LRBS

With PMDG working on a B747 classic, now is the perfect time to create something truly spectacular. This opportunity should not be missed!

It's a pity. Honestly, even as a 2D panel, it feels like I'm actually in front of a real airplane—so realistic and convincing. I can't find enough words to express how pleased I am with this cockpit. Just imagine what it would be like with MSFS 2024 graphics.

Yes, indeed. Looking back, FS9 wasn't particularly impressive compared to today's tech. But the key difference was having skilled, professional programmers making such remarkable software. Today, many developers fall into that rabbit hole of eye candy at the expense of high-fidelity dynamics and systems functionality. I'm not sure why developers are so focused on cookies in the cockpit or fidelity rivets on the fuselage when their product has many flaws. I hope that programmers like those who created this DC-10 will return and bring us genuine joy, for the love of this hobby.

To my knowledge, no. I implement many adjustments using the SDK.

I believe this is quite accurate. I would expect exactly that to happen. There are many situations where cars and trucks are affected by jet blast. Often, we're limited to taxiing at idle power close to buildings or terminals. When we need to make tight turns or use more than idle power during taxiing, we check with ATC to ensure there are no obstructions behind us. Imagine being hit by the wake. Even during air refueling, there are special procedures for hooking up to minimize the wake. Interesting on your findings during the next test. So far, IMHO, it's quite plausible. Let us know, please.

This subject is highly debatable and open to many interpretations. Wake turbulence is highly variable and can differ each time, regardless of how it's categorized. Many factors affect an airframe and its behavior. Even today, I can't predict the reaction; each time is different. It's not only the airplane that is causing it. For sure, it's there. There is some reaction, but I have never been able to predict its strength or the outcome. Under FAA and ICAO, "classification" ranges from severe, moderate, or slight based on the roll angle. Actually, there is no standard "classification" for this event. There is no official scale for weak/normal/moderate/strong wake turbulence or any numeric “strength rating” used in reports. Unfortunately, it's not so simple: you also have load factors (+/-) on the airframe during pitch changes, rates of climb (+/-), high gain/loss or altitude variations, speed variations, and even structural damage. On X-Plane, the physics, turbulence, and reactions to these conditions are much refined, whereas ASOBs still need lots of work. I think we can reach a compromise in MSFS, and regardless of the outcome, we will still find people who argue, even if they lack a real understanding of the phenomenon or turbulence from real-life experience.

Just another real-life scenario. There are non-radar places or closed towers where you can be cleared for "an approach" and follow a prescribed procedure or transition. It can be any approach type of your choice based on certification.

That is correct "only" if there are no waypoints with intermediate altitudes before FAF that include stepdowns. He needs to be aware of those restrictions. It's not just "Once you're on a intercept heading just arm APP mode and it'll capture localiser and then descend on the glidepath. "

When on HDG to intercept an ILS, if no descent steps are needed to reach the FAF, you can activate APP mode. If descent steps are required, start by engaging LOC and follow crossing restrictions using VS or VNAV. Once you pass the last waypoint with an altitude restriction before the FAF, switch to APP mode and confirm the correct altitude at the FAF. Happy landings.

1) During a pattern (trip), after departing from our base and reaching different stations, it generally takes about 5-10 minutes for paperwork, 30 minutes to clear customs, and an additional 10-15 minutes to board the bus to the hotel. Drive times depend on the location. Then, it takes another 10-15 minutes to reach the room. Overall, on the road, expect around 1 hour and 45 minutes of transit before we can relax, assuming everything goes smoothly. When returning to the base, the situation changes; drive times home vary for each of us and are likely longer. 2) In our case, ground personnel clean the entire airplane, including the cockpit, sleeping bunks, passenger areas, and other spaces.

For A320 and B737, if you are looking for a good short exercise, use KJFK 31L JFK5 CRI to KLGA RNAV X RWY 31. You will get a short flight with good use of LNAV and VNAV. To make it easy, you can restrict the climb, cruise, and descend page speed to 180 at 3,000 FT. This will keep you busy for a while. Also, you can try into KEWR RNAV X 29. Short flights with a lot of good work. No more than 20 MIN flight time.

@jon b , who is currently qualified and current on the 787, and I, who previously flew the 777 and 787, agree that the assessment is correct regarding cockpit size. The ergonomics and quietness are different, for sure. What we had on P3D at the time, especially in VR technology, is quite different from what we have today in the PC environment. I just reviewed the FCOM and noticed that the 777 is approximately 15 inches wider. Nothing spectacular, of course, but numbers and perspective are just that.

Interesting take on his part. In any case, flying is both fun and rewarding, whether in GA, airlines, or the military. Actually, we all program to a degree and manage systems while flying. Regardless of whether we are in a glider or an airplane, we "fly pretty much every second." If he's referring to actual hand-flying, of course, there are some differences. Is he serious? Only GA has a nice view? Only GA can be completely different? Only GA has views of mountains, coastlines, and small airstrips in the middle of nowhere? How about landing on ice at the North or South Pole? How about landing on a desert on sand runways? How about on military airstrips in the middle of nowhere? Only GA has aircraft on floats? Airlines have "the same spreadsheet"? I guess he's referring to a master flight plan. Does he understand that each flight plan is different and not the same? Does he know that there are actual airplanes authorized to push back under their own power? I suppose his bubble is quite tiny.

Since this is unprofessional, the FAA should focus on improving the entire US ATC system. We are so far behind the curve that it is ridiculous. I wonder who's investigating the FAA for its obvious shortcomings. For the NEWS MEDIA, they should focus on real news.

'm in the same situation as you. I tried several options without success. The only things that work for me after so many retries are RTX Dynamic Vibrance and RTX HDR. I will list my attempts: 566.36, still no joy HDR10 on/off in MSFS 2024 In NVIDIA app settings, "Allow experimental features" to see if it enables the filters. I also tried this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkT9i1i0qj8 The more I searched, the more I concluded that we were caught up in programming deficiencies due to ASOBO's faulty game's new engine and NVIDIA drivers. Still waiting for a positive solution. Sorry.