raddragon

Fantastic comments Ryan and well summarised. Some general observations which may assist with people understanding the incident: 1. The differing design philosophy between Boeing and Airbus. Many people have overlooked the fact that the Asiana PIC had just transitioned off the A320 and had 33 hours on the B777. FBW has been a factor in many incidents globally and as identified, there was an over reliance on automated systems in the Asiana accident. 2. Korean culture (and military rank) has been a component in many incidents/accidents (though has greatly improved in recent years). Three out of the four pilots were ex Air Force - the PF had no military background. The PF was 'Ab Initio' trained by the Company. 3. The PF was an experienced pilot and ex instructor on the A320, though he hadn't flown into SFO for almost 10 years. Everyone can get rusty, but like you state above, the complete lack of understanding of the systems, poor basic airmanship and poor CRM are the true causal factors of the incident.

Send me a PM with contact details and we'll go from there. In terms of testing for me, I'm planning an acceptance flight at Everett (hopefully my VA is expecting a 77W), then positioning to OMDB, then a trip from OMDB to YBBN/NZAA. I've already entered everything into simbrief. AIRAC/ASN/FS Realtime is all updated in preparation.

Oh heck yes. It's amazing the difference in perspectives too. Some of the RW pilots on here have some great knowledge to share, but it's interesting to see a slightly different perspective. There have been many instances where there has been some misinformation provided in topics (usually conjecture about why something is done this way etc). Being aviation, I cant exactly correct them (due to NDA).

Smart move! I don't even bother really asking questions anymore, too many trolls. A couple in particular are on my blocklist and to be honest, the forum posts are a lot nicer to read without their input. Making a general statement though, it would be nice if everyone was a little more thoughtful when it comes to discussions. Not everyone has the time to visit daily/weekly, not everyone is hugely knowledgeable on the T7/aviation and info sharing should be the goal. However stupid a question sounds, put yourself in the shoes of the person asking, it could be the difference between someone giving up or someone developing a passion for an industry we all love. I’ve spent 5+ years in aviation with some experience in the technical operations field, heck even I’m still learning! Wes, I think we should do a vatsim flight when the 77W is released?

Hey Wes - latest info here - http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/news/10181087/Ohakea-upgrade-complete. You won't see a Dreamliner into NZHN and the 763 can only go in there very light!

Hi Wes, it is definitely an available alternate and it has had Aero Arg and LAN in there before. They have had a couple of 77W's there before (including an Air NZ one).

Wes, don't forget Ohakea. It took a 77W last year when the Qantas 738 closed NZAA with locked brakes. NZCH is the only alternative in NZ for the A388.

Ok, thanks for the info. Back to the drawing board.

I have just spent the last couple of hours playing around. Looks as though it may have something to do with the RNP ARC's. I replicated the crashes on the NZAA Yankee approaches, but couldn't replicate the crash on the RNP X-Ray approaches. The difference seems to be the T7 adds a waypoint (cannot remember the name) to ensure the X-Ray approaches hold the ARC 5.6 DME from the AA VOR. The Yankee approaches however, do not insert this "additional waypoint" and CTD while attempting to fly the ARC. I am not an expert, but is the addition of such a waypoint normal T7 behaviour to be able to fly and ARC?

I have had a CTD 4 times while attempting to complete the RNP approached into NZAA. Are there any know issues with RNP approaches with the t7?

Hi David this is correct, RNP-AR only supports RF and TF legs, standard RNP use all types of legs.

This incident occurred at Melbourne, not Sydney. It was an error in the performance calculations. Although the crew did punch in the incorrect weight data, the fact is the PF was alternating between operating the 330 and 340; this was identified in the ATSB report and played a major factor as to why a 100 ton discrepancy wasn't picked up. The Capt was the only pilot on the flight deck who had not operated on both the A330 and A340 in the preceding 90 days. Fatigue played a role also, the Capt of EK407 had flown 99 hours of the 100 per month allowed by Emirates.

Sorry to stray a little into competitors products but... I can confirm real world, Auckland Airport (NZAA) has started using RNP-AR approaches and so has Queenstown Airport (NZQN). I can also confirm 100% that in the latest Navigraph data (specifically the Aerosoft Airbus X) has the NZAA 05R and 23L RNP-AR Yankee and X-Ray approaches listed in the FMS. As the Aerosoft Airbus X cannot fly RF Legs, it cannot hold the turns, but they are listed and the waypoints correct. I have tested this several times in the Aerosoft Airbus and iFly 738 - the iFly was the closest at holding the approaches. I have been told the Blackbox Airbus does not support RF legs either but have not tested this. Also, I believe RNP approaches do not utilise RF Legs, but RNP-AR approaches utilise RF Legs.

Completely agree. The only plan I fly in 2d panels is the PMDG 744 (the VC is not great - reflective of the era though).

Agreed. I have just found the ignore member function - you can hide messages from users with absolutely nothing useful to say.

Now it's clear, you are a "Mr Know It All" - I've got better things to do. Some people can't be helped. I have not once made any comment that PMDG are taking too long to release it. I suggest you both read over all the comments again including my original post and the post it was based on.

Yes that sucks. I cannot get any medical after an eye surgery at birth (and an infection). I have monocular vision (but have 20/20 with glasses). I was lucky and still have great peripheral and depth vision, though not enough for a medical.

Wow, you read far too much into my statements. Just chill out guys, in my original post I was simply stating a point of view which mirrored what I took from another posters comments. 1. I don't have a lot of free time to continually check a forum - I keep an eye on things primarily by checking Simflight.com once a week to get the high-level updates on things. 2. By teasing I wasn't referring to screenshots at all, I was referring to the "jokes" (as they have so eloquently been called) told at various public events/forum posts around the release of the T7. This creates unnecessary hype and frustration for many - personally don't like these business practices. Based on the high-level information I receive (point above) this is my personal opinion on how it looks to me. 3. Supply and demand was made in a very general context, referring to flight sim add-ons in general. Your point is correct, there is demand for a high-quality T7, but there is no supply at present. I made a choice for my next flight sim add-on based on supply. 4. And finally (and you had me laughing in my chair), back to my generalist statement regarding supply and demand (point 3 above). I will admit I have no idea the development time of the Q400 (point 1 above). One last point (and I wont mention the name as per Rob R's rules), I will admit the 777 I purchased is definitely sub-standard, but I also figured out after flying it for a while, it makes for very boring flights - though I'm sure PMDG will add an advanced level of simulation like what they did for the NGX. I guess that may change at a later date, but personally I found the T7 a bit of a boring aeroplane. Lesson learned, don't bother posting a point of view at all.

Anyway, as I said before, its their business, their strategies - I don't have to like them. They are extremely busy and probably don't care either way. On one last note, I think everyone agrees AirdailyX is not exactly accurate in their estimate.

Completely accept what you are saying here, but I find it very hard to believe given their experience at this that they cannot give a very general release date e.g. Fall 2013 for example. If it came earlier that a general date people are happy. I'm waiting for some wise crack now from PMDG stating "it's ready when its ready" or "we'll release it in the year 2020" or similar (my point exactly). A quick update every fortnight or month with a screen or similar if available wouldn't hurt - this would keep their stakeholders engaged and less likely to complain about the lack of comms. Anyway, how they run their business is exactly that, their business; just making an observation as a customer. I'm not attacking PMDG, just offering some feedback.

I'm pretty much in the same space - just can't be bothered anymore. If PMDG want to tease their customers for months and months, that's their decision, I just wont buy their product. It's all supply and demand, if it is available or a firm date is made available then I'll make a purchasing decision based on this, if not I'll spend my money on something else. I like PMDG products, their service and own several of their planes, but I don't like companies playing silly games with their customers. I got the Majestic Q400, Capt Sim 777 and Airbus X Extended and I'm happy. There's more to life than fight simulator (though I really enjoy their products!).

I'm sure the release is a while away yet. I am interested however in the update Robert mentioned in his earlier 777 post on 25 March. He stated "I am on the road with a very aggressive schedule until the middle of NEXT week- but we will have a more formal update for you at that time... Lots of goodies to share!" His comment has surely peaked my interest.

is the B747 V2 secret project number 2?

I did think it was a 787 - it was hinted recently is there is similarities between the code of the NGX, the B777 in development and the Secret Project Number 2 - I believe this was a specific component of the NGX - but probably a Boeing of some form - I wish I could find the post link. My thoughts are the 787 or 747-8 - but if Ryan said it isnt the 787 then it isnt I guess.

Look, you take what you get, PMDG are making a VC only model, you dont like it, then dont buy it.I used to be a 2d driver, then after the NGX was released I became a VC only driver - I'm loving it. Just take the plunge, you'll have to convert like I did at some stage. Who would want to fly in 2d anyway in a PMDG qualty 777?