vr-pilot

I passed my PPL test back in 1995 in Germany. There were some difficult questions, but they all had (strict!) logical results. It is a long time ago (21 years) so that I do not remember anymore if the test was multiple choice with several right answers... Is it possible that also the Spanish test has not only one right answer? My flight instructor's mother tongue was Spanish and I personally have the impression that the Spanish culture, administration and language is very logical. Reading this contradictive or "mean" multiple choice answers is quite astonishing for me...

Exactly that is true but the term "2 minutes standard turn" (for a full turn of 360 degrees = 3 degrees of heading change per second) is more common. So if you fly holding patterns adjusting the leg time only applies to the inbound and outbound legs and not to the turns. Otherwise the turns wouldn't be standard turns. The "good old" turn coordinator (turn rate indicator) instrument was/is fixed to that duration. In the end a standard holding pattern means being 4 minutes on the way before being above the fix again: 1 min. turn, 1 min.outbound leg, 1 min. turn, 1 min. inbound leg... The rule of thumb for calculating the bank angle for a coordinated (with rudder input...) 3 degrees per second standard turn says: speed (TAS actually) devided by ten plus 7. E.g. (230kt/10)+7=30 (degrees bank angle). That is one reason why holdings are never flown faster than 230 kts, because it would result in uncomfortable banks for the passengers with high g-forces. An other reason is that it doesn't make much sense do fly a holding (waiting) pattern at high speeds. Sometimes pilots request longer leg times (2 minutes or 3 minutes) to reduce the amount/frequency of turns in order to increase the passengers' comfort when holding for a longer time period. The shape (ground path) of the 4 minute pattern (radius of turns and length of legs) differs a lot between that of a Cessna 172 and a Boeing 777, especially with high winds, where slow flying A/Cs are much more affected...

Maybe this happens because the holding entry logic switches from "direct entry with flying the first 180° turn" to "direct entry with bypassing the first 180° turn" (direct turn into outbound leg). Probably the relatively high speed of 250 kts IAS instead of 230 kts IAS (entry speed) while descending further 1000ft inbound the holding fix contributes to this conflicting behaviour...

I hope they implement some real nice virtual reality features out of the box for all these VR goggles announced for this year, too. (Actually I hoped this would have been a reality in 2013 with P3D and Oculus Rift already, but it still seems to be a DIYer's pathway.)

Yes, same here. "F18 Interceptor" for the Amiga was my first own sim, too. Then I had "Approach Trainer Airbus 320" (by Thalion Software), then Sublogic's "ATP (Airline Transport Pilot)" followed by MSFS95 (FLTSIM 5.1), and so on... I am 47 by now and I find that flight simulation is still an interesting hobby, although I am off quite frequently for some drone experience in the meantime (Phantom 3). But when the weather is too bad, I am flying my PMDG T7F around the world B)

ISA+10 at FL 370 would mean OAT of -48°C (ISA OAT @ FL370=-58°C). My rule of thumb was that with climbing through FL280 an OAT of -40°C (=-40°F!) would be equal to standard and the higher you get the smaller should be the difference to ISA temps. 10°C of difference at FL370 is IMO an indicator for high altitude hot air updraft (moisture), which is "normally" followed by an intermediate (but probably severe) downdraft (cooler air) when "on top" of the cell (air mass effect). Maybe there are some severe updrafts/downdrafts below the OP's routes going on which cause the A/P to react strange and gets the A/C out of control when trying to fly it manually? Probably turning on FSX's thermal visualization could show the updraft and prove that problems start when entering that zone. BTW: on the OP's screenshots in post #6 there are quite some CUs/CBs during climb on his route and below him. In the end on the last two screenshots the sky is perfectly blue. Maybe just a WX simualtion flaw with an abrupt change of values? Happy new year, Claus B)

Since March 2013 I am using Nvidia's "3D -Vision2" with "Track IR v5" on PMDG's NGX and later on their T7. Inside FSX (MS+SE) it works out of the box. Unfortunately P3D since v2 stopped supporting it and since then lacks (like XP10 also) an official 3D solution. (Just SDKs like e.g. Oculus Rift). So I will keep my old but satisfying FSX-constellation perhaps even until summer/fall 2016 when turnkey 3D-Vision (360° immersion) support may be expected for both P3D and XP10. B)

Sounds like a bad experience. I have no serious explanation except that perhaps someone in the back of your plane hacked the FMCs in flight with a PS4 via WLAN and secretly changed the variables from binary to hexadecimal or something of equal extent. B) But the impact of the underlying error ("But at one point the problems are starting") is so huge that its reason might be easy to find because of its fundamental nature. Do other planes behave normally or is it just the T7? Sorry, but I have no clue. Anyone else?

A belated "Merry Christmas" Kevin, "Head up display (HUD)" made me think about the problematic of "both crew members' heads down" situations in CRM. This way I came across the abbreviation "HDD" standing for usual (but maybe sophisticated) "Head Down Displays": https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Products_and_Systems/Displays/Head_Down_Displays.aspx In times of augmented reality the question is if the whole visual conception shouldn't be "heads up". BTW: wasn't it Boeing planning to be the first in building cockpits without windows and leaving them eventually on the ground? (Lower price, reduced maintenance, better aerodynamics etc.) Maybe this is the point where PC simulation and RW flying will meet at the end of the day. Season's greetings and always "heads up!", Claus B)

Hi everyone, left/right mouse clicks ON the lever handle for arming/disarming SPEEDBRAKEs when in DOWN/ARMED position. 4 Clickspots (right of and on the lever's long slot) for DOWN, ARMED, "50% or half way" and UP positions. Between ARMED and UP position: left click ON the lever handle for increasing (towards UP), right click ON the lever handle for decreasing (towards ARMED). Instead of left/right clicking the lever handle it is also possible to use the mouse wheel for increasing/decreasing the SPEEDBRAKE's position. (One must follow with the mouse pointer (hand symbol changing accordingly) over the lever handle to keep this click/wheel functions working). Maybe some more I did not mention? PMDG did - also here - a great job IMO B) Greetings, Claus

Normally it helps to choose all the PMDG fonts in the FSX-SE "Fonts" folder (standard path: C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\FSX\fonts), right-click them and choose "install". This will install the selected fonts into Windows' fonts folder from where the programs (usually) read the font data. See picture below: Greetings, Claus BTW: I lost the PMDG fonts inside the Windows fonts folder about twice over the last 4 years or so. Re-Installing them via the above mentioned method always helped in my case.

O.K. Thanks a lot! B) I will "soon" check some videos on youtube. Especially the window appearance of GSX, ASN and RCv4 would be "essential" to me. EDIT: I just remember an early "statement" by the P3D team that FSX/ESP semi transparent windows were "suspected" as GPU/CPU critical performance reducers and so were replaced by the robust overlay since P3Dv1.x...

The point of being an actual low priced investment regarding the amount of well spent time is what I am also always claiming to be an important aspect. Or in other words: where else can one get so much for so little... Because I don't have much time for "investigating" right now I would like to just ask one question here regarding the "improvement from 2.5 to 3.0": are the P3Dv3 in-sim-windows still of the opaque 80's style or did LM change them to something more modern like the semitransparent window style of MSFS 2000/2002? (I know, the question incorporates criticism, but seeing the nice window styles that XP10 offers for its huge array of plug ins, P3D windows were really a practical drawback.) An improvement here could make my "should-i-wait-a-bit-before-buying-p3d-v3" hesitation a lot less reasoned.

I had this just yesterday as a passenger during a nightly home bound flight on an "easy jet" A320. Recognizing European cities by their shape of lighting along the route from Spain to Germany via France, Belgium and Netherlands was great! B)

I remember seeing them back in FS2002/FS2004 last time. Maybe I should put my FSX "scenery effects" slider a bit higher...

Thanks gents! Now I got it... B) The two blue signs "RAM DOOR FULL OPEN" above the 737 PACKs panel probably mislead me here in thinking they are fed with variable ram air inlets for pressurization ("input" source). Maybe the DC-8 did it like this? I checked it in PMDG NGX and T7: FL360 CRZ with PACKS off leads to approx. "150 ft/min cabin climb rate" in the T7 and "500 ft/min cabin climb rate" in the NGX. Maybe the T7 cell is more thight than the one of the 737NG? In both planes, if the outflow valve is fully closed and PACKs are off, the cabin will lose its pressurization completely (delta=0 PSI ) because of a "built in leakiness". The engine bleed air actually feeds the packs: no bleed air, no cabin ("re-") pressurization via the packs (that is what I've learned here). Consequently IMO the bleed air system (though a separate system in itself) is a part of the pressurization system: bleed+packs+outflow valve. But maybe that is a matter of taste. Thanks to all for clearing this up. Was interesting to "see all the oxygen masks dropping"... :blink:

Well, you may try to regulate your cabin pressure via the outflow valve only, but I would suggest to stay below FL100, because otherwise you will get a CABIN ALT WARN. If the cabin is not supplied with "fresh outside air" via the PACKs, the cabin climb rate will maintain to be approx.100 to 150 feet per minute. So from T/O to FL360 CRZ you will get the 10,000ft CAB ALT ALERT after approx. 30 minutes, and the "OXYGEN MASK light will illuminate" at 14,000ft CAB ALT after one hour in flight. It is all logical: one cannot regulate the pressure in an unclosed system just by regulating the loss. There also must be some source of gain... BTW: when at CAB ALT 14,000ft turning the PACKs on will give you a CAB descent rate of approx. 1,500ft per minute bringing your PAX back to a safe life environment in about 2 minutes... B)

Maybe it is because PMDG "ADIRU AIR DATA INVALID" failure activation disables all the main air probes (pitot, static, temp, AoA) for BOTH "ADIRU1" (Capt=left) AND "ADIRU2" (F/O=right), but not the SAARU ("ADIRU3"). So Capt. and F/O side ADIRU air data will fail simultainously. (Attitude, heading and GS remain) Nevertheless it is strange that it is not possible to get the SAARU air data + ATT displayed on the PFDs (Capt. or F/O) via the "AIR DATA/ATT"-ALTN switch. Maybe it is different when "ADIRU PARTIAL FAIL" or "ADIRU SINGLE CHANNEL" failures are activated. (There are some more ADIRU/SAARU failure combinations available...) Here is an interesting wiki article about the subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_data_inertial_reference_unit

So that is what I would have called it if I was a manufacturer... B) (replacing "pneumatic" with "pressurization" and "cycle" with "conditioning" though) Now that's understatement! Correct me if I am wrong but: the variable air inlets of conditioning packs are used for (cold) outside air supply and so actually "pump up" the cabin in flight, while the outflow valves just control the overall cabin pressure (delta PSI). So IMO PACKs (or Packs) are the initiators of pressurization actually... (And engine bleed air (about 200°C?) is just taken/added for hot air supply/mix to regulate the temperature)

I think the solution might be simple: Inside the PMDG Operations center you should look if you have enabled the "high resolution virtual cockpit model" under 737 "performance settings". This used to turn on (high res) / off (low res) the "wingviewability". It could be though that it doesn't work for 600/700 (anymore) e.g. because these two expansions are on the lowest (last) options level for the NGX inside the OPC. I don't use the "high resolution virtual cockpit model" less because of performance issues but to avoid the GSX vehicles like 1L air stairs appearing behind the wings... :blink:

Hi Kevin, I thought it would stand for "Pressurization & Air Conditioning Kit" (or similar). I may be wrong though... Regards, Claus

I remember flying jumpseat on a Condor (LH charter) 735 back in 1994 from LGKR (Corfu, Greece) to EDDH (Hamburg, Germany). We were going at FL410 with IAS below 230 kts and high pitch. So I started discussing the theoretical use of Flaps 1. The crew used high altitude tail winds at rel. high OAT. In the end Flaps1 was thought to be o.k. at IAS 210 which would have been worse than using FL390... So this 735 was on the limit...

It connects automatically with certain add ons which depend on it (like e.g. ASN). Because FSX, FSX:SE (and its patches) and P3Dv1v2v3 use different/newer "versions" add on developers have to provide/use the appropriate versions. Under certain conditions conflicting simconnect versions/constellations cause communication problems between the add on and the sim itself...

So this matches, I would say! B)

That's why the variable is actually called "CompanyCostIndex" I guess... B) Changing recently from 40 to 80 IMO reflects a change of mind from "strictly economic (fuel saving)" to "fast (without stressing engines)". That all could be caused by a reduction of world oil prices... In addition IMO "ND_trackUp=0" is the best way to avoid confusion between ND modes "MAP" and "VOR/APP". Those values IMO also make the most sense: DefaultEOHeight=800 DefaultAccelHeight=1000 DefaultReductionAlt=1500 DefaultTransAlt=5000 DerateWashoutAlt=12000 So I would say that these operators use intelligence when setting procedures...