MD911

So this means that the 747 will come out for X-Plane eventually or is it still to be decided?

I second the MD-80, but if they do the 767 or the 75, man that would be really awesome. I guess I'm just getting tired a bit from all the automation the new aircrafts have.

What about the QualityWings? They are making progress with their 787 and the systems are supposed to be modeled pretty accurately. I'm not sure if PMDG is going to try and play some games here who is the strongest. After all, they sated that they do not want to compete with other developers by creating the same type (Level-D for example who is doing their 757 for a decade now). I would much rather see them model another regional or perhaps even something smaller like the Beechcraft that they did. Although, I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for the 767 :Praying:

Awesome :shok:! Kyle, can I ask for KLM livery preview whenever time permits?

And there has to be at least 1.5 sec between A/P disconnect button presses.

What about visual fuel jettison? I believe Kristian (sorry, forgot the surname and sorry if got the first name wrong too) in the previous thread came up with it.

Under what pressure are those tires pressurized ?

I think it's great idea but I for one would like to spend a few days with it first before flying it online. If it comes out on Wednesday, we can throw the event on Friday or something?

Awesome, I love the video and I love the plane. Although I have one question. At 2:29 in the video after you entered reference airport and then selected ROUTE, the ICAO identifier of the airport (EHAM in this case) is not copied into scratch pad on CDU like it is on a 737. Is this because you've already entered IRS position at this point or the 777 actually doesn't have that option?

To add to the Kyle's answer to the first question: the 'CABIN READY' message disappears automatically after 1 minute.

Sorry but I can't find any state.cfg files in aircraft's folders.

Yeah. NG has VOR option, 777 has TRK option, otherwise it's the same thing (FMS). Makes kinda sense that it's the way the've made it.

I'm reading manuals for the 777 and when I finished with Autopilot section from SmartCockpit I realized that I haven't seen an indication that would show wich autopilot is the master (737 has a green MA light above left or right F/D, depending on which side is the master). Looking at the AFDS schematics made me realize that the 777 has three independent autopilots, all simultaniously activated by EITHER A/P button. Nice feature, all 3 active all the time but that made me thinking. If there is no indication which side is master, then how does the aircraft know which VOR to follow? If I decided that I wanted to fly a certain radial, how do I do that? 737 is simple, just hit VOR/LOC but 777 manuals only mention localizer and the only button there is on MCP is the LOC, without VOR. I then googled it and found on pprune that 747 is not capable of tracking VOR radials, only localizer. Is my assumption right that this thing is the same with 777?

Delaying the product for another 3 months in total Just imagine that everyone would have to deal with not just development but also writing. But then again, I don't know what's worse, having 777 sooner with them torturing us or knowing briefly what's going on and wait for the product longer. If I was them I certainly wouldn't be too much into writing though.

Thanks Kevin for a detailed answer. Yeah JS41 has thought me that, I was just too "spoiled" by the 737 I guess <_<

Window00 is VC panel IIRC, but the 2D view in FSX is still there although 2D cockpit is not modeled.

Is there a way in FSX to delete the 2D cockpit from just one plane? I searched the aircraft.cfg of JS41 but it's all about VC or cabin or outside. So I'm guissing that is FSX coded thing but is there a way to delete 2D cockpit from JetStream since it doesn't have one and live 2D for other aircrafts as they are?

Thanks for answers guys. Could somebody tell me if in general JS41 is more sensitive to yoke input than other aircrafts or not?

Hi guys. It's been a while since I've flown JS41 after spending so much in NGX. However, I've found that sensitivity of my yoke is quite horrible. I followed suggestion froms Tabs for NGX that I should leave sensitivity at about one third for NGX and it works perfectly. I can really feel the plane but when I came back to JS41 I notced that the elevators are quite a problem. Movement of just a little bit would result in a couple of hundreds of ft/min change. I was wondering, what is the right setting for flight controls sensitivity in FS and FSUIPC to get the most acurate feeling how the real bird behaves?

At what speed were you going? If your copilot called positive rate at 400' AGL it might be that you were going quite fast at that point. To retract landing gear max IAS is 235 and if you happened to be above that speed it might cause your landing gear to jam.

Check that it has nothing to do with the null zones in the FS or FSUIPC. About the last one, make sure you delete everything from it when flying NGX. I configured Aerosoft's Airbus through FSUIPC and although I clicked "make for this aircraft specific" I still had some problems with throttles in NGX. After deleting that, everything went back to normal.

One of the nastiest arrivals I've flown is at my base airport LJLJ, the LUMUS 3L followed by transition to ILS 30 approach. In real life, ATC would normaly vector the aircrafts from that point but when I fly offline, executing this approach requires some planning in advance. What I've learned from here is that whenever FMC tells you NO DES PATH AFTER XY, you better check the charts and assess how bad it is, in other words how steep the arrival/transition/approach is. According to that you then reduce the speed at the point where that steep segment starts, to something like 210 or maybe even 190 kts as I usually do on LUMUS 3L. The FMC will calculate the path so you can decelerate normally and when you reach that first point you will be much slower than on normal descends. This is a perfect time to drop out some drag. Flaps to 5, sometimes even 15, gear down (provide huge amount of drag) and if necessary, deploy speed brakes as well (but don't do it with flaps 15 or greater). In case of LUMUS 3L that's the only way I could have achieved the required descend path that is published on the chart. Pretty much the same is BERTA 2L at the same airport. I guess those Alps are good to look at and climb on but I guess planes don't like it that much .

It probably has to do with balanced field takeoff calculation PMDG uses that has been mentioned before in the forum. This basicaly means that V1 is calculated so that TODR and ASDR are the same for a given rwy lenght and aircraft load and configuration. The lowest value is usually applied so that in case engine fails at V1 you have enough distance to stop the aircraft OR to continue with takeoff and bring the aircraft to 50 ft above the runway at its end with one engine inop. In some cases TODR will be higher in others ASDR will be higher. If you've got plenty of runway left it just means that V1 for that specific runway, flap and thrust config as well as aircraft load was computetd based on TODR.

I chose to depart from Innsbruck but noticed that visibility is only 400 meters. Runway 26 goes off the list immediately because of the IMC and the initial departure procedure for runway 8 states that minimum of 4.8% climb gradient is required. I started wondering, is NG (particularly interested in -800) allowed to depart in such conditions? It's obvious that I can't land here in case of an engine failure during take off and I'd have to divert to Munich or Salzburg, but can I get out of the mountains with one engine in the first place in IMC? I searched through manuals but couldn't find any information on ROC for single engine take-off operations. I understand that PMDG probably couldn't publish that information but is there any other way to calculate if you can meet minimum climb gradient requirements for certain weights?

Hey guys you really got me interested in this. I mainly fly in Europe but I would love to try some routes in north America, too. It's just that I have default scenery and I find it a bit dull I guess. I did some research and I really like ORBX terrain but as I noticed it covers only the NW part of USA. I also heard that UTX is good, some also use GTX in combination with SceneryTech landclass. And when my terrain gets better I would be interested in some good airport sceneries as well. So, what do you suggest? My config: Win 7 64-bit Intel i5 2500K 3,3GHz 8 GB RAM GeForce GTX460 1GB