track will be different from the heading, caused by the wind blowing the aircraft sideways.If this is not the problem you mean, well, somebody else will have to step in...

As far as I know, this is just a normal 700, but with all business class seating...Might be mistaken though... For example, the fuel system is also different... The BBJ's have even longer range than the ER versions.Also, cabin crew interaction, and the associated items in the cockpit, will be different, I suppose.Again, I might be wrong, but that's my educated guess...

Technically, following the McPhat phraseology, the PMDG stock textures on the NGX are already UHDT.But that aside, yes, McPhat is going 737 as far as I know

How do you save your DDS files? Will need to know that first before we can help. (Photoshop, DXTBMP, ...) Also, a screenshot of the problem would help. There are different problems that could cause textures to appear wrongly. Haven't downloaded the paintkit myself, so can't really comment on the how to concerning the NGX.

There are a couple of advantages. First of all, remember that it's only the frame, so no actual window left.just covering over the frame will reduce weight (not by much, as the frame is still there) as the glass used in aircraft is thick and heavy (several layers of plexiglass).Also, windows are weak spots in the skin of any aircraft. So, the less windows, the less trouble spots, the less bolts, the less parts...It all adds up to less weight, less maintenance, less chance of trouble.From a perfect engineering point of view, you wouldn't put ANY windows in an aircraft... not even the windshield (some design studies for the Boeing 2707 didn't have windshields, just cameras...) However, from just about any other point of view (pilot, passenger, sales rep, etc...) you'd want as many windows as possible, and have them as large as possible...It's always a compromise between those different wishes. This is my view on this, I might be slightly wrong, but those points I came across when studying my course in aircraft structures.