

Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. i know that info, i just follow the advise of a 320 pilot, to no wait to retard to start the iddle. but anyway no matter i do i have does rates!
  3. Now you got me seriously interested in CFD. I had an eye on it, but never followed through because I tend to decide spontaneously whether I want to simulate a flight or not. Is OVPA still active? Me too. I prepared for weeks for it using the A2A C172 and was amazed just how close the A2A checklist comes to the real procedures. The instructor allowed me to do everything except operating radios and landing. The two things that I found most surprising where (i) it was actually easier to keep the plane at the right altitude and speed in real life; I guess the motional feedback helps a lot; (ii) In the simulator, I learned and practiced to keep my eyes on the instruments all the time. In the real 172, I intuitively looked out of the front window most of the time to check for potential obstacles, like another plane or birds. The instructor said that this was indeed how it should be done. I guess that instrument-focused flying mostly applies to jetliners cruising at 36000'. Peter
    Die Lackierung sieht echt gut aus auch wenn man se nur ein Mohnat im Jahr Fliegt
  4. Das letzte was ich installiert habe war M. A. REALTURB - REALTURB EUROPE P3DV4. Kann es sein, dass bei mir eine Windowskomponente fehlt, auf die dein Programm zurückgreift. .net, C++ etc. Das Fehlerbild entsteht immer dann, wenn ich den Scenery-Editor aufrufe. Ich habe ein Bild gemacht und es rot eingerahmt. Ich kann somit die scenery.cfg nicht mehr automatisiert über dein Programm ändern. Alle anderen Funktionen funktionieren. (zumindest die ich nutze :-). LG Michael
  5. Today
  6. The answers: 1) Yes, I will have a look on it 2) I tried to find this setting in prepar3d.cfg without success - any idea? 3) Thats funny. That was the way it worked once opon the time but a lot of simmers requested that it's not "on top" of all screens. Too bad... 😉 4) Will be fixed with v1.9 (already fixed in BETA)
  7. Many thanks, Peter! Whenever is convenient for you. 🙂 Cheers, Brian
  8. I once had a flying lesson in a Cessna 172 for real. Of course I knew this plane through and through from the simulator, often flown it. However when I was there in real life with an instructor beside me, somehow I had forgotten it all. It made me realize that no matter what I had learned from the simulator, I knew nothing when it came to real life flying. The whole experience is just so different. I think that's the main difference. You might do the very same thing in the simulator and in real life, but it feels different.
  9. The concept I will agree is an interesting one, but as mentioned by both Mathijs and Dave will require some additional work on the back-end which will cause additional development time which may be a wasted effort in that most simmers do not want to be bothered by nuances of system failures in flight. Granted there are many complex aircraft available that would have this capability of providing some sort of initiated failure log......BUT...... The majority of the failures that are encountered on a flight deck can be addressed with the QRH and will allow the crew to get the aircraft to the final destination, suitable airport or even returning to the field with the most critical part being having to declare an emergency to gain priority handling to the field. Most crashes which initially have some sort of failure are usually the result of human error due to not following or not executing proper procedures. The most probable way for one to get a feel for what may have transpired prior to the crash would be to pull data normally written to the FDR, and listen to the CVR if one is available. In the SIM CVR capability is practically unavailable unless the flight is being recorded via a stream or there would have to a recording tool running alongside this program. FDR acquisition can be a very tedious feat as the real aircraft FDR records several thousand variables based on the parameters chosen to be recorded. There is at least one aircraft that I know of but there could be others as well that will be able to provide FDR data, and even has the capability of using real world data depending on the format to recreate events. This feature may not be an attraction to most simmers as it is not a cheap feature and more of an "option" for the TRAINING Editions for that given aircraft. This tool you think/speak of would be advantageous more so if it pulled common parameters from all aircraft within the simulation platform and provided the most likely reason for the crash, but again the key question is - would it be worth the development time. Virtual airlines may see some benefit to keep a tab on how their pilots are flying their routes and flying by the company SOPs. Cheers
  10. I will answer soon. 😉
  11. Hi Michael, ich habe die Dateien aus Deinem DebugPack verwendet, bei mir läuft es aber. Welche add-on.xml hast Du zu letzt installiert oder angepasst? Und wann genau kommt der Fehler?
  12. Hi, die Datei ist nicht SDK Konform: Problem war, dass XML Case sensitive ist und sich SIMstarter NG an diese Regel hält. Daher ist "Addon.Name" falsch und richtig wäre "AddOn.Name". Das Encoding fehlte auch. Komisch... Das sollte passen: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <SimBase.Document Type="AddOnXml" version="4,0" id="add-on"> <AddOn.Name>Ultimate Traffic Live</AddOn.Name> <AddOn.Description>Real, scheduled, commercial ai aircraft traffic, for support please visit</AddOn.Description> <AddOn.Component> <Category>EXE</Category> <Path>C:\SPIELE\PREPAR3D V4 TOOLS\FLIGHT ONE SOFTWARE\ULTIMATE TRAFFIC LIVE\utl_client.exe</Path> </AddOn.Component> <AddOn.Component> <Category>SimObjects</Category> <Path>C:\SPIELE\PREPAR3D V4 TOOLS\FLIGHT ONE SOFTWARE\ULTIMATE TRAFFIC LIVE\utLive Aircraft</Path> </AddOn.Component> </SimBase.Document>
  13. Thanks. This will be fixed with next update.
  14. The STAR is selected but not the Transition.... looks normal and as it should and ABBOT returns in the DIR list
  15. During an autoland, "RETARD " auto callout should be at 10' RA BY FCOM AT 10 FT RA BOTH THRUST LEVERS...........................................................................................................IDLE Retard thrust levers at the "RETARD" autocallout. ------------------------------------------------- Maybe not related with your issue but noted.- <-----------------------
  16. We're working on some new CFD (Connected Flight Deck) coding, and hopefully it will be ready for flights by the end of August. Flying with a knowledgable pilot would be the best way to learn my friend - nothing else comes close. Best wishes.
  17. 1907 atm .. i have some screen shots I have just done a go around at EGSS and flew the STAR again .. same thing happened .....ND says im going to LAPRA yet the A/C is following the green track which wrongly wants to go to ABBOT i think ... in the FMC to the left ABBOT is listed as a hold but in the next pic i cant go DCT to it. Now if i just select the STAR with out selecting the TRANS then ABBOT will show as normal .. its when you select the TRANS from ABBOT via the VIA section that the problems start .
  18. Which AIRAC did you have loaded in the aircraft?
  19. Which aircraft? A318? A319? A320? A321? CFM or IAE? Also, and more importantly what was your loadout? Let me know and I'll try to see if I can duplicate, however I will be out of town on Thursday so I won't be able to fly this until Friday (I'm GMT -6). What I can say is that I've never had such a landing with Autoland, but I'm happy to look at this.
  20. I was Flying into EGSS from EPKK today using the default WZZ A320 IAE , using the Navigraph data set .....I selected the IDESI1A STAR with the TRANS from ABBOT for runway 22 , the flight went well upto just after IDESI then the green route track went off route towards ABBOT or CF22 was still showing LAPRA on the ND..... i could not select ABBOT via the DIR part of the FMC as it want not there.. althou ABBOT was listed in the route but only as a hold ., i thought it was just a glitch then i tried the same STAR on a short test flight this time from EGKK .. departing 26L the route was ADMAG dct DVR dct IDESI IDESI1A ABBOT trans runway 22... and it happened again, i dont know if its an Airbus thing or a Navigraph data set issue but its reproducible on this short flight. Thanks Rich p.s Its late here in the UK but i will fly it again and get some pics to show whats going on.
  21. Thanks Dave and Emanuel, I cans see your point. Maybe I should start to learn how to create YT videos with P3D and then give you permission to criticize at your hearts desire Peter
  22. Hey guys! One of our customers had some questions for us regarding how things are done differently in real life commercial aviation verses how they're done in the sim. He posted in our A330 Preview Forum, so with kindness and respect I've moved his post to a little better venue, our General Forums. This conversation may well lead to numerous pages in this thread, because I'm sure many of you have similiar questions and many of our users here are real world commercial pilots, so I'm hoping you guys can find some common ground and have a wonderful conversation that will be enlightening for many of our customers. Above are the first two posts on this topic (which our forum software placed above this, the original post I created for this topic...). Enjoy!
  23. Yesterday
  24. of course, the alarm is very acurate but, if you hear it with sound system with subwoofer, you can hear theres like a low airsound at there, i would say on 90hz. but i will check that sound on pro tools with a graphic EQ. im not saying the sound is not real, almost every headphone or a main speakers of normal users will not reproduce that frecuencies very accourate, so they wont be able to heart it. but thouse who care about the sound sytem they will hear that frecuencies and looks lithe the sound where recorded with air condition or something runing
  25. Hi im experiencing very hard landings with autoland function Btw 400-700 FT/MIN. the aircraft is perfectly set and the wheather conditions are optimum for autoland but at 20" call i put engines iddle but the flare is not reproduced in anyway. this happened to me all the times i autoland. any solution?
  26. I have been having issues with the pressurization as well. Even though both packs are on, the cabin will ascend to above 14000ft. The aircraft will also not descend until the plane is on the ground (I'll be descending through 2300, and the cabin altitude will still read as 14000. When I try to switch the pressurization to manual descent, there is no effect.
  27. There are so many more factors involved in real life like the weather conditions in the past (has it rained or snowed before? Is the ruwnay maybe already covered in ice/snow/slush, etc.), relative humidity, the actual runway (how easily can water flow off, what's the surface condition, etc.) and so on and so on, it would seem very hard if not impossible to actually use the variables available in the simulator for a fully realistic braking simulation. Generally: Yes, of course it is. The Boeing data package for the flight dynamics alone costs about 4.5 million Dollar and that's just the flight dynamics. Of course there are other aspects where P3D is also doing very well, if not even better: Mainly: Visuals! In a full flight simulator you don't need a lovely landscape, you don't need HD clouds, you don't need nice sunrises or sunsets, you don't need shadows, you don't need animated cars, people, etc. What you need is an airport looking like the one you operate into, a horizon and some mesh. Even that is usually on an FS2000 level however as that's all you need to show a pilot that there's a mountain ahead and if he comes close this is how the systems will react. My airline in fact only has our two main operating bases in our simulators in a highly detailed version (which btw has a lot lesser resolution than what most FS addons have nowadays) and the rest is just generic airports. Generic in these terms does not mean a default P3D airport btw, but simply a runway and maybe an adjacent taxiway. Apart from that, let me try to summarize and comment a little, but please be aware that these comments are mainly based on my comparably few hours spent in these simulators during my type rating: Flight Dynamics: A LOT better than P3D. When I say a lot I really mean a lot lot lot. And still shitty compared with the real aircraft Systems: Of course much more detailed than any addon available for P3D, X-Plane or AFS2. Even PMDG and FSL look like toys compared to a full flight sim! Yet many FFS's still lack behind the real aircraft when it comes to some tricks and hacks you use in your daily life. They're pretty damn solid however! Visuals: As described above. Weather: Again, a lot better, especially in terms of effects of the weather on the aircraft as well as the different weather phenomena, weather systems, etc. However: When I asked my instructor to do some max crosswind and full gusts training at the end of my last session when we had a couple of minutes left he only told me it would be negative training because the simulator would not even come close to how the real aircraft handles. And I probably have to agree with him based on even the lesser effects I noticed earlier on with weaker winds. As a final word: Keep in mind what those flight simulators (all the way up to the full flight sims) are. They are devices to train pilots in flows, SOPs, abnormal and emergencies. They are basically system trainers and they are not meant to replace any actual hands on flying skills. No simulator can replace good judgement and experience. And that you only gain flying the real thing. A simulator is there to give you a solid base of understanding how things work. It will give you insights into how certain situations might look like. Reality on the other hands side will always be different. One failure will never come alone and chances are things will evolve in a different way than in the simulator training. Look for example at that Southwest flight which had the engine separation in the climb at FL300. They got both, a rapid decompression and an engine severe damage (I believe a fire bell as well) at the same time. On top of that they had injured and, as far as I recall, even one dead passenger. The simulator might train each of these things at a time to give you an idea of how to handle those. In real life it is the good judgement of the crew, both captain and first officer, as well as cabin crew, which will lead to a safe and successfull outcome of the situation. No simulator can ever simulate that and in fact they are not intented to do so.
  1. Load more activity
  • Newsletter

    Sign Up
  • Create New...