CaptainLars

I bought the espansion pack last week and so far I don't regret it. :wink: Let's take a look: FSX: $ 89,99 + $ 29,99 = $ 119,98, or in percentage, 75% the base pack, 25% the expansion. P3D: $ 134,99 + $ 29,99 = $ 164,98, or in percentage, 82% the base pack, 18% the expansion. So, I think it's not a big deal in comparison with the base pack. Yesterday I completed my first flight with the 300ER, and it was a slightly different feeling when in outside view since it's a considerably longer vehicle. So far I didn't notice a big difference in handling, though. The VC has approx. two additional switches, one CAM display select button for camera view, and a Camera lights switch on the overhead panel which I could already use. Camera view does take a fair share of performance, though, but aids you greatly in taking those narrow curves on ground. I don't regret having spent the additional 30 bucks, and I seriously doubt anyone not having regretted the base pack in the first place would. Also, keep in mind that there are considerably more 300ERs than 200LRs out there in the real world, so if you like sticking to reality, it is also a good investment.

Cool story. I just hope I'm not having dinner or watching tv when it happens to me.

Hi, normally I land with A/T disengaged. I pull the levers back to idle at around 30ft AGL as I've seen it on YouTube. :wink: I have a Thrustmaster Stick/Throttle combination, I don't want to reach over to the keyboard to press F1 and F2 simultaneously. Perhaps I try and assign two buttons on my throttle the F1 and F2 key commands. I have already assigned it F2 for reverse operation.

Hello, it puzzles me that reverser operation after touchdown is only possible when the nose gear is on the ground. Is that correct or am I doing something wrong? Also, and this can be totally unrelated, of course, I observed that viewing a landing in FSRecorder, extending the speed brakes takes place only at the same moment when the nose gear touches down, whereas in "reality" (i. e., the sim, not FSRecorder) it takes place correctly just when the main gear touches down. To be sure that my perception of both the speed brake and the reverser deployment is correct, I watched an autoland from the outside, but reverser operation is still only possible with nose gear on the runway. Regards Lars Wüst

I found it and read it. This was exactly what I was looking for, thank you very much.

Thank you very much guys. I actually found that section in the FCOM, but I didn't come to the conclusion you made. Good point. So basically the rule is leaving it to "auto" unless you meet icing conditions already on the ground (or after touchdown). And I read that you should taxi with flaps retracted if you don't want to run the risk of having to repeat your de-icing procedure if you taxi long enough.

Yesterday I realized that when you extend the slats, the wing flex actually dicreases. Is that also on purpose?

So there is actually no occasion when you move it deliberately to the "on" position?

Hi guys, as the title says it - I searched the manuals back and forth and couldn't find a hint when to use what switch position. So, what is exactly an icing condition, and when would you select the "on" switch position right away? This bothers me since ever.

From my more or less ignorant point of view, the wing flex is ok. The wings are actually prestressed (I hope this is the correct translation of vorgespannt) so that their natural (non-stressed) position is somewhere in between the hanging (ground) position and the lifted (air) position. Correct me please if I'm wrong.

I'm using FSGRW and I had to disable aloft turbulences to get rid of that erratic behaviour. Thank god just the turbulences and not all of the wind. Another wrong set of tires? :wink:

Yesterday I flew to Barcelona, everything went fine and I did an almost perfect landing there. How that? Perhaps I should have described the "zig zag line" better: A line always consisting of four airports in the vecinity of the aircraft. Perhaps you can guess right now the cause of this: it were the alternate airports that the 777 FMC constantly searches, and which I accidentally mapped on the P3D flightplan by selecting "INCLUDE ALTNS IN PLN" in the PMDG Setup -> Options -> Simulations Menu page 7. So another problem solved. That said, I'll get a more sophisticated ATC nonetheless. Thank you very much for your help!

So, I think I'm a whole lot closer to getting that Pro-ATC Addon. P3D-ATC just ruined my flight to Barcelona. In the meantime I found out what's wrong: it's the fact that, as the 777 is "too advanced" as far as realism is concerned, you don't enter STARs before take-off. Doing so would of course be unnecessary. But that's exactly the fact that the P3D-ATC can't handle since it wants a flightplan from airport A to airport B. Although this requirement is met when you load up the plan in P3D, the PMDG-777-flightplan overwrites the P3D-flightplan when crossing a waypoint or when editing the route. And that's also the moment when the "zig-zagging" occurs - it has nothing to do with the up-to-dateness of the fixes and other data. You can constantly request a "clearence for new IFR-destination" via P3D-ATC, but the clearence will only be to the initial fix for your STAR ("...request clearence to Barcelona..." - "...cleared for GRAUS airport..." where GRAUS is the fix of course). When you just enter a STAR in the FMC for the sake of it, it will clear you properly (but not always, it's yet not really predictable to me). The problem is, you don't know what runway you'll get assigned to, and unless you know this, you can't enter a runway into your FMC... and if you're lucky as I was today, ATC just doesn't let you descend to the destination airport. This is so strange because it's so new. I have this problem only since a few flights. I wonder what would happen if I were able to export the flightplan from PFPX to P3D v3 properly instead of v2.

Thank you Dan for your input. Your description of considering the fuel for the different parts of the remaining flight is pretty much what PFPX says. So I think I did it right. Thx also for the RTE Copy method, I do that now every time in case I need it.

Hi, my last flight KJFK-LEBL with Delta 772LR went as follows, and I'm not sure if I did everything right: First of all, PFPX proposed a random routing, not a NAT, which I think was OK, because, a. The chosen random track stayed at least 1° of Latitude south of the eastbound NATs, and b. The westbound NATs crossed meant no problem either because they're valid between 11.30 and 19.00 zulu, and my flight was carried out between 00.00 and 05.43 zulu (crossing took place at around 04.00 z). I also let PFPX calculate a Redispatch Fix (4612N), with Redispatch Airport La Coruña / Alternate Vigo. I hope I understand the principle of a redispatch fix correctly when I think that you are safe to continue your flight to the planned destination when your amount of fuel at the redispatch fix is at or above the indicated amount in your flight plan? So, my flight plan said that the release fuel for the trip 4612N to LEBL was 32538 lbs (see attached picture). So, since at the indicated redispatch fix the amount of fuel in my tanks was about 30800 lbs, I decided that I had to divert to my redispatch airport LECO, which I did (what a nice view over the town). Did I apply the redispatch flight plan principle correctly? Finally, last question: when I approached the redispatch fix and already saw this could possibly not be enough, I wanted to make use of the RTE2 feature in the FMC, but I was unable to enter the new airport there. Instead, I was able to change RTE1 accordingly. What FMC-technique would you use in such a situation? Many thank for clarifying my doubts and questions!