[jhb_airlines] Re: Article finished.

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:23:37 -0000

The PMDG 737 isn't immediately compatible with the GF units either -
something I got cross about. I found a couple of hacks after trawling
several forums but now GF have released a document telling users how to =
set
it up correctly. I haven't done this yet but I'll report back when I do =
so.

bones

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwinsk@xxxxxxx
Sent: 17 November 2004 06:19
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Article finished.


Moving towards, at least attempting to, real life IFR & ATC proceedures
should lead me=20
inexorably towards the PDMG type of systems based panel / aircraft
combinations.=20
There are two flies in the ointment. Grey cell fatigue could be =
overcome;
eventually. The=20
real "Systems" showstopper is being accustomed to using the GoFlight =
kit.
From=20
attempts I've made with the ERJ145, it seems that the systems are so
integrated that=20
they resist GF use. The same integration usually defeats my attempts at
panel mods. I'm=20
loth to go back to mouse clicking, having become used to the greater =
realism
produced=20
by GF use.=20
 Pity really.

Gerry Winskill
gwinsk@xxxxxxx


On 17 Nov 2004 at 0:50, Bones wrote:

> It is fairly true to say that if you want to move up to serious =3D=20
> machinery the choice of jets is immaterial because most of them are=20
> now fitted =3D with similar nav kit.=3D20
>=20
> Everything from the CRJ to the 747 has FMS so, if you do move upwards, =

> =3D it isn't the navigation bit that will determine your choice. I=20
> suppose it =3D is the complexity of the rest of the systems that will =
be=20
> the decider.
>=20
> I would guess that there are three fairly distinct "layers" in FS =3D=20
> aircraft.
>=20
> First is the default aircraft with functional though limited panels=20
> and hardly any other systems. Many freeware models fall into this=20
> category =3D too.
>=20
> Second is the above aircraft coupled to a more complex panel such as=20
> Matthias Lieberecht's 146 and Jetstream - see=20
> http://www.baepanelproject.com/. These panels are back to the concept=20
> started by Paul Golding (MD80) and Eric Ernst (B757) in FS98 which =3D =

> combine enhanced instrumentation and navigation kit with additional=20
> aircraft =3D systems functionality. They are darned good but will take =

> you back to ground =3D school - the Jetstream Manual is 120 pages =
long.
>=20
> The third stage is a complete aircraft package where the aircraft and=20
> =3D its panel/systems have been integrated from the start. The PMDG =
737=20
> is =3D perhaps the best known example of this. Here you start from=20
> scratch again and =3D really need to follow the included tutorials.=20
> Think of it as being at a real aircraft conversion course.
>=20
> Wherever you start consider that moving up is a continuing learning =
=3D=20
> curve. Even at the bottom rung of the ladder the panel layout will be=20
> different =3D to what you normally use and it will take time to settle =

> down to the new layout. One word of advice though - don't download=20
> half a dozen machines with different panels and try to fly them all.=20
> That just becomes plain confusing because you remember mouse clicks or =

> procedures for one and =3D forget what they are for another. Start off =

> with one aircraft and fly it for a little while. If you like the panel =

> stick with it but if you find it =3D hard to get along with try=20
> something else. I can't fly at all with the default =3D B777 panel=20
> because I can never find half the knobs and taps - many major =3D =
items=20
> are hidden away in pop up panels.
>=20
> Herein lies the crux of the matter. The more complex the aircraft =3D=20
> becomes the more you have to fly it and ignore other goodies on your=20
> system. The bonus is that you gain valuable insight into how a real=20
> aircraft works =3D and your flying (and thinking) become closer to =
your=20
> real world =3D counterparts. Which is why Gerry keeps asking such=20
> complex questions - needing longer =3D and longer tutorials to =
explain!=20
> <vbg>
>=20
> bones
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Brook
> Sent: 16 November 2004 15:51 To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject:=20
> [jhb_airlines] Re: Article finished.
>=20
>=20
> Bones -
>=20
> Thank you so much!  I'm now resolved to upgrade from my PA-28 to some=20
> =3D form of 'big iron' so that I can learn how to apply the info in =
your=20
> article =3D and start playing with the big boys.  This may take some=20
> time...  As always, =3D you are an inspiration, many of us have =
learned=20
> such a lot from you over the years - long may you continue!
>=20
> Best wishes
> MikeB
> JHB193
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=3D20
> > [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bones
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 3:16 PM
> > To: JHB Email List
> > Subject: [jhb_airlines] Article finished.
> >
> >
> > I've finished the article that was started in response to one of=20
> > Gerry's questions last week. You can find in in my ATC pages or
> > just go straight to
> > the page from http://www.homepages.mcb.net/bones/04fs/MP/ATC1.htm
> >
> > I'm tempted to run it past one of our 146 pilots but I
> > fear that the full
> > description of flight management would fill a lot more pages and=20
> > become a bit too much too follow. I think I'll leave it as it is
> > for now and develop
> > it only if feedback suggest it is worth filling in with
> > more detail..
> >
> > HC@xxxxxxxxxx
> > http://fsaviation.net
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20




Other related posts: