ALF1

If your goal is to have variable reverse thrust I am afraid you will be disappointed as this on/off only from buttons assigned is an FSX limitation. Therefore you will only have full reverse thrust but I still don't know what the N1 percentage is. Whatever this will be an FSX limitation and not PMDG NGX. EDITED TO ADD: Just tried on off reverse thrust using the reversers on the Go Flight throttle quadrant and calibrated as buttons with their software. max reverse thrust was 63.5% N1 on both engines and took a good while to get it. I think that you will have more unrealistic behavior from the autobrakes setting. If you set it at three or max you will really stop the plane in a hurry.

What do you mean VNAV "switches off" when you are at 400 ft ? You engage the roll mode and pitch mode on the ground for flight director commands only on takeoff and up to a certain altitude above 400 feet. VNAV will only be armed for takeoff and early climb until reaching acceleration altitude, then you will see the pitch FMA switch from white armed to green active. Still, as long as you do not engage the autopilot this will be for flight director commands only. Your autopilot will do what your flight director commands it to do depending on the modes that you have selected. The flight directors will provide the clues for hand flying also as long as they are engaged. If you are not doing your CDU preflight correctly and have skipped on the takeoff trim settings, N! climb power, or other stuff then your autopilot will not engage properly as it will find the aircraft out of trim.

I think it is either full reverse thrust or nothing at all. In my GoFlight TQ-6 throttle quadrant I pull on the reverse levers which act really as buttons for on off reverse thrust. I haven't looked at the percent N1 on reverse though I will come back with that.

I did, but I was dumb enough not to restart FSX so that the disablements would take place. Even if you unplug the controller and continue to run FSX the fault remains until you restart FSX or the computer cannot remember which. There is a simple test to do this though. Try to calibrate the pedals from within FSX. I noticed that the right pedal brake was already at 50% or right at the middle of the calibration box with the pedal fully released. The airplane veered right after applying power. So that is the bad potentiometer.

Problem found in Saitek rudder pedals hardware. The right potentiometer is bad I disabled the control axis and I can steer and rudder but no brakes with the pedals. Have to assign another key for the brakes bummer. I will fix this.

Probably wrong forum but I certainly hope someone can help me. My problem is exactly what the title reads. It happens on any airplane I load. I have tried calibrating all controllers and nothing. I deleted the FSUIPC modules from the FSX modules folder and nothing. I have tried running FSX disconnecting all controllers from their USB ports and NOTHING !! What is going on ? On startup any airplane shows differential brakes on the lower left corner of the screen.

Level Change will arm autothrust after pulling back power to idle, and will adjust pitch for MCP Speed. You can add power to your discretion but you will therefore lower your rate of descent. Reading from what you have stated no it should not have worked that way. Did you verify MCP SPD in you pitch Flight Mode Annunciator ?

The biggest problem for me is unequal thrust. in this sim that will get you drifting quickly. make sure you set N1 to exactly the same value on both engines while the long taxi.

This approach and landing is an RNP style conducted visually with ground reference maneuvers. A pilot flying a heavy jet at 135 LIAS VREF cannot just invent the entry procedure. It has to be flown precisely. For example, the 180 degree turn has to be coordinated to lose 2,000 feet from 11,000 to 9,000 and then you have to track left riverside next to the mountains and line up with the temple straight ahead. Necessary for the right turn onto the hill before the left turn to extremely short final. This procedure already carried out at Vref. Many pilots in the world could qualify if trained, but the training is necessary for the procedure. Same with Toncontin.

pm me your email please.

Nick, download Process Explorer .exe from the web (it is free), get you sim going as you normally would near the OOM failure and run the program. It will tell you where the consumption is. You have to think that an OOM is just an overflow and it is not just one thing. The airplane consumes about 700,000K of the available 4GB for FSX. Something else (a combination of things) is eating the other 3,300,000K available. The natural reaction to an OOM is to blame the latest addon as that was the one to cause the overflow. But I am not sure if your OOM is strictly from FSX or as a whole in the computer. Sometimes intruders like to get a bunch of things going automatically in your computer which could also be the problem. You have to see if the FSX application in Process Explorer is consuming anywhere near 4,000,000K.

Joe Diamond and Kyle, I am very glad you expanded on this topic. There is still plenty out there that Pro's like you know that we don't. FASCINATING ! I had never come across any of this in all these years, the peculiarities of the system. Here is a good link to all of it. http://www.gofir.com/aviation_accident_prevention_program/runway_safety_program/html/surface_movement_guidance_system.htm

Thanks for the replies guys. All pretty much in line with what I had thought.

I have been flying into some airports lately like KJAC or KASE and even if the weather is clear taxiing on the centerline can be difficult. Anyone know why these airports don't have taxiway centerline lights ? I realize that recessed lighting can be expensive but still.....seems like it is needed.

The sim works on the FSX data. Ted Stevens VOR at Anchorage for example is fairly new, and is not in FSX in its proper position nor the frequency, You can use a program called BGLNavEditor to modify these things. Good luck and let us know how it goes.

Nick, I watched your video. That not only looks like windshear but also a major downdraft. I don't know what AS16 does or if this happens this way in real life. There are four anemometers on each quadrant in major airports and if there is a discrepancy of either 10 knots or more than 10 degrees in wind speed and direction the tower alerts aircraft. there were thunderstorms around, so I don't know what the NGX felt but your airspeed dropped to 70 KIAS so the 737 definitely stalled. I believe something similar happened in real life to a Delta DC-10 was it ? at DFW many years ago. Did you make the decision to abort landing and added go around thrust when the wind shear alarm came on ?

I was gonna say 250 from the Flight Levels wont get you down fast enough as required. I often have trouble complying with the altitude constraints when using 280 and more like 300 is necessary with even a slight tailwind.

Go to your FSX folder, look in the modules sub folder, locate the file so named and delete it.

Agreed many things are best left to pilot's discretion. Otherwise you would be making robots out of human beings and the pilot in command is the final authority. That said though I am a big believer in SOPs and internal regulations. FAA regs may not be enough for safety. A while back in a field I will not disclose a flight was to land on a fairly short runway. It had just rained and the runway was wet. Further, the ceiling and topography would force the pilot to land with a 10 knot tailwind and the runway had just been resurfaced. This made for poor to nil braking action. The airplane skidded off the end of the runway. My belief is that an internal airline regulation should have existed prohibiting the pilot from attempting this landing, instead of leaving it to discretion. When an internal regulation exists, the airline is relieving the pilot from a very tough call--one he might even feel pressured to take reluctantly and ill adviced. Then you have insurance requirements. For example, I don't know if this actually followed but if I were the insurance underwriter I would set forth conditions such as this one for coverage eligibility.

Because when it comes to flying a fleet of airplanes airlines need to be consistent. The less you leave to subjectivity the better and safer everyone will be. SOPs are an absolute necessity.

2,000 feet seems the standard for GS intercept at which time you would extend gear, arm speed brake, and flaps 15 speed down to 160 or so, bout 7-8 miles out. Most conservative carriers I've heard want the approach stabilized by the OM, or 5-6 miles out. A large carrier in Europe I've heard places a 6 mile ring around the airport in the MFD as a reminder to extend the gear. I guess SOPs are different all over.

Which sliders Pietro ? the Aircraft/Realism under the main menu or display and others ? You should notice an aircraft handling and response difference with the realism settings.

I have found that engine response time and a few other things are affected by the realism settings within FSX. Try setting all the sliders forward and see what happens.

I wouldn't even dream of engaging a GS profile without being in the LOC first, is that not super unsafe ? I admit I follow it for guidance and when on a feeder route to a fix where its published minimum altitude permits it, but unless it is an RNP approach with a G/P angle I try to stay away.

I think what Matt is saying is you can arm both VLOC and GS through APP without having to arm VORLOC first and capture in order to arm APP. Different than capturing VORLOC first in order for GS to engage. But it can still arm.