DEHowie

Members
  • Content count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

68 Good

About DEHowie

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.vortexaviationphotography.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cairns

Recent Profile Visitors

448 profile views
  1. I was very surprised how good the Lear 25 is from Xtreme Prototypes. That kind of surprised like with the AOA Connie where you go wow this this is completely awesome. Very accurate systems and the flight model feels right with astonishing performance. My only flight in the early Lear waa a blur of altimeters and brain lag. Easily the best business jet on the market from a systems and handling and the visual model is gorgeous. Excellent support to.
  2. An excellent article on a truly great addon. The B-377 was fabulous as well and between these two if your a hard core piston head you will be in heaven. There is an excellent addon called weatherships for trans-atlantic and pacific crossings for long range radio navigation. Well done AOA!!
  3. Because i dont need to. All the Bieings run the same FMC which is based on the system developed for the 737-300 way back when. FMC's have advanced far beyond that point except for Boeings. The list of missing features compared to the MD-11 FMC system is quite massive. It may hurt your feelings that the Boeing system even in the 787 is the same basic system with none of the advanced planning features of Airbus or MD. A perfect example is conducting a missed approach to an alternate. You will NEVER be cleared direct EVER. Yet all Boeings only give you the ability to get a fuel figure for that. With RTE 2 being used for your second approach you dont have acess to a final fuel figure oherhead your destination except via direct tracking with no allowance for an aporoach and landing. I could go on with the number of features missing even from the current Boeing FMC on the 787. In short it hasnt changed, its been the same for over 30 years and other that its great ability to show visual information which is great its missing numerous important functions covered since the late 80's by all of its competitors. Having flown the 717 which has the same FMC/Autoflight system as the MD-11, the Airbus A320/330 and a Pegasus FMC as per 767/757 I know them all. The Boeingbthing is boring per se as that simmers realy need to see "why" real pilots prefer the other two in operational use. In fact if in the reao world we could have MD's FMC combined with Boeings displays and an Airbus flightdeck you woukd literally have the ultimate aircraft. In short the Boeing thing IS boring in simming because yes they are all functionally the same and simming gives the unique chance to view multiple aircraft easily something many professionals never get to do. Hence why have another same same Boeing when the chance for seeing the great MD system exists? Or just go buy the TFDI 717 and see the best system going...
  4. Pmdg's decision(apparantly) to abandon the MD-11 is a boon for Xplane. Many simmers are Bored of reiterations of Boeings ancient FMC system and setup. Basically every Boeing is the same. Works for airlines but not for people after interesting aircraft. The success of the Rotate MD-80, the TFD 717 and the new Aerosoft CRJ is showing simmers are looking for new challenges and the one size fits all FMC and autoflight system of Boeing isnt that. With an excellent MD-80 in xplane and soon the much loved MD-11 lots of simmers will make the jump to xplane to get a modern take on the Mad Dog an aircraft with a flight management well ahead of its time and today still far more advanced than any of the B or A aeroplanes. The MD-11 is a pure powerhouse and its high approach speeds, great FMC/Autoflight system and advanced setup is something people tired of the Boeing way will turn to gladly. Far more capable in the planning and execution of flights being very similar to the Airbus system in most respects but with extra capability. Seeing Pmdg are interested in doing the Jetstream than an MD-11 and there is already a rather incredible Dash 8 out the worlds best turbprop dominating P3D the owners of xplane will be thanking them for not reissuing the MD-11. In turn encouraging a huge number of users to jump to xplane to get their Mad Dog fix.
  5. The biggest issue with the Boeing system is the weight on wheels scenario. In every normal scenario you will be initiating the go around by pushing the TOGA button a single time to initiate the soft go around. Then all of a sudden after years of training in soft go arounds "if" the wheels have touched it will not engage. Firstly on a widebody it is very possible particularly in turbulence to have wheel contact without the crew knowing it. So having already decided on a go around a click of the TOGA button to initiate the soft go around and "if" the wheels have touched nothing will happen. It is a MASSIVE flaw in an otherwide excellent go around system. If you have ever flown an aeroplane for 12 hours on a back of the clock you will know how dependent you are on automation for the clear purpose of safety. Your brain operates FAR more slowly and your reactions and startle factor are multiplied significantly. You make errors and a system which 99.9% of the time works perfectly in the single time you need it the most ie fatigued, early morning arrival, poor weather will let you down because of the weight on wheels disabling of go around. Almost all go arounds after long flights will be soft ones because the last thing you need after a 14 hour duty is 4000'/minute into a 2000' level off. To top it off there is no warning it is disabled!!!!! The soft go around has just been incorperated by Airbus into its FMGC suite as its a great feature but to have it disabled with no warning and relying upon the crew after huge duties to "sense" if a large aircraft has touched which can easily be missed or not sensed is and was a disaster waiting to happen.
  6. Crj is a much more basic aircraft to fly without autothrust. 717 gives a great look at McDonnell Douglas at its best as the 717 used the MD-11 Autoflight system. Both have a place in anyone who interested in the different way manufacturers work. 717 is about as advanced as you can get being light years ahead of 737 and several features better than Airbus. MD did a great job with the Mad Puppy. Get both if not and you prefer manual flight go Crj if you dont get the 717.
  7. OPs center update was released but still cant install...
  8. For payware the new KLAX v2 and KSLC...free KBOS, KPHX anything Misterx. Justsim stuff is good to. Id you simply google xplane plus the icao code you should see plenty there is tons of freeware in xp.
  9. Its a pretty nice package...well done JF
  10. Up on the deck at Fairbanks! Nice... Wasnt quite warm enough when we where there for short sleaves..lol..
  11. Great stuff Alex very glad your doing this one! One more nose are bird to do..lol...i have better close ups to...
  12. Yep just copy effects. As Midnight said you need the new gauge from Doug Dawson to get all the effects active. Love it..
  13. Update worked here wonderful aircraft easily as good as any payware stuff out there. Superb.
  14. Cracking work by AS on what in my first few flights is very nice indeed. Well done AS..
  15. You will quite clearly find that companies like Qantas are continualkybasked by Boeing about there aircraft and what Qantas do to fix and operate them. Jetstar are continually working with Airbus educating them on how "their" aircrsft works(or doesnt) in the real world so they can continue to improve the product. It terms of throwing yourself in front of Pmdg's holy altar saying someone who has a legitimate question and concern is wrong because the "developer knows better or more" is simply that. Accept that the question or criticism is valid rather than dismissing it would be a start. Pmdg do some wonderful products but its seems people criticizing (constructively) are frowned upon and heavily critiqued even when its clear they are correct. The end goal is an improvement in already great products not scoring points for or against.