Posts by BuddyBuckets

First and formost, I'm not begging or demanding that this be added to the game this instant. I understand that IPACS has a list of priorities and by no means is this on that list, but i would like to say that for being one of the few free airports in the game, SFO should be updated. Some of the taxiways are incorrect and T1 is not updated to show the new terminal in real life. If this is one of the airports we could see get remodeled in the next update, especially since i don't believe theres too much work to do, that would be appreciated by a sf/bay area resident.


Respectfully
BuddyBuckets

Quote from Mao!

Hey, try to use 148 knots, it is a lot better for me. If you search some landing video of Being 777-300er on YouTube, you might see a lot of pilots were using 148 knots!

Quote from ZK Aviation

Yea 148-150 works best for me

Thanks for the suggestions, will definitely try it out!

Look at the differences between the Sim and an irl landing. See how in real life, the plane doesn't flare as much in the sim yet still touches down smoother than the Sim.

ScreenRecording_08-01-2025 03-56-00_1.mov

When landing the 777, the speed is automatically set to 145 kts. I've found that this leads to you having to flare at an excessively high angle to reduce the vertical speed. I've figured out that 150 kts works a lot better, and the flare angle is a lot more realistic, like what we see irl. Could this be something you could change?

With the release of the 737-800 and the addition of split scimitar winglets, would there ever be a possibility of bringing these to the -900 variant of the 737 for airlines such as Alaska and United?

Quote from javito19

I feel it very nice with the pmdg mod, for me is a bit hard the 777f but not too much, I flare at 30 then at 10 I hold pitch and finally small pitches at 3-5 fts.

Are you talking about PC or mobile?

Quote from Overloaded

It doesn’t help to mix discussion on the behaviours of PC FS4 and Mobile Aerofly in the same thread. My unmodified FS4 777 is perfectly fine but in mobile however it does have an exaggerated ultra big plane feel with manual flying.

The inertia in this mobile plane model is above average, a bigger heave is necessary to move it and care needs to be taken to stop it going past the adjustment desired. I find it hard to judge, the mobile 777 often is not quite in the attitude I wanted so the plane naturally wanders off.

I think Autotrim makes it a bit worse, it ruins the designer’s hard won excellent aerodynamic stability by interfering with the speed and pitch interaction. A nose down disturbance and speed increase should pitch the plane up to restore the original condition but the autotrim (destructively) lightens the load if ‘back pressure’ (it is a tablet being hand held!) is temporarily held so the trim is made to be all wrong when speed and height are re-acquired.

An approach is best held stable on the glide path for a good ten miles to avoid excessive auto trimming and if full flaps and 150 knots (Vref plus 5) are the final target, in mobile I need to noticeably haul it up to about plus 5 degrees on the attitude indicator as the power is pulled off passing 30-20 feet above the runway. Running an auto-land with the flight director bars and the flight path vector symbol turned off gives a clear view of the sim’s flare input, perhaps a half or a full degree less would result in a nice arrival without a prolonged float.

This is exactly what I mean. I feel like I have to yank the nose up while landing on mobile. It's almost like the plane feels really heavy and you have to flare considerably more to slow the descent rate.

for landing full flaps

I don't know if it's just me, but when landing the 777, I have to flare significantly to land smoothly. Does anyone else have this same problem?

Yeah, it seems to pulse between being bright and being dim, but I've only experienced this once.

Quote from Phil747

I think this has been discussed before but the option not considered because the MAX9 already has split winglets and this might be a tad confusing. At least i think was the reasoning before.

Ok, that makes sense thanks for clarifying.

Yes, my apologies, thats what I meant to say.

Is there any way in the future that the 737-900 gets sharklets? I know IPACS is working on a ton of things rn so I know something like this won't happen for a while , but I thought it was worth asking.

Thanks

Quote from WAR_Capybara

Guys please stop pinging/@ IPACS/jan and stop asking for teasers check pg 2-19 Jan said that he/she would delay if ppl keep on asking

My apologies. I take full responsibility for not doing my research beforehand. I'm also a beginner to this forum and may not know everything there is to know and the rules surrounding the forum and I do appreciate you calling out my mistake.

Time wise I think ur right but remember the project has just started and could take longer than expected. For the variant type, the devs had previously stated that they would be making the longest version of the aircraft type so I'm leaning more towards the A350-1000.