Ok i have read through this long 18 page post and some really good points on both sides. I do have one question for you folks that purchased this Aircraft. Do you fly on Vatsim with it and if so how do you follow the sids/stars if you cant get updated nav data. And yes i saw were you all say there working on getting that fixed. I own the levelD and Captain sim c130x pro pack so i understand that things can go wrong as CS has proved but they make a great C130x. I would never purchase another A/C from after having some of the similar issues with the activation process. So to hear that it took that long to get up and running turned me off completely. I dont care if there trying to fix it if i spend 100 bucks on an add on then i want to use it with in a 1/2hr of purchasing it. Im looking for a great 738 since my VA (virtual airline) has a lot of routes for the 738. But from the sound of things I will keep waiting for the pmdg as i had their 737 for fs9 and just loved them. The price isnt a problem as long as all is work as its suppose to. I cant believe the process you have to go through to get the GW in the fmc for this expensive A/C.Roberthttp://www.joinava.org

First up, what people were saying about inputting the GW being a hassle, on this thread, was incorrect. You don't have to key in the weight to three decimal places and you don't have to pause the sim either and you can quite happily key in an incorrect weight or temperature to fool the system for a forced derated thrust take off, or any of the other tricks airline pilots indulge in on occasion.Now about your online queries. Some of this is important if you fly online and use real controllers, and has a bearing on how easy that might be to do (or not) depending on the kind of realism you encounter from controllers and how much you want to indulge in that realism yourself.The limited amount of SID/STAR Nav Data in the Ariane 737's FMC is not the major brick wall it at first appears, but it does mean that things are not as flexible as they could be. Sure it would be nice if it was all in there already, but that does not preclude you from putting it in yourself and saving a flight plan with a particular SID or STAR on it. It's also worth noting that some airports have very complete SID/STAR data already in there, just as some don't (EDDF, for example, has a good deal of that data in the Ariane FMC already, EGCC on the other hand has no SIDs or STARs data).But as it stands if you put your own SID/STAR data on a flight plan, to use it you would have to load the flight plan with the SID/STAR data on the plan rather than access them as regular SID/STAR via the DEP/ARR pages. To be fair that's not that far off how things are at real airlines in some respects, where they use 'company routes', which is how you can load saved plans into the Ariane 737 anyway, but it does mean that a last minute departure runway change or something of that nature could potentially be a pain in the &@($* unless you had several company routes already saved and could pick one with the right SID on it, which of course there is nothing stopping you doing. STAR changes on the fly might be less easy to get around, but not impossible with a bit of thought and pre-planning.The Navigation Database Editor which Ariane are going to release is aimed at addressing all that and making the process of creating SID/STAR databases much simpler too, because it will enable the data to be created away from the cockpit in a separate application and then dumped into the aircraft's FMC from the external database manager, so that the aircraft then has an updated SID/STAR database. This is much like what happens on a real aircraft, whereby the data is placed into the aircraft system via the Data Loading Panel on the flight deck, via disk or through a PCMCIA slot, although it is usually aircraft technicians rather than pilots who do that sort of thing at most airlines. So if you want realism, that's really taking it to extremes!So, that all sounds like things are going to be sorted and groovy, but now the (slightly) bad news: If you want to use the Ariane 737 for online flying with 'real' controllers (such as on VATSIM or whatever). As it stands, the Fix page on the CDU is non functional, But...It is possible to put fixes into the FMC so they will show up in the flight plan and can be flown, but not via the Fix page, because the button for the Fix page does not do anything in the current Ariane 737. So it is not that the Ariane FMC cannot actually handle fixes (it can), just that you don't do them in the way that one normally would on the real 737. Presumably this is an easy thing to sort out for Ariane in their promised patch, because they simply have to shift that functionality from the Legs page (which is where you can currently do it) to the Fix page and enable that button on the CDU. This is supposed to be getting sorted in a free patch by the way (I might have more specific info on that in a day or two incidentally, since I have enquired about it).So (when flying online with a real person doing approaches) if you get a request from a controller to make a certain height by such and such a distance from a navaid or fix, then what you would have to do at the moment is do it on the legs page and not on the fix page. Not totally like the real thing of course and not as flexible, but still possible to do and only takes a second, although if you are a stickler for absolute realism down to using the real page on the real CDU, then at present that is not what you will be doing. In short, not an insurmountable problem, but not exactly like the real 737 either, at least in its present state.Here's a pic of a custom waypoint inserted into a flight plan in the Ariane 737. You can see the TNT VOR (which is near Manchester EGCC) and I have inserted a new waypoint fix that is offset 90 degrees from TNT, ten miles away from it, which is marked as TNT01 on the DU and in the CDU display:The other sticking point which has been raised on this thread, as you are probably aware, is VNAV functionality. So with getting the absolute truth about this completely clear for the purposes of my upcoming review, I've been talking to one or two real world 737 pilots (who incidentally, have been very helpful indeed), and enquiring about VNAV functionality. Thus far it seems that most people who are claiming that VNAV does not work are misunderstanding how VNAV actually does work on the real thing (and I include myself in that to some extent, which is why I spoke to a few real 737 pilots to clarify matters). The basic upshot is, from what I have so far determined, that it actually does work like the real 737's VNAV, but how the real 737's VNAV function works is not like most people think is how it works, if that makes sense, and the reason it says that it is not fully supported in the Ariane manual is that they did not boother to update the manual because in their words: 'nobody ever bothers to read the bloody thing anyway'. Stay tuned for a full diagnosis of that VNAV functionality by the way, because I'm still testing that theory a bit, but it does seem to be the case from tests so far.Now, with all that said, the one thing I can confirm for sure, is that the Ariane 737 is not an absolutely faultless doppleganger for the real 737NG in some respects, but it is often tricky to pin that down and say for sure exactly what it is that is not 'correct'. You should bear in mind that I've had my head buried in technical books on the real thing for days and that's why I know that to be the case, and it is also why I know that it is very much like an NG indeed in a lot of other respects. So if you are the kind of person who is similarly disposed to learn every single screw on the thing, you will spot anomalies, but they are mostly fairly minor in character and I daresay the average person would never know that they were not how the average real 737 NG is, and I'm willing to bet there are a few 737 drivers who wouldn't know either.Here is an example of that: The software for the various NG systems has been through numerous iterations (basically it gets patched to sort out errors and add functionality like any other bit of software), and much of the FMC capability on one particular 737 can be very different from that of another (even if it is an identical model and they were built one day apart from one another). This is because a lot of the functions are customer options that the airlines have to pay for, so it is not really possible to have a 'definitive FMC' for a 737NG, because they are usually specifically tailored to each airline, a bit like when you choose the options you want when buying a flashy car, park it next to another one and they'll be different, but the same.With that in mind, there are features of the Ariane 737's CDU/FMC that if you know absolutely everything about it, you can say 'aha, but software update P/N 2276-COL-AC1-05 (aka update 140) for the Collins MCP added the capability to arm the LNAV and VNAV before an FD take-off when combined with the compatible FMC update in late 2005' (That is not made up by the way, it's a genuine change enabled by a software update, and there are literally hundreds of similar changes in FMC and MCP capabilities along similar lines). So one 737 NG might be able to do that, and another might not, and if you simulate one that can, the driver of the other one will say that your sim is wrong, and it is for him, but not for the driver of the other one. And they would both say they drove the same aeroplane.System aside, the thing runs unbelievably well in FSX as far as frame rates go, which is another consideration for flying online, where you'll be using more RAM than offline. It has a really nice virtual cockpit too (amongst the best), but if you like using a 2D panel, then you are out of luck, because it does not have a 2D panel, so that's another thing you might want to consider.Anyway, hopefully it will not be too long until I have completed an in-depth review for Avsim (still awaiting some info from various people and conducting some further test, but I'm nearly there), so look out for that.Al

Ladies & Gents,I am proud to announce that today I am celebrating the first month since I 've ordered Ariane's manual!! (I'm still waiting for it)The round of beers is on me !!! :( Who said they have improved their customer service ??I sent them an email three days ago and didn't get any answer.Soooooo nice!!

:(

Alan, many thanks for taking the time to review the Ariane 737NG, during the thread alone you have provided an excellent non-biased insight into the aircraft. I'm not sure if I feel reassured or concerned about the VNAV after your comments, if it is properly simulated, then great, but if there is no guidance on how to use it fully then that is a cause for concern, and I dont have one of those 737NG technical book on me! Anthony H.

great.. now I kind of want this airplane!! once proper navdata is released I will be first in line...

.......Here is an example of that: The software for the various NG systems has been through numerous iterations (basically it gets patched to sort out errors and add functionality like any other bit of software), and much of the FMC capability on one particular 737 can be very different from that of another (even if it is an identical model and they were built one day apart from one another). This is because a lot of the functions are customer options that the airlines have to pay for, so it is not really possible to have a 'definitive FMC' for a 737NG, because they are usually specifically tailored to each airline, a bit like when you choose the options you want when buying a flashy car, park it next to another one and they'll be different, but the same......

A very interesting post, Al. I have a version of the 900ER for FSX that is maybe 2 prior to your's (at least 1 version prior), and while I notice certain things such as the attitude of the aircraft hunting during a FLCH ascent or descent ( which you may not see), I have had a ball with it since I recently got it activated. (Mine was purchased in December of 2007).On the topic of certain versions, South-West Airlines (certainly the biggest US customer of the -700, if not in the entire world) does not have auto-throttle in any of it's NG's. I'm not sure if this is a weight saver, or an expense saver, or exactly why, but I'm sure that it changes the V-NAV operations somewhat (if V-NAV is even used on their aircraft). But, as you say, one of their aircraft could be side-by-side with another that have sequential msn numbers (but for different customers), and be entirely different.Thanks for all the great info in this thread, looking very forward to your review. Bruce.

I'm just giving the 737-800X2 another go.Something seriously wrong with the progress page. I have the FMC set up as the manual says.It thinks I hit my last waypoint at 1707zMy next waypoint in 19 miles, I will reach at 1707zThe waypoint after that, 72 miles away, I will reach at 1707zAnd at my destination (MHTG), in 1166miles, I will have -103,000lbs of fuel. It knows I have 26,600 lbs on board at moment.I've even got winds disabled, clear weather. Its supposed to be flying in a straight line at moment on a heading of 176, but its rocking side to side by about 5 degrees in VNAV and LNAV mode at FL390. Edit: FMC just updated, now thinks it will be 1720z and -95,400lbs of fuel, pics show it rocking side to side in LNAV with no winds. I cant even be bothered finishing this flight, removing it from my system for good.

Just a guess, but that might be something to do with payload, you are only 2,000 feet shy of the 800's maximum service ceiling when at 39,000 feet, so if you have a lot of passengers and cargo on board and approximately half the fuel the 800 can carry if you have that on board, then it really could struggle, average cruise alt is about 35,000 for the 800, the 900 is a bit higher than that.Also another guess, have you got the yaw damper engaged, looks like you have actually.Al

Yaw damper engaged, no cargo on the plane at all (since it overloads the aircraft in its default weight configuration - cant be bothered going through every single row of the airplane to adjust passenger weights before every flight, another chore), just standard passenger weights and enough fuel, ZFW is 121892lbs, it was rocking on part of the climb too, it seems intermittent.

Also another guess, have you got the yaw damper engaged, looks like you have actually.

Having yaw dampers off should result in a warning, but maybe this isn't implemented in the Ariane model.

and I dont have one of those 737NG technical book on me!

Well in that case you might like this: guide to 737That guide is not specifically for a 737 NG (it's for a Classic with the FMC) but it is a very nice and - more importantly - easy to read and follow in order to understand many systems on the 737. And that includes understanding and programming the FMC and all its various pages and modes, which regardless of model is broadly similar in all aircraft. So if you want to know what putting the wrong Cost Index in will do to VNAV when you have Econ selected on the climb page and are below 15,000 feet, or any of that kind of technical stuff, it is worth a read.Note that some of it mentions stuff that only relates to NGs if they have had a modification or two, for example the Boeing rudder update programme and the modification to the elevators which allows use of the spoilers at higher speeds etc, but generally speaking, it is all fairly relevant.Al

A very interesting post, Al. I have a version of the 900ER for FSX that is maybe 2 prior to your's (at least 1 version prior), and while I notice certain things such as the attitude of the aircraft hunting during a FLCH ascent or descent ( which you may not see), I have had a ball with it since I recently got it activated. (Mine was purchased in December of 2007).On the topic of certain versions, South-West Airlines (certainly the biggest US customer of the -700, if not in the entire world) does not have auto-throttle in any of it's NG's. I'm not sure if this is a weight saver, or an expense saver, or exactly why, but I'm sure that it changes the V-NAV operations somewhat (if V-NAV is even used on their aircraft). But, as you say, one of their aircraft could be side-by-side with another that have sequential msn numbers (but for different customers), and be entirely different.Thanks for all the great info in this thread, looking very forward to your review. Bruce.

you only need to read a little bit back to see real pilots mention they certainly use vnav and auto throttle is used by southwest. it was first thought of as a training and expense saver but they realized that quite frankly the computer in all auto mode can do a far better job saving fuel than a human being

you only need to read a little bit back to see real pilots mention they certainly use vnav and auto throttle is used by southwest. it was first thought of as a training and expense saver but they realized that quite frankly the computer in all auto mode can do a far better job saving fuel than a human being

The company I am working for has two Boeing 737-700 and nine Boeing 737-800.They are all AT outfitted and as I said already we generaly use VNAV on descent.

you only need to read a little bit back to see real pilots mention they certainly use vnav and auto throttle is used by southwest. it was first thought of as a training and expense saver but they realized that quite frankly the computer in all auto mode can do a far better job saving fuel than a human being

Must have missed that- I just recall an article in Flying magazine some few years ago about the lack of AT, but obvioulsy things must have changed.Thanks for the update, Bruce.

It probably relates to the fact that when using VNAV, you will have to manually control the speed on a descent in some cases (in real life that is, not in FS), and that was certainly even more true years ago before the CFM-56's intake spinner cone was redesigned, because it used to be the case that if you throttled it right back to 'flight idle' and went through heavy rain or hail, it could possibly swamp the engine and cause a flame out.Following this discovery, a directive went around that 45 percent RPM and restricted use of the autothrottle was recommended when going through precipitation in the 737 (which used to mean that descending in poor weather in the 737 could be a tricky proposition), but the conical spinner on the CFM-56 has since been redesigned and is now 'coneliptical' in shape, i.e conical at the front and a curved elipse toward the back, which has the effect of steering rain and hail away from direct ingestion into the engine. However, it is still not infallible, hence the occasional need to manually control the throttle settings, especially on a descent.This 'flame out effect' actually happened to both engines on a Garuda Indonesia 737-300 'Classic' in 2002, and had previously happened to a couple of other aircraft a few years before that. In the case of the Garuda 737, the engines could not be restarted despite several attempts by the crew (the flameouts occurred at 18,000 feet as it passed through thunderclouds). Even the APU could not be restarted and so the crew had to make an emergency flapless gear up ditching in the Benjawang Solo River in Java, which, displaying great skill, they managed, but sadly the rear of the aircraft broke away in a similar fashion to what happened in the recent 737 accident at Schiphol, and a stewardess was killed as a result. And that Garuda aircraft did have the newer coneliptical spinner cones fitted.Al