Schnell13

Dual Installation with FSX-se on different drive: RealAir Duke Turbine V2 only partially compatible. Configuration App does not work on my set-up. It has already been stated that Reality XP 530/430 does not work, but also cannot rearrange the positions of the default GPS, autopilot, transponder etc,(which was one of the major improvements on Turbine V2 in my opinion), change the default Engines Running to C&D on installation, or any other default settings.

This is really not pertinent to your question as worded, but there is an old GA "Rule of Thumb" that was used before transistors and printed circuits showed up: Just add 2% to your IAS for each 1000 feet of Altitude above sea level to get TAS. The result will be close enough for most purposes. Otherwise calculating it (forFlight Sim anyway) is somewhat of a pain, since it requires outside temperature, Calibrated Air Speed, and having an ISA Standard Day chart available plus a hand calculator unless you remember how to take square roots.

Go off the taxiway and go around him. Works for me.

Because of re-install hassels (not pointing the finger at Carenado by any means) I don't buy "download only" software from anybody anymore. I am waiting for it to be available in a boxed version or a downlod version with a back-up CD. Will buy it when (If) that happens, although I already have a real good GA turboprop.

Hi,Found the problem(s). It was "Cockpit Error" on my part.I had the frequency set correctly and was at the right altiude, but somehow during the setup of my saved starting flignt, I had switched the Captain's side to VOR 2 (probably while reaching for the FD switch) and wasn't paying attention to that display indication. Also i was not switching the display to APR at GS lockup.Got to be more careful. Everything works now.Thanks to both of you for the responses. Red face, and String closed.Tom

(Actually these are just round-robin flights from take off to landing and stop)I often make manual or AP controlled TO/Landing circuits with the 737-NGX, mostly just to practice the landing flare. This is without anything at all programmed into the CDU (No Flight Plan).I have no problem with the first part of the flights (well sometimes my pitch trim is a little off), and acquire the VOR's and ILS lock-ups on the approach as scheduled for the landing. However, Ican't seem to get a lock onto the Glide Slope using APR. No big problem, by then I am in visual acquisition range, so can finish VFR or I can use VLOC and VS to complete the landing.However, I don't understand exactly what is going on re the Glide Slope. Can someone explain why I can't get the GS Lock? Is there something in the 737 system that requires a flight planloaded into the CDU to lock up the glide slope?Thanks,Tom Hill

jen,Read through the post on the SP1c release, whiich is a sticker at the top of this forum. Near the end, it states when these discs would be put into production (only about ten days ago as I remember) and that they were be shipped to the buyers shortly afterwards. If PMDG met their target date, they should be shipped soon. PMDG decided months ago not to ship them until they SP's were all up to date.There is some confusion on the part of some other buyers on these discs vs. just the extended downloads as were offered in the past, but no, there is no confusion on your request. PMDG did sell the back up disc option, and obviously they intend to follow through on it.I also ordered the back-up disc option, and have not received it yet either, but based on the latest post, it is a little bit early to expect it. I have not installed SP1c, and am waiting on the disc to do so to make the un-install/reinstall of the 800/900 package simpler.Regards,Tom Hill

I subscribe to a "Real World" aviation magazine that has a regular column written by an airline pilot, currently flying B-757's . He indicates that another pilot's first flare and touchdown in an airliner type new to him is when the Check Pilot's adrenalin is usually at it's peak. He described one incident where he was the Check pilot, and after a near perfect flight, the new Captain automatically reverted to the landing flare procedure that was proper for his former aircraft type. It did not work at all well for the B-757. The result was an embarressing "bowling ball thump" on touchdown. While no damage resulted, and he got his type rating, the cabin crew did not let their new captain forget his mistake. I doubt that he ever did it again.A fact that surprised me was that the Captain on a given flight may have never even been in the cockpit of that particular type of airplane prior to taking command. The transition training from a different type, at least for this particular (major and international) airline, is all done on a simulator.However the new Captain is required to make his first "type qualification" flight with a Check Pilot in the cockpit with him.Tom Hill

I have X Plane 9, and found it entertaining and worth the purchase price. I used and enjoyed it for several weeks, then cycled back to Flight Simulator. I have since gone back to it once, but now haven't used it for over a year. I got it not long after it came out, so do not have a lot of different airplanes, while I have a surplus of FSX stuff. I will probably use it again periodically when I get bored with FSX.I don't think you can directly compare the two platforms. Flight Simulator is an overall aviation siimulator, while X-Plane 9 (I have not tried X-Plane 10) is really more of an individual ariplane simulator.You have a lot more control over the individual airplane flight charactieristrics in X-Plane 9 ,but there is no real ATC and only a REALLY basic navigation system. The X-Plane 9 version of ATC consists mostly of a recorded chatter that repeats itself over and over, and frequent nonsensical and annoying (to me) commands to change headings to avoid another airplane. It does have a good, realistic weather program,including hail that can crack windshieds etc., and that ws entertaining to use while comparing it to local NWS radar.In other words, if you like to experiment with changes to the airplane behavior, and a few other extras, X-Plane is superior to Flight Simulator. If you like the entertainment value of having ATC, a diverse navigtion system, almost unlimited add-ons and an aviation rather than just an airplane simulator, Flight Simulator is your thing.Another possibilty that is of more immediate concern to me is that MS will change something (Like stopping Real World Weather support) or come out with an update that makes Flight Simulator unstabile or even unusable. When (Not IF) that happens, it is good that there is an alternative to fall back on. From what I have seen and heard, "Microsoft Flight" is not that replacement and won't be in my lifetime.Tom Hill

Johan,I was beginning to worry along the same lines. I know if Real World Weather was not available, a lot of people might rethink the entertainment value of Flight Simulator.However, it's back up and working now, so they didn't kill it. Thank you Microsoft.Tom Hill

Mike;I just found and went through Microsoft's troubleshooting procedure on this topic. From all indications, the servers are down. (Temporarily I hope).Tom Hill

Thanx-You probably saved me from screwing something else up while troubleshooting.-I will see what happens later in the day. I hope they didn't stop supporting FSX!Regards,Tom Hill

I suddenly lost Real World Weather download capability in FSX. Usual "check your internet connection" (which is fine) etc., but wanted to make sure Jeppsen is still up before I start trouble shooting and cause myself more problems..Is it still working normally?Tom Hill

Most turbine aircraft, especially with wing mounted engines, can sustain engine damage at low speeds and reverse thrust. The major problem is that the hot exhaust gas can get sucked back into the intake and exceed the intake design limits. Also, as someone already mentioned, the 737 engine position is very low, and invites both FOD and overtemps.In other words, yes you can probably back it up with the engines (for a while) but it may be very expensive. :<)Tom Hill

Anyone else having trrouble installing the PMDG listed Continental Livery for the 900WL?I cannot get the Livery Manager to recognize that this particular .ptp file is in the folder, although I have verified it is in the right place and the title appears to be correct.I have installed two other 900WL's exactly the same way, one before and one after the problem with this texture, so cannot rationalize that this is a Livery Manager problem.I am running it in the Administrator mode and have the folder set up as reccomended. I redownloaded it three times, and spent a couple of hours trying to resolve this.Not a show stopper, I can survive without that livery, but just curious as to what is happening.Tom Hill

Robin,I have done that on several occasions. Auto-Throttle seems to get frustrated if the wind speeds and directions keep changing (as in turbulence) , and if it won't handle VNAV that is my usual out. I got used to that on some of the earlier airliner models that required you to use manual thrust control and follow the required vertical path indicator during descent. I also often switch to manual power control at the start of the glide slope, because it gives me a quicker reaction time in case of surprises.However (see my post to Ryan above) I have found that just switching VNAV back on when it drops out, and occasionally switching to manual power and/or using the speed brakes to recenter the pointer has pretty much solved the problem I was having in VNAV mode during heavy weather..Thanks for your input.Tom Hill

Michael,I like your dog picture.I essentially agree with everything you said. I am deliberately flying into heavy weather with the 737, and real life pilots would not do this if they could avoid it. I also agree that Real World Weather (as well as ground friction) are not realistic in FSX. However, since this is just a game, though an exceptional one, I use it for entertainment and sometimes do not follow what would be good real world flight practice.As an example, one of my other favorite flight sim actions is to fly tail draggers into crosswind landings, something else that real world pilots would normally try to avoid.(FSX crashes are easily repaired at no cost)That said, thanks for your very valid comments.Tom Hill

Ryan,Just in case anyone else reports something similar:I found out what the problem was. (The usual cockpit error). The turbulence was causimg the flight model to disengage VNAV occasionally during descent, as it is supposed to do if the path deviates out of limits for some preset time. I was not watching this closely enough, and delay in re-engaging VNAV or taking other corrective action was getting me into approach maneuver requirements beyond the capablilty of the flight model.Since I started paying attention to this, the VNAV profile seems to work O.K., even in very heavy weather.

Thanks Ryan;I agree-just about anything is better than the default weather, and I deliberately pick out cold fronts and other turbulence generators to select my destinations.No, I am not entering the winds into the FMC; I have not looked at what is involved to get that data, but the problem is gusts, not navigation. . You can turn off the turbulence and thermal effects, and that stiops most of the airplane motion. However, the Autothrottle and Pitch using VNAV (I'm guessing-I don't fully understand the cause) just cannot respond fast enough to keep the airplane under control in really bad turbulence. I wind up with the speed suddenly jumping 100 knots after I have the flaps set for final approach if turbulence is bad. if using realistic settings, there go the flaps.Appreciate you taking time for the reply-know your schedule is full.Tom HillI am not familiiar with Active Sky, but seem to recall something earlier about another problem that show up with a registered copy of FSUIPC. Although the cost is not a problem, I'll probably just hand fly the descent in that kind of weather rather than add more programs. However, I am ;printing out your answer for future reference just in case I change my mind.

I am still in the early stages of learning the 737NGX, although I have had experience with everything else PMDG has released in the FSX versions.I think using Real World Weather and also loading Winds Aloft adds quite a bit to the FSX experience, so I am deliberately flying the -800 into cold fronts etc. to see how it reacts in really bumpy weather.So far, it hasn't turned out as I had hoped.I have not been unable to make a successful descent and landing into the really bad stuff using Autothrottle and VNAV. I can do it (most of the time ) by turning AutoThrottle off and using LNAV and and level change, with a great deal of throttle motion and speed brake work , but things really get busy.Yes, i do have the "Effects of Turbulence on Aircraft" etc. disabled.Switching over to an an FSX flight plan and using ATC to guide you works too, but that throws away a big part of the "complex" add-ons.Anyone else playing around with the rough weather and getting down successfully?Tom Hill

The information I received (via a ticket) was that the back-up CD's would be burned and sent out after SP1 and SP1b had been incoorporated into them. I realize both of these are now available, but with the SDK and Tutorial 2 still in work also, it may well be a matter of the workload and priorities. In the meantime if you bought the backup you can get re-downloads in a few minutes, as I recently did when I upgraded to a faster computer.I'm not sure that burning your own will work, and would like to hear from someone who has done that, then succesfully used it for a reload. I have tried that on software that I downloaded before, and the passwords, licenses, or whatever system was in use would not allow me to reload from a "burn-your-own". The original licenses were for the downloads only. The CD's had a different one.Tom Hill

I have been happy with FSC9. It is simple to use (Read the manual though-don't try just pounding on the keys until something happens). It exports in PMDG and several other formats, and will display SIDS, STARS, and Transitions before you commit to one, which can give you a good understanding of what you are creating. You can let it do the planning automatically, or do it yourself (as you indicated that you prefer).It also will print out the most useful information for reference during the flight, including the form used in tutorial one for the NGX. It is airplane specific, based on information you input to it one time per aircraft. I am not familiar with Aivia EFB though, so can't give you a comparison.Tom Hill