Litjan

I guess this whole 3000 feet thing serves to demonstrate one thing very well: There may be errors in the database, and finding and rectifying them is the duty of the pilot. In this case, nothing would really happen - this is an ILS approach, and you would capture the GS at the 7.9DME waypoint to follow it down to the runway. If you really fly an RNVAV GPS approach, regulations require you to check the approach for correct values before you fly it. The essence: Don´t trust your database. Don´t trust your airplane. Monitor and verify and take action if things don´t go as expected. Jan

That´s how we are struttin´ it here in Germany!

Oh, I wish...

Thanks for the credits - but quite the opposite is true! Since I tend to operate the plane the way it was intended, I don´t cover the way that 90% of our customers will use it. They don´t know or don´t care for the proper procedures, limitations and system behaviour. We have to get ready for a myriad of support questions like "you guys forgot the mixture lever!" and "wtf, I can´t find the ignition keys!" Few customers will really know or take the time to learn how to operate this plane, and we want to see where our model is showing faults. This is why this second round of beta-testers will focus on people with no real 737 experience. We already know that this plane behaves correctly when flown correctly - now we want to find out if it behaves correctly when flown by Kerbals! Cheers, Jan

Hi, You can watch the movies we did (I mention and show the effect of airflow sounds changing on a few occasions, iirc.) to see how we modulate cockpit sounds. Since the 737 has no pneumatically driven "demand pumps", driving the flaps in the same situation will not have an audible effect, though. You would see a spike in EGT - as the electrically driven hydraulic pump B has to struggle to satisfy hydraulic power demand, and therefore the APU has to generate more electricity. At the same time you could see a marked drop in hyd B pressure - with flaps driving a lot slower than on EDPs. Cheers, Jan

a.) Not for 1.0 This is something that real airline pilots use very rarely, well, except for adding the fix "HOME" so they can input the coordinates of their house. Complex missed-approaches are part of the database, or can be made with conditional waypoints (PBD). But for 1.0 we won´t have conditional waypoints, but you can use the FIX page to "visualize" maneuvers that are off the normal FIXES. b.) not sure what exactly you mean - the acceleration altitude is the altitude at wich the plane should start to accelerate, this has nothing to do with the thrust rating. Thrust is reduced (usually from TO or R-TO to CLB) at the thrust-reduction altitude. This altitude can be set on the TAKEOFF REF page (it defaults to 1500AGL). If you push the N1 button below this altitude, then the autothrust will set the current thrust limit (which will be R-TO or TO). You can change the thrust limit manually on the N1 LIMIT page, though. c.) Yes, of course. But - as in the real plane - you must be at a different altitude than the one set in the altitude window. So you can´t be at 3000 feet, have the altitude window set to 3000 and then expect to engage V/S. It is not allowed (technically the aircraft intercepts the 3000´ again before you even start to gain any vertical speed). To start a final approach descent in V/S just put the MCP ALT to something suffiicently "high", then dial it down to missed approach altitude when you have safely descended from it. Jan

Exactly right. While technically reading forums and posting stuff takes time (that could be used for development) it doesn´t work like that. Even coders are human beings that have other needs and desires besides coding . And if you neglect those other needs (like breathing, eating, OR partaking in forum discussions), productivity suffers. Here is my favourite example: I know the whole team enjoys the discussions (mostly) and even getting annoyed is sometimes helpful as it masks the pain of coding an FMS... Jan

Well, part of the blame is on us - we start an official "progress update" thread, then post more snippets of "updates" in replies to questions and comments. So sometimes the latest "piece of news" from us is not in the latest "progress update" thread, and it can become a bit confusing. I was thinking about doing regular reports, but these would get a bit repetitive on the edge of silly if we go "this last week we worked on the FMS... AGAIN... " Jan

Don´t spoil Tom, he will get used to it and next thing you know he wants 4 days off!

I talked to Nils who made "me" and the FO, and the textures for the heads will not be encrypted - so anyone with a camera and a bit of photoshop wits should be able to make a version of himself. Note that the 3D head is tailored to my head, so your results may vary. I personally think we should have asked Lena for help, here... . Jan

I asked the team to make me 20 years younger and have full hair again, but they were cruel enough to take present-day pictures .

Not sure, how is the carbon footprint?

Damnit, too late! https://www.simuwelt.de/bus-simulator-16.html

Or how about we just make the wheels a lot bigger and drive them directly with some sort of combustion engine and a transmission, maybe diesel-fueled, add a steering wheel instead of a yoke, and make the thing small enough to travel on regular streets? We wouldn´t even need airports anymore!

This means that someone with normal skills will need a week or two, though .

You understand this wrong . You will not get anything besides an aural "traffic, traffic". Jan

It seems to work that way, sometimes. The whole "bird scaring" thing is a bit of a mystery - some people believe that they can sense the radioenergy of the weather radar, and one Italian airport even asked pilots officially (LIPE, iirc) to use the wxr radar even in good weather to test the theory. Jan

Hehe, guys, I hope everyone realizes that this thread is ment to be just a fun diversion - no need to give Vantskruv bad rep! Anyway, I am intrigued by the early use of astronomical data for navigation, and I recommend the book "Longitude" by Dava Sobel - a great read about the problems that early navigators faced. Of course you would have to be a very adept user of a sextant to navigate your way through a typical Italian SID, plus have clear skies . I think the 707´s and some military planes used to have that skyport necessary for that? Jan

It´s a replica of the paint-stripe on the spinner. We figured we should put it on the vertical stabilizer as well, so we have less bird strikes from severly myopic birds that hit the tailfin when the plane is parked somewhere!

We can do that, but first we have to build a model of all visible stars, sun and moon, so you can use the correct almanac data. This would take....about 2 years.

FO seat? Me?

You think right

It´s starting to wear on me that we only have 5 or 6 737s left at Lufthansa. Last flight is planned for something like October, and I really hope they will throw a farewell party, but for some reason I doubt it. I start taping and taking pictures of all the 737´s I see, my Copilots think I am crazy . Just yesterday I saw our newest model, D-ABEF! (Only a little over 20, still a youngster!). And what do we get to replace them? NEO´s... what a nightmare. Jan

See guys, this shows you how hard Tom is working on this and not browsing the forums all the time . We did indeed say that we want to release the tutorial videos prior to release, and I think that is still the plan. I am not going to stick to the time-frame of "4 weeks", though, we might show them in a faster succession. But we are not going to start the video run until we are satisfied that we have a gold candidate, and as Tom said we are not quite there, yet. Cheers, Jan

This is symbology we have in there for now to help with debugging. Later on there will be only one T/D. DCL means "decelerate" and denotes points where a speed-change is scheduled. Jan