V1ROTA7E

Thanks for the review, your service to the community is appreciated!

I noticed this too yesterday. Gonna do the scenery index clearing thing. Side note, pretty wild how it uses TWENTY-NINE GB OF VRAM!!! …I really do like the runway and taxiway texturing though.

In the description it says it downloads and injects the whole planet at once, or something along those lines. ~$30USD….already rolled the dice on the CSS737, and that’s turned out poorly. I’ll leave this one to someone more brave than I. Edit: 250 miles, not the world

StrataWx haven’t heard of the dev, been happy with active sky…anyone try this one out yet? https://secure.simmarket.com/strata-designs-stratawx-msfs24.phtml

That’s true about most of the sought after airports…ORD nightmare, ATL, thank god they got rid of “Dixie.” JFK….PITA. AMS….Grt ready for a looooong taxi.

5090 has 32

If you did a flight with Pete in the sim to Charleston before your vacation, that’s why. They added a ‘memory’ feature where your crew can remember past events. So if you did that flight, and Janet wasn’t present, she’ll ask about your trip.

Haha. Reminds me of a situation we got going into LAX last week at work. Approach told us to call the field in sight while we were on downwind and it was very much out of view. “Airport is 7 o’clock 12 miles, report the field in sight” 🙄😂

You need to pressurize hydraulic system B

It's meh. Still nice to have in the sim though. Prop doesn't feather in flight, sounds don't particularly bother me. Not sure if it's locked behind encryption, but i'd imagine someone out there will do some tweaking if it's possible.

clean install as in, DDU?

Not sure if I got it working correctly....Enabled dynamic mode in the NV App, selected preset B.

exactly. but the BS only gives full engine power when the c/d/l is in high idle.

GA planes generally have them marked on the airspeed indicator, the stall speed, blue line, and red line. Those speeds are for max landing weight, generally speaking. Bottom of the green = clean stall speed. Bottom of the white = stall speed with flaps fully extended. Can't speak for the 404 directly, but in the 402, we used 120 knots and one stage of flaps until the runway was 'made'... essentially within gliding range, then we'd select full flaps and start to reduce power.

I may have found an error with the C208...Now, it's been nearly 15 years since i've touched one, but if I remember correctly, we used to fly around in low idle...as you advance the thrust, the fuel flow adjusts to give you full thrust. High idle was used when we needed quick engine responsiveness. In this plane, I was wondering why my torque and ITT weren't getting limited...at all. And this is with the inertial separator closed. Once i bumped up the condition lever to high idle, the fuel flow spiked and I was able to get full thrust. If there are pilots with more recent experience, please chime in. This was the same with the king air and BE99. Similar engines, just different versions of the PT6.

Personally, I haven't gotten the MD-11 because it feels a bit "too soon." I really enjoy the A300. Rustic feel with modern features. I'm sure the MD-11 is cool, but the A300 is lots of fun imo. BS planes are very good, the thing i enjoy most about them are the engine visualizations. So many to choose from!

bout time! I wish black square would do the realityxp thing and just modify this one...but it's still better than nothing. one of my favs.

It's a nice scenery and performance is quite good. My only gripe is that it looks too 'clean' and there's not enough clutter, especially at the cargo ramp LOL. But they did a good job.

Back on topic, I took the 77F for a spin into the new iniVHHH for funzies. Just a normal flight, no failures or anything to see how the plane feels. I got chase plane too, and it does help with a sense of inertia...but i think i've gotta dial in the settings a bit. Anyways, to the point...the plane is quite good...not 100%, obviously, but it's pretty good. One thing that I like to pay attention to is how it 'trims.' I put that in quotes because the 777 trimming concept is a bit different than conventional trimming. It makes sense, but at first it's a bit counterintuitive. Basically, when you trim, you set a speed at which the plane will equalize and maintain that speed based on thrust. There's actually a setting in the simulation tab of the CDU that says "Trim Reference Speed." I like using it because it gives me a better visualization of what speed i'm actually setting. Here's an example...let's say you're hand flying and you want to trim to maintain 250 knots. In a normal plane, you'd set the pitch, trim out the forces, and modulate the trim to keep that speed. In the 777, you'll (on the back end) trim to 250 (which is hidden from the pilot IRL) and essentially 'let go.' The plane will maintain 250 knots regardless of power setting. So if you've got full thrust, it'll do 250 kts and adjust the vertical speed to maintain that speed. If you pull the thrust out, it'll pitch down to maintain 250 kts and adjust the vertical speed to maintain 250 kts. It makes sense, just a slightly different concept since the actual stabilizer's movement is done by the plane itself, not the pilot (under normal circumstances). The PMDG does this fairly well, within 10 knots, but tends to lag quite a bit. Not saying it's unrealistic, just gives a slight faked sense. The 777 really is like an airbus with a yoke. The other thing driving the point that it's slightly 'faked' is banking. In the real plane, when banking 30 degrees or less, the plane will maintain its pitch. So if you're maintaining an altitude and you bank 30 degrees, you don't need to add back pressure to maintain altitude. That's all done for you....another reason why this is and old person's plane lol. The PMDG doesn't do this too well and you'll need to add slight back pressure. I'm using a brunner yoke, so it may be interfering with the way the plane handles in the sim...so feel free to try this stuff out and let us know if these features work normally for you. There are a few minor other things, but won't bring them up since 99% of people wouldn't notice them. Still an enjoyable plane and happy to have it in the sim.

That’s very realistic 😂

Hey, that’s pretty cool! Keep up the great job!

Yep, we fly about the same...but no it's not a typo. This was brought up during recurrent training 5 years or so ago. Everyone was shocked...but the data was right there on the screen. Figure 12 landings/year. Autopilot connected at the minimum altitude 200-250' -- disconnected at 1000-500' and you get roughly 20 minutes per pilot. Now, of course it's an average..some fly more, some less, and doesn't include sim time. Figure 15 ish seconds to get to 200' then about 1 minute from 1000 to touchdown...that's 15 minutes annually right there lol.

That may work. I'll check it out too, been out of the loop for a while. cheers!

LOL. I hear you, and to answer your question, many reasons. It was in fact a company mandate that out of one particular airport we were required to engage the autopilot at 250' on the 747. Everyone knew it was ridiculous, and it only lasted a few years. But, having the same sentiment as you, I love hand flying...but sometimes it's it's not prudent...that coupled with we're always running 3-4 man crews, you're lucky to get your 3 TOs and landings in 90 days. Here are the most common reasons why the autopilot stays on... 1) China...nuff said lol seriously though, china is getting much better, but they are STRICT, broken english at the best of times, they use meters, constant micro managing, speed/alt restrictions that aren't in the box, strange clearance instructions...it can be a nightmare and hugely increase the PM and observer's workload. 2) At the end of a 16h flight, you're smoked 3) Poor ATC/radios, high density traffic, and overly complex arrivals 4) No-margin-for-error airspace: North Korea, Iran, Russia. Sometimes places you're going are *very* close to places you shouldn't be. You're right, but you'd be surprised. On our flight plans we can see which crew member needs a landing (who's gonna expire first). Sometimes, they'll put guys on flights specifically to get a landing. I'd say 9 out of 10 guys knock it out of the park. As an example, I had an FO that needed a landing when ANC's winds were insane a few months ago. Got a legit windshear warning on short final to 33 and went around. He tried it again and nailed it. I did his captain IOE on a different plane, so knew he was a great stick and decision maker. We had a good contingency plan too, so was comfortable in letting him do it....But it's not uncommon for people to do really well. The guys that drive me crazy are the ones that haven't flown in a while, turn the autopilot on at 200' and turn it off at 500...especially if it's a 'short' flight. Luckily, the 77 has some incredible augmentations that make flying easier...though I do miss the days of good ol flying. You may decide to go to the 78 eventually...you'll see 😅

Funny you say that because I feel the same way...somewhat. And to be honest, I feel the same way about the actual plane. I'm a 77F capt and even in real life the plane feels a bit...boring. Hand flying is actually really fun and responsive though. So much stuff happens in the background and the pilot is taken out of most of it. Overall, it's a far less involved aircraft, and honestly, I enjoy planes that are require a bit more attention and work. Ultimately to improve your experience with this plane is a shift in mindset. You're flying a 350T airplane into big airports over vast distances. The flying is, by design, boring...but it doesn't have to be (i feel this way about the iniA350 too). Paperwork, fuel planning, airspace procedures, systems monitoring, etc. are your main focus throughout 95% of the entire flight. The plane PMDG modeled is actually quite good at just being a B777...everything else is on how you want to conduct your operation. The feeling of flying a 'mission' requires planning, contingencies, and communication. ETOPS and oceanic stuff will keep you busy, especially if you do things to verify your position or have random failures requiring you to exit ETOPS. Aside from mindset, things that could be added to improve immersion/life would be stuff that we actually use on a daily basis...the printer, a full fledged ACARS system with performance planning ingrained, reminders, GPS jamming, etc. I think ini and Fenix have simulated most of these 'nice to haves' but they ultimately serve a purpose in MSFS...and that's to keep you immersed. The little things add up. I'd also say that the plane (along with the iniA350) feel...light. They seem to have a very dumbed down feeling of inertia. But that's hard to replicate without the proper hardware. In the real plane, everything feels stiff and heavy (except for the thrust levers, which drives me crazy...they're as smooth and light as a throttle used for MSFS), especially the tiller. It gives you a sense of weight. Honestly, I think a huge improvement would be a camera addon that simulates the sense of inertia to remind you that you're flying a large plane. fun fact: The average long haul pilot (at the place i work) only gets around 20 minutes of actual 'stick' time per year. The rest is spent on autopilot.