mallcott

sure you will never get your wings in a none commercial flight sim, You missed my point completely.... there is a lot you can learn before going off to flight school. You can become familiar with cockpits so when you first sit in the real real thing you are not overwhelmed by the the experience... you will also have an understanding of how a plane flies you will have an understanding of landing patterns angle of attack why you need flaps how they work knowing runway making's the list is endless.... Yes a sim is a good cheap way to become familiar with aviation.... but not if you treat it just as game then you will get little from it apart from schoolboy fun.....

Sure, simming can ENHANCE the flying experience, but one must start with genuine intent to learn to fly, NOT learn to `sim`.

FIRST you must know - learn - what `flaps` do. You don't learn that from a sim, but one can practice the cause/effect cycle...

Hi there,

 

in my lack of experience, my question is if it is still woth it to go for P3D or should i wait for MSFS? I always wanted to build a flight sim and I am an airliner guy. So i want to get as close to realisem as possible. And I love the PMDG planes, GSX and all this fancy stuff, but it will not be available for MSFS for some time.

But is it worth to start now with P3D?

 

thanks a lot in advance

P3d has a variety of optional updates. MSFS however is NOT optional and you MUST keep it up-to-date via online updates. And the data is ALWAYS out out -of-date too, there is simply too much data to keep on top of.

My advice would be P3d.

Plus the models you're talking about are some way out, and NOBODY can tell you how good they will be, plus everything may have changed by then, as the sim is constantly being adjusted, and not in a good way... At least with P3d you know what you're getting.

But what is your system? That can make some difference.

Who thought this was a good idea? No slam, just dunk.

Slow, unresponsive and really goofy looking.

An aircraft only a mother (or Jan) could love. :p -- Bob

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]229035[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]229036[/ATTACH]

Powered electric aircraft. It's the future, I tell you. NOT..!

I'm sorry, but this statement takes a whole library to describe its BS.

 

 

 

What does gender or "color" have ANYTHING to do with qualifications? Seriously. Who the hell cares what your gender or "color" is! I obviously don't. If you have the qualifications and meet he company's criteria, then in my opinion you have the job.

 

Making social issues a criteria for the hiring process means you're committed to hiring specific people no matter their capabilities. Which to me doesn't sound right in the interest of equal opportunity employment long laid down by the Department of Labor and Congress. Because it pretty much means this person has a guaranteed job over someone else. So you can quickly see the double edge sword behind this idea that has no logic or common sense behind it. And guess what? You shouldn't be focused on social issues for hiring criteria anyway when you're going to have a very hard time procuring hirees right now and possibly in the future. To those that don't now, airlines as well as air traffic control jobs are on the rise as baby boomers retire. Plus, there may be lots of people that actually like getting sleep... Never mind the wages...

 

Anyway, gainful employment should be available to EVERYONE and not subjected to what amounts to be reverse racism and gender bias.

 

/soap box off.

 

Vive la Constitution!

 

 

(This post not up for debate. So please do not quote it and expect such. We now bring you back to our regularly schedule broadcast already in progress.)

All pilots at my flying club in the UK are WASPs. Not an Indian, Chinaman or Black man in sight. And precious few women.

So I definitely welcome some new blood of whatever gender and whatever colour.... Positive discrimination implies compensation for years or decades of bias. But as a middle-aged white man what would I know?

Let me suggest that this type of topic might be better in the Outer Marker or in Real Aviation sections.

Yes, not relevant to FSX - or any simulator!

10,000 REAL pilots? Can any - ANY - simulator match that?

Hello,

 

I am a student planning to take a Private Pilot License and is looking for a simulator. I been googling and watching YouTube of mainly 3 software but cannot come to a conclusion and got more confused

 

1) MSFS 2020, 2) XPlane11, 3) P3D

 

I need a software that is most accurate in terms of flight physics as I want to practice maneuvers outside a normal flight envelope. Such as accident barrel rolls and vertical flights...etc.

 

I have a high end computer and willing to pay for pay ware planes. Plane type can range from GA to Airlines.

 

The most important solo goal is the accuracy of the flight modelling and weather dynamics.

Avoid MSFS. Like the plague. My recommendation is P3d. You won't have to deal with 130 gig of updates every month. And it handles `off book` flight manoeuvres, whereas MSFS can't be called a flight simulator yet. And I'm a real pilot and my advice is don't rely on any sim.

Take real lessons from a real pilot. There is no substitute for doing it properly.

It's like a house: starting with 'foundation' then 'walls and bricks' finaly 'the paint'.

Fsim: 'Mesh', 'Landclass' and finally 'Textures'; if you keep this order in your Install sequence

(immediately after the Fresh Install) the priority should be fine. (I recommend: first make a full b-up of

yr fresh Install) Off course, this is all my opinion only....

Er, did you forget the highest resolution MESH always takes priority in P3d, regardless of location of placement..?

ALWAYS remove the lower quality Mesh first.

Granted, equivalent quality takes priority according to your assertion, but why would anyone have multiple Meshes? Just delete the lowest res.

Available here:

 

https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/p3d/#scenery

 

Works fine with my P3D v. 5.3 HF2.

 

Jorgen

Ah, but does it work with earlier variants? Hence my question and reply. He needs to reply first and then there is a possibillity of a decent answer....

I'm old school and use the 2d panels. Does anyone know if this from AFS has the 2d, or is it only VC?

https://www.afs-design.de/fsx-airbus-a350.htm

Everything you need to know.

Hi Fi Simulations

or

Rex Simulations

Tried running FS2004 with Event Viewer running but I didn't see anything untoward.

 

Two things I have noticed which could be significant:

 

1. My problem is specific to 2D panels: the Virtual Cockpit (on planes that have one) works normally, and

2. It isn't just switching between Windowed and Full Screen mode that redraws the gauges, resizing the panel window will also do it, as will closing then reopening it.

 

No I haven't: does FS2004 use .net for anything?

 

:confused: :mad: :confused: :mad: Has no-one had this problem before with their FS2004?

 

George

No. When I last used FS2004 the current OS was Win 98/7.

Didn't use .net or DX12...

Frank, initial climb isn't JUST about best angle (Vx) -- it's ONE TYPE of initial climb -- when there are obstacles to be cleared that Vy might not clear by a reasonable margin.

Correct again, technically. But does this answer the OP's question?

It was definitely a basic answer answer to a basic question, and I was going to not say more about your answer, but it was too basic and I felt it might mislead him a bit, since enroute covers a lot more than the time after reaching cruise altitude, including most of the time until reaching cruise altitude, whether you're a C-182 going from 500 MSL to a cruise altitude of 9500 or a jet climbing into the flight levels.

 

 

 

I felt that in this case the OP didn't know enough to know what to ask, as so many don't, but it felt as if he really wanted more.

 

So we obviously differ in our approaches to answering questions, which is fine with me, and so often I feel your responses are quite good, but this one seemed a bit sparse. Maybe it's just the CFI in me coming out, because this is the approach that was needed for real life students, and it became a habit. I certainly didn't expect to upset you though, so I'm sorry that I did.

I cannot disagree, but my CFI told me early on: `just answer the bloody question` and to not make assumptions abouit what the questions may, or may not, actually be.

My reply acknowledged only that we should not assume an over-complicated reply is the correct one. If one question gives rise to another, he can always come back and ask... KISS rules in this forum, as it's for Newcomers after all!

Hello: Can someone recommend the best Hawaii scenery for P3d? Thanks!

Which version of P3D?

Common sense applies as well as regulations. I only learnt to fly a Blanik glider, and the golden rule drummed into me was 'height is safety', given no engine. Of course, you can turn at any time, your choice (but you might incur the wrath of the authorities and fellow pilots), but given the aircraft flies most efficiently and safely with level wings, the worst situation to be in is in a climb, slow, nose up, wings not level, i.e. in a turn attitude, and LOW and SLOW, when the engine sputters and conks out. Bad situation. With that wing dipped you're in a configuration to go into a stall spin without sufficient altitude to recover (your 'new best friend' will be the ground and you'll enjoy a holiday in hospital, if you survive).

 

Better to climb straight out for awhile e.g. to pass the 500 ft Above Ground Level (AGL) before doing anything. Get as high as possible as quickly as possible, so set yourself up for maximum climb rate, e.g. I think in the Cessna 172 type its about 80 knots roughly, full throttle. Simply concentrate on getting to a safe altitutude and form a nice rectangular circuit if doing circuit practice, e.g. start (it takes time) a slow, gentle 90 degree turn left about 500' , then do the next turn 90 degree left at about 1000' (say start at 900) so that you join the 'downwind leg' at the nominal 1000' circuit height. Other pilots in the circuit will appreciate your proper and fully expected behaviour.

 

By getting into this simple, comfortable routine, your mind and body (that 'seat of the pants' feel) has time to focus on each leg of the climb out, nothing is rushed, and you are one with the aircraft. The same applies to landing, and what you intend to do on the flight - plan everything before you get in the plane, including knowing what turns you are going to make, at what altitude etc. Flying can then be enjoyable with minimal stress.

AGL - Above Ground Level means exactly what it says - it's the height above the ground (and surrounding terrain) that matters.

You gauge your approach and departure on winds, terrain and turn rate from which you derive a safe speed and then add the token variation that is defined on the charts. A safe bet is 1,000 ft Above Ground Level, but one should always relate it to local charts and never rely on ANY `rule of thumb` as it will surely kill you, eventually. I never undertake a steep turn within 1000 ft AGL in ANY powered light aircraft, although I do see Glider pilots doing maneuvres at 500 ft.

And round here we do have military pilots who roar over at a high bank angle and plenty of knots...

Reading through the thread I would say for the most part it's a lack of practice..... When I started with MS flight sim back in the 90s I learned to land in the Cessna in flight school, once I could do that I went on to fly the Boeing 747... there is a flight school in fs2020 don't feel intimidated to go back to or start from the basics you will learn so much more about your aircraft it's a win-win situation..... For the Cessna, full flaps 80nts and the correct decent speed and it's hard to fail unless you hit a strong crosswind.... When you can land a Cessna on an aircraft carrier, you have control and can land a Cessna no problem and you won't need to rely on ILS you will be able to land your Cessna virtually anywhere...... When I have to cut short a flight in the TBM I will just put it down in a field, I don't think farmers love me ha

It's a diffrent sim. So completely different....

Judging by your screen name captarnaud, I would venture a guess that this question pertains to flying a commercial jet as opposed to a GA aircraft. Like Larry, I like to elaborate on simple questions to give a little more info than was requested.

 

A typical commercial jet flight, for me, would be KSFO to KSAN (this was done in real life many times). Typical cruise altitude would be FLT380 for the near 500 mile flight. I always flew IFR and depended on ATC for turns and for altitude adjustments. I would set the A/P and and A/T just after takeoff and wheels up.

 

Flying a Southwest 737-800, climb rate of 1,800 FPM and speed set to 250KIAS until passing 10,000 feet.

After that, setting climb rate down to about 1500-1600FPM and adjust speed to 280KIAS. After reaching each altitude given by ATC, I would reduce slightly, the climb rate and would then switch to MACH instead of using KIAS eventually reaching the cruise altitude.

 

ATC is rather notorious for not giving you descent orders soon enough to prepare for your landing, so I would request my own descent about 150 miles from destination.

 

Good luck on your flights and happy landings! ;)

I'd be inclined NOT to make such an assumption. But assuming a jet I'd need to add something about NOISE reduction after take off, as all airports share NOISE issues unless they're in the middle of nowhere.

While mallcott has the general idea right, more specific information is:

 

In light aircraft, the initial climb is the climb until you are out of the pattern, then (on a trip) in so many aircraft you ease the nose down to a higher airspeed climb, which reduces the rate of climb but provides for better engine cooling (not a big deal on a C-172), as well as better over-the-nose visibility. You would typically maintain this enroute climb until reaching cruising altitude, barring additional restrictions.

 

When on an IFR flight plan, there may be some differences at times, due to ATC instructions, but in general it's the same.

 

In typical bizjets and airliners, initial is as above, then it depends, but generally (in the U.S. -- other places may be different), there is an intermediate climb to get above 10,000 MSL, when they can go to a more normal enroute climb rate. Sometimes there are step climbs* and when those are above 10,000 MSL they are typically done as enroute, unless the pilot has a reason to do something different.

 

==============================================

* A step climb is when an aircraft is cleared to a certain altitude that is below his intended cruise altitude (usually done for traffic conflicts), then after some period of time is cleared for further climb, maybe to another intermediate altitude or maybe to cruise altitude, depending on the traffic conflicts that ATC sees.

 

The reason I specify 10,000 MSL in the U.S. is that there is a 250 knot speed limit below 10,000, and once they get above it they are free to use a higher climb airspeed, which often is advantageous in one or more ways, either cooling, travel time or other things.

The complex answer is, technically, correct. But mine was definitely an answer to what was a basic question. If our OP needed more detail he only had to ask. But thanks for the complex reply.

If there are further questions, I leave it to you... I ignored the detail unless/until the OP expanded on his question by inlcuding greater detail on the type and nature of the aircraft. The `250 knot` limit may or may not be relevant.

Like learning to drive, it's best to learn the correct way, THEN fly your way ha, Happy crash and burns lol

Yes, take some REAL flying lessons would be my advice, too.

I fly for REAL and Sim, a lot!

I have just come across the HAG site & after having a good look around, I can't tell which Simulator(s) they use.

Anyone know?

Thank you

TTM

Read their operations manual:

Historic Airline Group exists solely to provide an enjoyable experience to users of Microsoft Flight Simulator, Prepar3D and X-Plane.

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?336066-King-Air

I don't recall them EVER flying the King Air? Are we talking about the same show?

Years ago I had set up Shift+Z to go from red...to yellow..

 

BUT...I was able to border the yellow with a BLACK background.

 

Really made reading the text a whole lot easier.

 

I can't find a thing on how to do it now.

 

Plenty of info on how to change the 'RGB' colors....but nothing on how to add that BLACK background !!!

 

Anybody done this ??

 

Thanks for any help

 

Skip d

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?306234-P3D-v4-Changing-Shift-Z-colors-shading-of-onscreen-parking-slew-window-text

Of course, if you are NOT using P3d v4 it won't help.

But you don't say WHAT sim version you are using?

I remember as a kid there used to be a flying doctor series on TV here in the UK, I can't remember what aircraft they used though, I wasn't that interested then.

 

Col.

The series was called: The Flying Doctors and was an Aussie series which ran from 1986-1992. They flew GAF Nomad's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAF_Nomad