nj1044

Haha really guys? Really? :(

...sorry, to clarify I mean first as in before you purchase a second computer or ipad

Hey bud,I agree with the guys above for the most part but I think an EFB would probably much better suit ur needs. I know of two that are available at the moment. One is from FSwidgets and the other from Aivlasoft. check these out FIRST.Cheers,-Nate

Hey Gabriel,I have a couple thoughts on the subject:First off, I experience the exact same phenomenon usually at least once per flight, so I'm totally with you on your frustration. I've seen 4500fpm ocilations that would absolutely not occur in real life. However, PMDG no doubt coded the VNAV correctly. If such a windshear condition did occur in the real world, the real NG would preform exactly as you saw in the simulator. Your request for them to impose clime/desent limits, although reasonable, is not true to the real aircraft and doesn't actually address the real issue which is the FSX weather engine. Imposing such a limit may inhibit an intentional senario wherein you need that kind of climb preformance. Activesky is alot better that the default at handling wind changes, but still fails epically at times. I personally would like to see someone develop a smoother weather engine. Anyone. In the mean time, some of the guys suggested that the best option is jointly using AS6/ASE for wind (is one smoother?) and a registered FSUIPC for pressure. That might help you somewhat.From a pilot's perspective, when the wind starts to shift (you can usually tell its coming), engage VERT SPEED mode untill the change is over. This trick makes my flights a lot cleaner. You'll still experience turbulence, but that at least is realistic.I hope this helps you out.-Nate

Thanks for the input Matt, I'm very definatley still in learning mode. So its a automated climate control system wherein the pilots dial in a desired temp, not a spectrum where "C" is the coldest possible output and "H" is the hottest. Good to know. Also, my thoery should still work: if the problem is anoverheated cabin after engine start, then starting the engines with a colder ambient temp should fix the problem. However, I dont understand what causes the temp spike in the cabin during/after ignition... So if the answer isn't too complicated, why can zone temp anns be tripped shortly after engine start even with the PACKs on? Any recommended fixes? Highest regards-Nate

Hey Jeff, Try a pre-emptive strike on this quirk: crank the zone temp down all the way to "C" when you start the APU or about T-minus 3-5mins if you run it from the start. Then set them back to AUTO before taxi. Also, leave the recirculate fans on during eng start; just kill the PACKs and you're good to go. Turn off the APU bleed air immeadiately after the engines are stabilized, even before u set the APU switch to off. I don't know why but this seems to help. Finally, open as few doors as is necessary. PMDG modeled the cabin heating up/cooling down more quickly with more doors open(cool, huh?). I hope this helps. Regards,-Nate

Hi Caballero, Trevor is 100% regarding STAR transitions. However, if I read your question correctly it was regarding the necessity of selecting approach transitions when flying a STAR. Approach transitions are used either when you are not using a STAR or when your approach transition is also a waypoint on your STAR. You don't see pilots flying STARs almost to the airport then U-turning and heading all the way back out to intercept an approach transition. The answer lies in ATC proceedures. Many times you will not recieve both STAR and approach clearances from the same ATC controller. The approach controller may assign a different STAR than filed, completely negate a STAR and vector you to an approach transition or other waypoint, or just assign headings all the way to final. In short, use your best judgement within fsx. If a STAR/STAR trans and approach/app trans are "on your way", fly them. Otherwise forgo the app trans and just use the STAR and approach. *****Others may feel free to correct content, I'm eager to learn******* Happy flying-Nathan Jaeb

Hey Marc, I'm glad you asked about this I've experienced this on occasion when selecting new approaches do due weather changes. For clarification, were you selecting a new rwy, approach, STAR, or a combination thereof? Also, these compounding waypoints should be broken up with a "discontinuity" message and not simply strewn together as one long flt plan. Verify that is true and then the solution is exactly as Max said: copy the first waypoint of your new desired STAR or approach to the LSK of the first waypoint of the one you wish to replace. You shouldn't need to delete any data; simply replace The FMC will normally automatically update your route without waypoint manipulation so long as you select both the rwy approach and STAR before you activate the changes. Also, if possible, make any desired changes before you're actually flying the STAR (failing to do so is a great way to screw up the 737's LNAV/VNAV profile.) As far as a cause is concered, I believe it has to do with which STARs are used with which approaches. If you're arriving on a northbound STAR and the wind shifts favoring southbound rwys, there may be some discontinuity between the end of the STAR and start of the approach. Hence, you can go DIRECT to the next waypoint but this may put the aircraft in an awkward position. When this happens in real life, you have ATC to vector you accordingly. But alas, this is a sim. ********please feel free to correct me if anything is incorrect, I love to learn********* Good luck to ya bud,-Nathan Jaeb