ha5mvo

ah, before you start cursing me...the registration process is a bit annoying, no biggie though..

Aharon Just to avoid duplicate work, Take a look at the "smartcockpit" website under questionnairs: http://www.smartcockpit.com/plane/boeing/B767/ Granted, those are not for everyone and require quite a bit of knowledge, but it might help your friend

Best addon for flight sim, bar none! extremely immersive and offers a good balance of automation and manual operation. By no means a "set and forget" type of airplane. Don't know what FMC bugs you're talking about Dani. (or a VC addon for that matter...sure you're not confusing it with the maddog2004??) At this point it has no VC, and the only "bug" I have noticed is a strange algorithm for autoland which results in a somewhat awkward loc capture, but the plane is under constant development (an offspring of LAGOs maddog) and the developers are adressing all issues. its compatible for both FS9 and FSX, and no - I'm not experiencing any performance issues whatsoever with a properly balanced graphics quality setup

Avsim has stopped being a reliable source of information for its reviews for quite some time now. for the last couple of years, those "reviews" seem to be more of a promotional campaign for payware company x or y than an objective review - so I tend to take them with a grain of salt The decline of flightsim.com started, IMO, when they introduced the access fee. At that point,the chances of avoiding the "all nodes are busy" message was the same as winning the lottery. I believe things have changed for the better since, but many simmers had already jumped off flightsims wagon, never to look back.

good idea, but the utility doesn't work

hmm...will greatly depend on whether they'll add something different or will just tweak the dynamics and the FMC calculations to match it, or else it will be the old PIC under the guise of a 757

LOL I can sympathise with that, having been detained by "Israels finest" at Ben Gurion (guess the long hair and bloodshot eyes from spending the previous night at Gatwick had made me the natural suspect) Though nothing can beat the regal treatment of East German police. Fortunately, that one is a matter of history.....

The first, if I'm not mistaken is an additional file for your #4

http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004scen http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004scen http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DL ... fs2004scen

For sure! Judging by the specs of peoples computers, finding the latest hardware in Israel does not seem to be an issue. As far as prices are concerned, don't forget that in North America, it is not the habit to include taxes in the quote. For example in Ontario, you'll need to add 15% on top

You can also try some Norwegian airports. Other than dramatic fjord scenery you can also get some interesting approaches with ILS offsets of 90* (like the old HK) due to the terrain

skill or art? certainly a skill, surely not an art! The psychological barrier will be breached after several safe and CHEAP flights

Oren, You're stretching it somewhat. I'm sure there are many mechanical/computer malfunctions that end up as a non-event due to human intervention. To date, the machines ability to DIAGNOSE is relatively limited - I'm not quite sure exactly why, but that's the fact.

Ilan/Asaf, Its all fairly simple. The guidelines for a civilized manner of discussion can be summarized in a single sentence. Those "guidelines" are pretty universal and would apply to VATIL or some fancy medical forum. IMHO, there's no point in splitting hairs or devising a rule for each possible anomaly (see rules 1&3) Since we ARE in the middle east (if not physically for some), and there's no shortage of " managers" and other ad hoc moderators, surely you can imagine a scenario where the various vigilantes will follow up many posts with endless commentary referring people to the "rules". Didn't check, but I bet the better part of those 250 remarks was not made by the official moderators. Most situations, if they arise, can be handled in a common sensical way Bottom line: the more rules you have - the more the issue of rules would become the main subject... and that in turn will distract Ran from flying his LDS over the hi-res swiss deserts of FSX...

This is very good news FSX users on the "Leonardo" MD-82 also reported minimal, if any, impact on performance. This is contrary to what many (myself included) had assumed regarding the ability of FSX to accommodate advanced addons. So, the future of FSX might not be as bleak after all....

ראשית הבהרה: אינני אומר את הדברים ע"מ לעורר פרובוקציה, אני פשוט מעוניין להעלות כמה נקודות למחשבה ואינני מכוון את ההודעה לאיש זה או אחר חיפוש מהיר יתן כ 250(!!) "פגיעות" לצירוף כללי\חוקי הפורום... אינני רואה כיצד כל כך הרבה שריקות לעבירה (בין אם ע"י השופטים או ע"י אלו שהחליטו לקפוץ על העגלה) יקדמו אווירה נוחה, "גיבוש" או יעודדו אנשים לתרום ולכתוב... לרוב, התוצאה הסופית היא משקעים ואנטגוניזם מיותר. אתה מוזמן להקליק על הקישור המופיע בתחתית ההודעות שלי.תמצא שם את אחד הפורומים הידידותיים ביותר! לא תמצא ולו שרשור אחד תחת הכותרת "כללי הפורום", וראה זה פלא, מעולם לא נאלצתי לנעול שרשור או למחוק הודעה. ישנו הסכם בלתי כתוב שבו המנהלים משתדלים לא להתערב, והמשתמשים יודעים להלך בין הטיפות כאשר העניין מגיע לנושאים "רגישים" או לכבד איש את רעהו ללא הצורך באכיפה חיצונית. יתרה מכך, את חלקם של החברים שם (גם הוותיקים) אני מכיר רק על פי הניק, אינני סבור שאיכות ההודעה מושפעת מכך שבתחתיתה מתנוסס "מוישה" או "יענקל". אם ישנם כאלו שנוח להם , מסיבה זו או אחרת, להשאר אנונימיים - מדוע לשלול מהם את הזכות לכתוב? אם לחזור לקלישאה, הרי עודף שריקות וכרטיסים לא רק שפוגע באיכות המשחק אלה גם לרוב אינו גורם למשחק להיות הגון יותר.

Etai, All the examples you gave are actually very good and worth developing upon (which I might do, when I have more time BTW, no one had claimed that replacing the human pilot is feasible using current technology. One thing to keep in mind. We are roughly a hundred years into aviation technology and roughly 50 years into electronic computing technology. If anything, future innovation will proceed much faster on the computing side, because new designs and methods can be tried quickly and cheaply

Aharon, Thank you and your friend for your efforts! This discussion is indeed not new, and isn't limited to pilots or air crews. I have seen it in medical context ("can a machine replace the surgeon") and can virtually be applied to any profession that is technical in nature. There's nothing wrong in playing hard ball, as long as one keeps playing the ball , not the player - of course

זה נוח בכלל?

אהרון, לעניין עצמו... מספר דברים שהם בגדר "nice to have" מבחינתי לפחות... 1) טוטוריאל המבוסס על ה SOP (לצורך העניין זה יכול להיות החברה בה עובד הבחור) 2) טוטוריאל לפרוצדורות חרום וכשלים. "טיסות דוגמה" שמשלבות נושאים מתקדמים או לא שגרתיים יכול להיות די מעניין. אינפורמציה ודוגמאות "סטנדרטיות" יש כמו שנאמר, למכביר, כמו גם פירוט המערכות. (גם מי שמחפש אינפורמציה סופר-ספציפית יכול למצוא אתרים מפורטים או לקבל תשובות במקומות דוגמת "פרונז")

Correct. if you want to experience something (remotely) similar, try PMDGs 37 CWS mode

Like most others, I can't foresee the future. What I can do, is watch the trend and try to interpolate it... Roll back the years, and you'll come across the flight engineer. Go back a bit further and you might find there the navigator and the radio operator... All these fine gentlemen were at one point or another asked to requalify and change their vocation. How long before the F/O follows that route? I have carefully read your post, yet failed to find an argument that will explain where's the principle difference between the systems monitored by the obsolete flight engineer or those monitored by the pilot

Other than the gauge graphics, The concept of moving outside the SDK has been seen before. Not to such an extent perhaps, but that remains to be seen. There's an addon (for a certain turboprop) that also provides that level of failure simulation and was indeed intended for the training of commercial airlines (used by Tyrolean and Wideroe) To date, the most extensive use of modules that work around MS SDK is to the best of my knowledge on the PT planes and its there to simulate such features as a 3-surface stabilator, surface dependent braking, or continuous flaps to name a few. At any rate, the team behind that Airbus does seem very serious and I'll join Ophers recommendation to keep an eye for what may very well be a big step forward in addon development

Surely there is! Maybe its a question of definitions, but the way I see it , FBW refers not simply to remotely controlled servos and surfaces but to the full configuration of those by a computer

Todays state of the art technology still can't replace the flight crew all together. I have no doubt though that in the future it could and would. The question is just that of the timescale