Kattz

Hello, Joona, If I could fly from, say, the new Nellis AFB LC that DCS is supposedly adding to the Georgian airspace and back, then, yes, that would be OK. But I couldn't reach cruising altitude in the BUFF in the current landmass. Caveat - I'm not thinking of carpet-bombing a former Soviet republic, just thinking of what the game would be required to support for realism distance-wise. It could be purely fictional airspace. BTW, I have splashed a few airliners with the F-15 in FSX....

Well, gents (and ladies as well), we know PMDG does love accurate systems modeling. And for the most part, their work has been turbofans. Most part because of the upcoming classic piston airliner rumored to be forthcoming. And, they seem to like Boeing... mostly. And they like big aircraft - Bigger, the better. So, Boeing turbofan, lots of systems, classic LARGE aircraft - Bring on the Boeing B-52H by PMDG. "When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight." (Old SAC adage) Now, I'd fly that! Kattz out...

Definitely Boeing, although at times I have to run the kid off when the voices from the dark abyss start to mock my run on the Canarsie 13L approach in bad wx...

No, sorry, I have not. I've done it on real aircraft, but nothing in FSX or P3D.

It's called "dry motoring". You can open bleed air from the APU or run the starter for that engine (watch allowable number of starter operations within a set timeframe and length of each attempt) and watch EGT, FTIT, or TOT as applicable until the temp is within acceptable parameters. Every aircraft and engine type will have a slightly different procedure, but this described here is generally accurate. Best, Kev

I have to say that I strongly agree with the mods here and strongly disagree with the OP in the firmest way possible without saying something rude or harsh. You might as well say that watching a YouTube video of NGX procedures promotes piracy because someone could actually glean some information from it. Ludicrous, bordering on paranoia.

OK, I think you and I agree on that.

OK, well, you may be aware of something I'm not. Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong. However, were I on board said aircraft, I'd strap on a parachute, pop a door near the tail, and take my chances being the next D.B Cooper. I've got over 200 jumps, so IMHO I think I'd be safer...

Here's my opinion - note that it represents opinion and not facts, but: I have zero experience with a CAT III Autoland outside of the home PC. However, having over a thousand flights as a passenger under my belt (frankly, I'd guess that over 50% of us here are just commercial jet passengers, not pilots), I've felt the assymetrical loads on the aircraft during both manual and autobraking deceleration. God granted me a sensitive gluteus maximus, I guess. And I've been on aircraft that during perfect flying weather and without any real winds that have blown all four main tires on landing. (Northwest Airlines 737, near Minot AFB, ND, 1992) I've been on a Delta DC-9(?) that dragged the left wingtip on the ground during a CAT III autoland (Delta, KATL, 1993) The skill of the yoke actuator in the cockpit saved my family jewels, and it is these types of occurences that I think of when I say to the OP, "Hmmm... Nope, I can't feature you landing the aircraft safely". Assymetrical loads on landing are rough and it takes a practiced hand to recover. I'm assuming you were thinking that during the autobraking the aircraft tends to remain arrow-straight down the centerline of the runway? Reminds me of a line out of The Matrix - Morpheus to Neo: "So you think that's air you're breathing? (insert pregnant pause) Hmph." Rick, given the nature of some replies, I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks!

This is THE spot-on response in my opinion. As a USAF crew chief, I once had to taxi a jet out of a HAS due to a fuel fire in the rear of the HAS. I got in serious trouble for it, but I saved a multimillion dollar aircraft from becoming a heap of slag. With live weapons on board as well... Wasn't nothing to it. I've rotated an F-16D on takeoff - as a non-pilot. Flown a departure as well, same circumstances. Easy. Not an expert, mind you, but it was as easy as one could imagine if one had some time in DCS... The g-forces I was imposing on the airframe and myself were unsettling. First time I pulled back on the F-4C stick I about filled my drawers, and not in a good way... I've flown approaches in an F-16B and DG - as a non-pilot. Again, not an expert, and I would've had a high probability of requiring to eject if I actually allowed the aircraft to touch the runway due to my lack of skills - but I could do it. I've done bombing runs at the range as a non-pilot. Wasn't that hard. I've aviated in the F-111, F-4C, F-4E, and all USAF variants of the family truckster version of the F-16. I'm not a fighter pilot. I'm a crew chief. But in response to the OP, I could FLY it. I would have been a statistic if I'd have tried to land the aircraft, as well as taking out others in the vicinity. And, the trusting hand of an IP was always hovering near the other stick if I made a mess of things. Let me add that I know where everything is in those cockpits and how all of the systems work, and was professionally trained. If I'd have tried the same thing using BMS Falcon, I would have been declared certifiable. In answer to your question: With the right research and a illustrated checklist in front of you, you could prep the aircraft for flight. You might miss something important, but chances are you'd do OK. Taxi? Maybe. You'd look like my grandmother trying to drive Formula 1, but maybe you could do it. Takeoff? I'd put your chances at less than 50/50, because you'd scare the bejeezus out of yourself as the nosegear cleared the runway. This assumes you could keep it going down the runway straight and level prior to rotating. That, well, I give you a 10% chance of that. IF - big IF - you got it started, taxied to the runway, got it down the runway and airborne, flaps up, gear up, yes, you could actually fly it as long as you kept within bank angles, g-loads, VNE, VMAX, VMIN, and assorted other parameters. Landing? Even CAT III ILS autoland, I give you a 95% chance of becoming a smokin' hole in the ground. I leaned to fly and did my first solo in a Traumahawk. Even that little bird had its own quirks that only flying with an IP could prepare me for. Theoretically, yes, you could fly it. The chances of your or the aircraft's survival is extremely low.

Hi, Rob, I'm not endorsing the crime. It's just that it's so widespread that one almost has to look for the silver lining. I have to admit that it's pretty ballsy for someone with a pirated copy to ask for support. After the initial post I looked up PMDG 777 and ngx on the internet, I was frankly blown away by the number of hits I got for pirated software. I really don't pay attention to that kind of stuff because I'm never looking for it. I checked out some of the sites and I did notice something interesting. On many sites I read "please use this as a demo and if you like it, then support the developer and buy it". Could be CYA language or intentionally meant. Don't know. It is still illegal. I'm sure it's probably hard to be a developer and see your work stolen and distributed.

Agreed, and I disagree with Rob, although usually I don't. There's another way to look at this - if you're stupid enough to fly a world-class add-on like the T7 and broadcast your piracy on the internet, then you're an idiot for all the world to see and deserve anything you might receive. However: If you download a pirated copy to just check it out, and then either hate it and remove it or remove it and buy the full working version, then I think the pirated software, though illegal, has done a good thing and prevented an unhappy customer or made a sale.

Awesome job. Being a former aircraft mechanic, I can say that the weathering and lube trails from the various parts of the control surfaces, wings, empennage, etc. are spot on. Rarely have I seen something this good by anyone. Don't forget the streaming from the engine drains. Everyone forgets this small but necessary part. Otherwise, this is a sierra hotel piece of work. Best, Kev

I haven't upgraded yet, but from all the complaints I've skimmed over here on AVSIM, seems like 2.3 is a real FPS killer. Any improvement with 2.2?

You near Ohio in that pic? We get black rain...

TSA - based on my many experiences, is an acronym for "Thousands Standing Around".

+1000.

Hmm... You can't get a decent lunch that you can sit down and enjoy (other than fast food) for under $12 in most areas of the US. That's pretty inexpensive for this piece of software. If it gave a person a 10% increase in performance or killed OOM's for those who have them (never had one), would certainly be worth the $. Firehawk44 and Tom Allensworth - calling you, brothers. I only have P3D now (and DCS, woohoo!) but I'll "gift" you an application of this if you'll test it for AVSIM and report official findings. I'm pretty sure that testing FSX on my Devil's Canyon at 4.9GHz might give the app an unfair advantage. I've never had any OOM's on a fully loaded up FSX computer anyway. PM me if you guys are interested. Yep, I'm serious.

See here...

I've got P3D. Meh. I got so tired of flying a bus and missing Falcon BMS and LOMAC that I bought the DCS A-10C. Can you say 140+ FPS without stutter, terrain and cloud shadows (not as good as P3D), dynamic wx, etc. Study-quality sim, flight dynamics feel better than either FSX or P3D. And there's nothing like the feeling of schwacking enemy armor with an AGM-65D from 5 miles out in bad wx. I had to go back and study TACAN, radio navigation, and stick - rudder - ball flying. Loving it. Low, slow in the weeds. The greatest challenge is to throw out some AAA threats and some armor, and use terrain-masking to pop up, make the shot, and disappear behind the ridge leaving the SAMs wondering what the heck just happened - until the Maverick hits. Granted, the AOR is small and for long trips you need to hang two or three bags on the jet or hit the tanker. Tanker is pretty darn cool. I'd like to see the Longbow or Hind D as a new project. Kattz out.

It just flies... so... smooooooth...

Gamers. OC-ers... People like us who tend to want more from their equipment. This chipset and CPU is not targeted towards the Office and Outlook community.

The whitepapers from Intel indicate that the new architecture (which is a development purely to cater to our crowd) will be like the jump from the Core2 Duo to Sandy Bridge and the i7. Roughly a 30-40% gain over the 4790K/Z97 right from the start. So yes, something worth writing home about...

Hello, I know you're in a hurry... or can you wait? Haswell-e and Rosewill/X99 is getting ready to release in September. This is going to mean a few things! 1. Haswell-e/Rosewill will use DDR4 memory, and there will be a rush of gamers and OC enthusiasts that will rush to buy this board. This means that there will probably be a drop in DDR3-based enthusiast's boards using previous chipsets. I was going to wait and go this route, but I lost two PCIe lanes on my Maximus IV Extreme and bought the Maximus VI Extreme at a really reasonable price. It is a Z87-based board. If 3-way or 4-way SLI isn't an interest, then you will be able to pick up the Maximus VII Hero Z97-based board like the poster above has. Very solid, but since I do extreme OC'ing as well and want 4-way SLI, I went with the board I bought. While I swear by ASUS ROG boards, others swear at them... Either way, you might want to wait - 2 months? 2. There is going to be a small drop in higher-speed DDR3 DIMMS with the new chipset release as well. 3. With the release of the 5XXX series CPU's, 4790K's may take a further drop in price. Right now $269 in the US, but where I purchase them is thinking $199 might be in the future very soon. 4. Finally, SSD's are really coming down in price. If you can afford to do it, even at a later date, please consider your OS on a 240-512Gb SSG, FSX on its own SSD, and a 7200 rpm mechanical drive for your user files and other programs. While others might argue it, I stand by my opinion that the faster you can push data through the CPU, the better FSX will perform. It's true that FSX was designed to run on systems we would scoff at now, but then again, for pushing the NGX or T7, Active Sky, REX TD, and add-on airports/scenery/FTX, it really isn't FSX as it was designed... I lost my mobo and had to build a new system early, otherwise, I'd be waiting. Best, Kevin

Thanks, Ctec1, I didn't have any luck with it, but I'm not an experienced user. It took me a month to get my radios working in the NGX with it. Thank you for answering the OP's question!