Sad day for Mxsmanic

"Mxsmanic" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
Mike Ash writes:

The bit in the article where he talks about a simmer being asked to land
a passenger plane after the pilots have been debilitated is pretty
funny. Absolutely no mention whatsoever of the difficulty or
improbability of actually pulling off such a feat. It is simply assumed
that it could be done.

It can easily be done.

[snip further brabble]

For what it is worth, I have taken a go in an A320 simulator (I have a
PPL/IFR license for 8 years now) some time ago. Expensive pleasure but well
worth the experience. I have indeed tried to hand land it w/o autopilot
because I wanted to experience the difference in controls (I usually fly a
172 Rocket).

It actually took me three tries to get the damn thing to the ground safely.
The problem was neither tracking the glide slope nor fiddling around with
the speed control, these were pretty simple actually. But I could not so
easily get the flaring scheme out of my head which made me land the bird on
its nose wheel twice as I flared well too late. You have to flare the
******* at an altitude where I do not yet spend a single thought on flaring
in my Cessna.

But, and that's the actual point, while I was busy keeping the bird on track
the FI who was acompanying the situation did actually push a whole lot of
switches which seemingly were necessary also to land safely. And once I got
her to the ground safely I was actually surprised how difficult it was to
keep her on the RWY during the landing run. Can someone with no or FS
experience only do it safely? From the experience I doubt it ...

Just my 2 cents.

Herbert

Herbert Paulis writes:

But, and that's the actual point, while I was busy keeping the bird on track
the FI who was acompanying the situation did actually push a whole lot of
switches which seemingly were necessary also to land safely. And once I got
her to the ground safely I was actually surprised how difficult it was to
keep her on the RWY during the landing run. Can someone with no or FS
experience only do it safely? From the experience I doubt it ...

Someone with FS experience would at least know what all that "whole lot of
switches" actually does.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Herbert Paulis writes:

But, and that's the actual point, while I was busy keeping the bird on
track
the FI who was acompanying the situation did actually push a whole lot of
switches which seemingly were necessary also to land safely. And once I
got
her to the ground safely I was actually surprised how difficult it was to
keep her on the RWY during the landing run. Can someone with no or FS
experience only do it safely? From the experience I doubt it ...

Someone with FS experience would at least know what all that "whole lot of
switches" actually does.


Bull****. Not even the G1000 in MSX is even close to complete.

Darkwing wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Herbert Paulis writes:

But, and that's the actual point, while I was busy keeping the bird on
track
the FI who was acompanying the situation did actually push a whole lot of
switches which seemingly were necessary also to land safely. And once I
got
her to the ground safely I was actually surprised how difficult it was to
keep her on the RWY during the landing run. Can someone with no or FS
experience only do it safely? From the experience I doubt it ...
Someone with FS experience would at least know what all that "whole lot of
switches" actually does.


Bull****. Not even the G1000 in MSX is even close to complete.


Come on. F1 - F12. How many more switches can there be on a A320?
T

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:

Bull****. Not even the G1000 in MSX is even close to complete.

I'm not sure what MSX is. In MSFS, G1000 simulations vary in accuracy with
the source. The Reality XP simulations of Garmin 430 and 530 units are
complete and accurate, at least. (I don't use a G1000 and I have no interest
in doing so.)

On Feb 28, 7:35*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:
Bull****. Not even the G1000 in MSX is even close to complete.

I'm not sure what MSX is. *In MSFS, G1000 simulations vary in accuracy with
the source. *The Reality XP simulations of Garmin 430 and 530 units are
complete and accurate, at least. *(I don't use a G1000 and I have no interest
in doing so.)

How do you know that if you haven't used a G1000?

Cheers

Varactor writes:

How do you know that if you haven't used a G1000?

By reading the descriptions of the simulations.

On Feb 28, 3:14*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Varactor writes:
How do you know that if you haven't used a G1000?

By reading the descriptions of the simulations.

Ohhh sure that's a reliable evaluation. What did they say: "perfect
simulation of the G1000" What was the G1000 pixel resolution and
update rate?

Cheers