achutchison

Are there plans to make the fbw trim smoother? It seems to be a bit awkward on the 777.

I completely agree with this, beautifully said too!

RVSM rules do. That's poor aeronautical decisionmaking if you try to salvage something you have doubts about. I certainly wasn't suggesting there should be no stabilized approach criteria, however 1000 feet is very conservative and restricts the options if the event of a late approach clearance. Perhaps I worry a bit too much about automation dependency, however I think it was relevant to mention considering the original topic of the thread. This opinion is reflected in the policies of many airlines in the United States, as well as FAA findings and recommendations.

The stable by 1000 feet rule is a little bewildering to me, considering there are airports where you’ll to make the turn to final well after 1000 feet. One example in the US is DCA runway 19. I think its a good thing to have pilots handflying a bit more, especially when workload is low. It’s important to keep that skill alive. It seems like the 1000 feet rule is just to provide insurance for loss in basic flying skills because pilots in the EU can’t get any good practice due to the operating policies.

That’s a pretty modern looking wing you’ve got in you signature

That’s exactly what altitude hold does... it holds your attitude. You need to remain in vnav, vs, or flight level change to descend.

The auto throttle is not to be trusted to provide fast response for gust protection, generally the more the challenging conditions, the more caution you should exercise using autoflight systems. Besides, getting back to basics is always a good thing to do. Handflying is something that is done more often than simmers tend to think IRL.

You’re vagueness and general disinterest in awnsering people’s questions doesn’t help solve your issue. Please give an example of when this happened including how you set up the fmc, and the altitude and fma indications when you tried to engage vnav.

Mission accomplished

What do you thing GVAS is? Was it a typo meant to read GBAS (Ground Based Augmentation System) to increase the realism of PBN ops, or is it possibly a Graphical VAS monitor to measure the VRAM usage in anticipation of lots of high resolution textures? Let the speculation begin!

Keep in mind that the 747 cockpit is a much louder place than the 777 cockpit.

That would increase the workload. Adding the flight director into a visual circuit is inappropriate use of automation and will just keep you more busy than you have to be

There is no fps hit with dynamic lighting for me because I don't try to run scenery for v3 in v4. Its really simple!

You've got a lot to learn... enjoy :D

I see lots of people hoping for older jets, and some asking for jets that have already been announced by other developers. With flightsimlabs covering airbus' 320 series and "something a little larger" later on, and PMDG having done all modern Boeings save for the max, I think the only way to progress with a up and coming modern aircraft that is not on anyone's radar yet would be the cseries, or the e-jets!