Posts by Phil747

Quote from Ethan's Aviation

On the 747 it even looks weird😭

Yeah I mean even our friends over at infinite flight model the same aircraft with multiple engine types, sometimes the sounds are not the greatest. I’m sure this is something IPACS will work on sometime or other

Quote from Small Planes

By the way, my son was in New York as a tourist and visited this museum.

Display More

THAT IS SO COOL

Upon searching further, find the other supersonic legend hidden on the Intrepid:

Aww that’s too bad it’s not modelled. Not even the ship 🥺

Maybe we can get it built in a future version…

I literally just found out that G-BOAD is stored in New York City, next to USS Intrepid. Of course F-BVFF is at paris CDG and G-BOAB is at Heathrow airport. Before I go and check for myself, is there a Concorde display modelled in NYC in the sim or not yet?

I’ve used multiple sims and there are some that do make V1 an automated call out. Actual airline simulators I don’t remember do though, as V1 speed is always determined on weight and other factors of the aircraft, therefore always calculated differently for different flights. Would be nice to have the code amended so it calls ‘V1’ whenever that speed is reached on the takeoff roll.

Do you actually need a departure and approach? Normally works okay for me when I don’t put both or either in 🤔

Quote from Beto McFly

The addition of the two 737 models plus the addition of an A330 or A350 in the future would bring a flourish to Aerofly's aircraft fleet. The addition of a multiplayer mode could also be considered by IPACS.

Another long haul Airbus would be nice but I imagine multiplayer is a far more demanding task than building and programming an aircraft

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

So far it looks like the 737 Max 9 and 737-900ER.

didn't you guys say the -800 was also on the table?

just curious

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

Whoops, that's only supposed to turn up in the upcoming 737 ng and max

Well whoops…

👀

Quote from Overloaded

Baro is good if there is irregular high ground before reaching the runway. It would have the radio altimeter returns fluctuating and meaningless.

Oh okay I see, so it’s best to use radio unless there is terrain around the runway which would make radio call-outs inaccurate?

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

No, it depends on how you enter the minimums. Currently the route or airport does not affect the minimum selection.

Oh. So down to FMC planning?

Yeah that’s a good point I’d love them to rework the engine types on the airlines which use the Rolls Royce motors cause it doesn’t feel right to fly a BA one with the GE’s currently 😭

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

If I remember correctly we currently have it programmed that "approaching decision height" and "decision height" is called out when it's a radar minimum and "approaching minimums" and "minimums" when it is a barometric minimum. I'm not sure if this is how the real Boeing aircraft do that. I think it is an airline option which callout is used.

So this changes depending on airport used?

I was going to check last night but I’ll go on YouTube and find some 747 or 777 approaches and see what the call-outs are like

Thanks

Which aircraft have ‘approaching minimums’ callouts and which ones are replaced by ‘decision height’? I might be going crazy but I swear there was one Boeing aircraft that has the GPWS call it minimums over decision height but I’ve just landed 3 Boeing aircraft (777, 747, 787) and none of them have the callout as minimums, all ‘decision height’. Since the airbuses all call ‘Minumums’ before landing I definitely know it’s a Boeing that does it correctly where the others don’t. Is this also how it is IRL? I’ll check some landing videos but I’m pretty sure most of the real airliners are geared for ‘minimums’ and that ‘decision height’ is just an Aerofly thing.

Cheers

Upon completing a few more flights with it I found that the aerofly one can exceed skin temperature of 130C, but it was weird how the airspeed indicator even at 57000’ showed that the airspeed can be far higher, and another Mach indicator needle maxed out above 2.2, but the main Mach indicator with the readout capped at 2.07 or thereabouts… 🧐

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

It probably is that the turn anticipation of the route is broken again. The autopilot just flies what the route gives it and if that leg switching happens too late then the autopilot can't make the plane turn hard enough with the bank angle limit that it has.

Oh i see. is there a need for this to be fixed then or is this what should happen anyway?

Quote from ThomK

I think

Guess that's what happens when the Speed is too high for the tight corner. 🤔

I mean I can’t really help doing Mach 2.04 ._.

Also the turn isn’t even that tight what are you on haha

Edit: my current flight has just done it again, here’s exactly what it was trying to do

My guess is that it overshot the turn and this somehow caused INS to disconnect but when I found this it wasn’t changing heading, so probably a bank hold of some sort?

it tends to just disconnect and i think try to fly whateevr heading is set in the heading bug, although actually if it did this exactly surely it would straighten out once hitting the heading. It doesn't (the concorde doesnt at least, dont quite remember what the 787 did)