MacRumors Flight-simmers - images of your flight

[avro707]

Post your current flight, maybe a few images of what you are flying. I can't see that this has been done before. This could be X-Plane, MSFS or whatever else you use.

I'm flying from Sydney to Hong Kong in a UPS McDonnell-Douglas MD-11F on the following route:

YSSY RWY34L/KAT1 POLEV T25 TNK J30 TN J251 DN A461 BUTPA R590 AMN A461 ZAM SABNO VHHH

You can see through the left windscreen the M4 motorway in Sydney and Prospect dam.

 

[ThomasBoss]

I use Google Earth LOL

 

[avro707]

Another couple of images from my flight.

Both show the MD-11s characteristic 6 displays and two forward FMC panels. The first one shows the air-con display (and some temperature adjustments taking place), while the second one shows the "consequences" page which shows any current issues and the effects those issues will have. And there is one issue showing there. And the other obvious thing is the first-officer HSI display is warning "Declutter or reduce range" and it is obvious why it is showing that, the display as it is shown there is impossible to read. You can also see in the HSI the difference between ground-speed and air-speed, showing that there is a quite strong head-wind.

I don't normally use the MD-11 - it is slow on long flights and doesn't have very long range, but it is never-the-less a very interesting plane from a technology and systems perspective. The dial-flap system is also quite quirky (I avoid using it).

ThomasBoss: Google earth isn't bad - those graphics are pretty good.

 

[Macman45]

Wow

This is re-kindling my interest in Flight sims. I won't run bootcamp, so is xplane the best for my iMac? I got pretty good with Flight simx in the windows day's but what do you guy's recommend?

Also, a suggestion for control yoke or good FF joystick for mac?

 

[avro707]

This is re-kindling my interest in Flight sims. I won't run bootcamp, so is xplane the best for my iMac? I got pretty good with Flight simx in the windows day's but what do you guy's recommend?

Also, a suggestion for control yoke or good FF joystick for mac?

For Mac, I'd suggest XPlane - but I haven't any idea on what is good for it or not. A whole batch of CH or Saitek controllers (yoke/pedals/throttles) would of course be the ultimate if you've got tonnes of money. I personally want one of those FMC panels to connect to the computer. But I use three types of Boeing plane (MD11, B737NG and B747-400) and I suspect the B737 and B747 are slightly different, and the MD11 is almost half-way towards being an Airbus, so it's way different.

I tried one of them for a B747 once at a flight-sim convention and was hooked right away. So much easier to type in flight plans having a FMC panel with its own proper keypad and display:

http://www.flyengravity.com/page/shop/7

They are very expensive!

I'm just using an old Logitech Extreme 3D joystick that is old as old can be. However, the big airliners don't take sudden movements - so the controllers don't get much abuse.

Do it! Get back into Flight Sims! I'm still going on my flight - I've passed Alice Springs, I'm now 73Nm away from Tennant Creek in Australia. A long way to go. Cargo containers fortunately can't say "are we there yet"!

 

[Macman45]

You've Got Me!

For Mac, I'd suggest XPlane - but I haven't any idea on what is good for it or not. A whole batch of CH or Saitek controllers (yoke/pedals/throttles) would of course be the ultimate if you've got tonnes of money. I personally want one of those FMC panels to connect to the computer. But I use three types of Boeing plane (MD11, B737NG and B747-400) and I suspect they are all slightly different. I tried one of them for a B747 once at a flight-sim convention and was hooked right away. So much easier to type in flight plans having a FMC panel with its own proper keypad and display:

http://www.flyengravity.com/page/shop/7

They are very expensive!

I'm just using an old Logitech Extreme 3D joystick that is old as old can be. However, the big airliners don't take sudden movements - so the controllers don't get much abuse.

Do it! Get back into Flight Sims! I'm still going on my flight - I've passed Alice Springs, I'm now 73Nm away from Tennant Creek in Australia. A long way to go. Cargo containers fortunately can't say "are we there yet"!

And thanks for the links. I used a joystick before, and like you say, flying the heavy stuff doesn't need stick wrenching, I know the pedals and yokes are expensive, but it's SO tempting.

Happy flying

 

[avro707]

One of my earlier flights

Yeah, it's fun - especially when you are forced to do no exercise for weeks and weeks. Keeps the mind engaged.

This was a flight between Bali (Denpasar) and Sydney and back on one of my round-the-world tours with Concorde:

Reheat:

Inside the flight deck:

The little green light above the radio-altimeter dial indicates that I'm doing DME updating of the inertial-navigation-system (INS) while I'm en-route. That's a way of refining the accuracy of the INS while you are going by using a known reference point, in this case, the distance measuring equipment (DME) dialed into a known VOR beacon. The lat/lon of the beacon is already programmed into the INS, so you can dial the appropriate frequency into the NAV 1 selector, and set it going on the INS. It's very rewarding once you learn how to use the INS.

The passenger cabin with working Marilake plasma displays, operating just as they did on the real thing:

That was the coldest outside air temperature I've ever seen. -81C! I can't imagine what that must feel like - only that it would be bitterly cold beyond my imagination. The reason for such cold temperature is, if I'm not mistaken due to the extremes of the equatorial tropopause, as opposed to the polar tropopause. You always get those really cold temperatures around the equator, and on Concorde (even in the flight-sim) you notice that when the cruise engine rating is selected, the engine speed will be reduced slightly. It only happens in those conditions and not normally on the trans-atlantic where the upper air temperature is generally warmer.

That particular Concorde (it's an commercial addon for FSX) is a very full-on systems and performance simulation of Concorde. It takes a long time to really get to know how to operate it properly, even with the checklists.

 

[Macman45]

Can You Build In

Yeah, it's fun - especially when you are forced to do no exercise for weeks and weeks. Keeps the mind engaged.

This was a flight between Bali (Denpasar) and Sydney and back on one of my round-the-world tours with Concorde:

Reheat:

Inside the flight deck:

The little green light above the radio-altimeter dial indicates that I'm doing DME updating of the inertial-navigation-system (INS) while I'm en-route. That's a way of refining the accuracy of the INS while you are going by using a known reference point, in this case, the distance measuring equipment (DME) dialed into a known VOR beacon. The lat/lon of the beacon is already programmed into the INS, so you can dial the appropriate frequency into the NAV 1 selector, and set it going on the INS. It's very rewarding once you learn how to use the INS.

The passenger cabin with working Marilake plasma displays, operating just as they did on the real thing:

That was the coldest outside air temperature I've ever seen. -81C! I can't imagine what that must feel like - only that it would be bitterly cold beyond my imagination. The reason for such cold temperature is, if I'm not mistaken due to the extremes of the equatorial tropopause, as opposed to the polar tropopause. You always get those really cold temperatures around the equator, and on Concorde (even in the flight-sim) you notice that when the cruise engine rating is selected, the engine speed will be reduced slightly. It only happens in those conditions and not normally on the trans-atlantic where the upper air temperature is generally warmer.

That particular Concorde (it's an commercial addon for FSX) is a very full-on systems and performance simulation of Concorde. It takes a long time to really get to know how to operate it properly, even with the checklists.

Failures, the way you could in FSX? Say lose an engine at a random time...Hydraulics failure, that kind of thing? Used to like challenging myself with stuff like that....It usually ended in tears, but not always.

 

[Crusader]

I just started on the"DCS A-10C"... still trying to figure out how to fly the damn plane... . The PDF manual alone with about 700 pages...
Unfortunately this game only available in Windows. Got to create a win7 partition on my macbook pro.

Instead of the game screen capture... here's my flying setup.
Thrustmaster HOTAS warthog with the Cougar MFDs.

 

[Macman45]

Crusader

NOw That's impressive!

 

[Crusader]

NOw That's impressive!

Impressive? Yes... spent a fortune on those but still can't fly the darn plane straight..
Nothing wrong with the hardware, it's my flying skill. The plane in the sim needs constant trimming. Not sure about the real thing, won't have the chances to sit in the real thing.

Here's a few more pics on the hardware for you..

 

[Macman45]

Crusader

Now I KNOW I want that setup....It's what my 27" iMac was made for...errr actually I bought it for work...Any exuse

 

[avro707]

Failures, the way you could in FSX? Say lose an engine at a random time...Hydraulics failure, that kind of thing? Used to like challenging myself with stuff like that....It usually ended in tears, but not always.

Oh yes, but most of these commercial addons simulate their own failures and don't use the standard FSX systems. That Concorde uses its own entire programming and systems.

It has some pretty hairy and scary failures. The one that gets me occasionally and freaks me out is the engine surge when throttling back the engines at high speed (Mach 2.0). If you do it very quickly, the engines make these huge banging noises. The real thing apparently did it as well. The solution is to throttle back more carefully. But when you've got the sound coming through a big speaker system - it scares the heck out of you.

I've had engine failures/surge as well. I haven't got Concorde loaded at the moment, but it has a large amount of failures that can be set. Even hot starts on the engines. THe engine failures are influenced by the way you operate the plane and the engines.

I don't use the included manuals - I have the Air France flight manuals instead which I can sort of understand even though they are written in French. I have British Airways manuals as well, but I prefer the Air France ones. I also have a very good French book on supersonic aerodynamics that was good reading and very relevant to Concorde.

Crusader: Unbelievable! That is very impressive - respect indeed!

Now I KNOW I want that setup....It's what my 27" iMac was made for...errr actually I bought it for work...Any exuse

Haha - 27" Led Cinema Display here and a Mac Pro. Normally for work, but it does some secondary duty sometimes (but not often).

 

[jake.f]

One thing I've learned since starting to get my Pilot's Licence in a very light aircraft (<= 600Kg MTOW) is that FSX does not compare... and is pretty useless for practice to be honest.
In FSX I can land the plane I'm learning in absolutely perfectly, much harder to do in real life. For instance last time I tried to land in real life I flared a bit early, which left us about 10ft off the runway and wanting to drop like a rock. Luckily I saved it with power and it was actually quite a respectable landing.
FSX also makes takeoff seem too easy, especially when in the aircraft you fly it is procedure to lift and balance the nose wheel 6 inches off the ground for the whole takeoff roll as soon as power comes to full. That takes coordination....
It also does not simulate crosswinds too well, especially not cross wind takeoff's. In FSX it may not even be noticeable, but flying a real aircraft it is, and much more fun. Last time I did one the second the wheels left the ground we ended up climbing out at an angle of about 20degrees relative to the centreline to compensate.

So I don't tend to use FSX for light aircraft anymore, however it is still great for getting to fly things I never would even dream of in real life

 

[avro707]

I finished the flight - had to save it and continue at a later time, the benefit of a flight-sim versus real world.

In flight, some traffic showing on the HSI:

One of the planes is 2000ft above, the other 1000ft below - both not a threat, so no TCAS advisory messages.


Landing approach for Hong Kong, the infamous IGS13:

Surprisingly, no "bank angle, bank angle" warnings - the infamous last-moment turn is always spectacular:

Apparently a trick is to fly off to the left side of the IGS, giving a longer/straighter approach path to the runway after the turn. I've seen a few planes in real life do it, but it seems to be at the expense of a very steep bank angle and sharp turn.

Parked:

Hope to see some other people post some images too.

 

[kolax]

Crusader - where do you live because I want a shot of that! Awesome setup!

 

[Mal]

I love these, but I have to say I really miss having a combat flight sim. I used to play Chuck Yeager's Air Combat for hours on end, and while it wasn't realistic like this, it was great fun. Dunno what happened to good games like that...

jW

 

[quagmire]

What I usually fly on X-Plane.

Boeing 737-800

Boeing 787

 

[Crusader]

Crusader - where do you live because I want a shot of that! Awesome setup!

Compare with those fellow simmers who built their own flying cockpit, my setup is nothing... All my setup are available for purchase from Thrustmaster.

 

[avro707]

There is one is Sydney who built a B747-400 simulator with full motion rig and everything. He owns his own company, but still.

The most I could manage is something like Crusader has done.

quagmire: Nice B787!

 

[avro707]

Hong Kong Kai-Tak to Incheon

I'm flying HK Kai-tak to Incheon:

VHHH RWY13 ELATO1A KADLO L1 SALMI B576 OLMEN RKSI

Typical MD-11 climb performance, very steep, with Victoria Harbour in the background, and the cluttered Kai-Tak also visible with its infamous Runway 13:

Flying from Tathong Point to waypoint W, you can see the plane is holding at 7000ft and 250kts on this SID:

Predicted to get to 36,000ft on this flight.

 

[Abyssgh0st]

Wow, this is pretty neat. I know absolutely nothing about flight simulators, aside from what I've seen in this thread. Do flights take as long in the simulator as they do in real life?

 

[avro707]

Abyssgh0st: You can speed them up, or you can do them real time. The longest I've ever done is this one, in real time using a B747-400:

YSSY DIPSO G595 WARTY 3400S 16200E 3402S 16300E 3400S 17000E 3403S 17304E 3401S 17635E 3400S 17700E 3300S 17500W 3200S 17000W 3000S 16300W 2728S 15700W 2700S 15600W 2300S 15000W 1800S 14400W 1600S 14100W 1100S 13400W 0600S 12900W 0000N 12400W 0330N 12112W 0500N 12000W 1000N 11600W 1700N 11100W 1941N 10900W MZT J29 SLW UJ40 NLD V359 LRD J21 SAT J131 EDNAS KDFW

That is Qantas 7, Sydney to Dallas - and it's actually the real plan (one of them - they seem to change it day-to-day, perhaps to chase tailwinds). Two of us did that one at the same time, the other person a real world B747 pilot, and it was good to learn how to operate that B747 exactly like the real thing, following all procedures correctly. I normally didn't use that plane in flight-simulator before that.

I can just do it in the simulator with the B747-400 I have, but I can't load any cargo or passengers, otherwise there is not enough fuel. Have to also have tailwinds too. Length of that flight is just over 16 hours, doing just on Mach 0.834. In real life, Qantas uses a B747-400ER - with more fuel capacity and 413T take-off-weight so they can carry some useful amount of passengers and other stuff, something we don't have in FSX yet since nobody built a quality addon to simulate the ER version.

It's quite fun to use Concorde because you can go very far, very quickly. But it's also fun to do short-haul flights with the Boeing 737-800:

That's not the default one that came with FSX, as you probably guessed. It's by PMDG. It's fun flying Sydney to Melbourne and back, or Sydney to Brisbane and return. They are short and easy flights.

Default Microsoft Flight Simulator is about as interesting as watching grass grow. But add some quality add-ons to it and it comes alive, it's very engaging. Some people even fly online with others and have real human beings acting as air-traffic control, and you must follow their instructions, as in real life. Some of them are actual real air-traffic controllers. That's not me I must admit - I'll keep my flying offline.

 

[Vogue Harper]

I'm flying HK Kai-tak to Incheon:

VHHH RWY13 ELATO1A KADLO L1 SALMI B576 OLMEN RKSI

Typical MD-11 climb performance, very steep, with Victoria Harbour in the background, and the cluttered Kai-Tak also visible with its infamous Runway 13:

That's very cool. Was just thinking of the old Kai Tak approach last night while watching Pan Am.

Always liked playing Microsoft Flight Sim many years ago and would love to do it properly but sadly time doesn't allow these days.

 

[avro707]

Yes, I've got both HK airports in Flight Simulator, but the new one is not active - I disabled it and added the old one back in all of its infamous glory. It was dangerous, but there was a certain charm in the old place.

I'm on my way back from Incheon to Kai-tak, this time with a Nippon Cargo Airlines B747-400F, fully loaded. The thing climbed slowly and I've got a 50kt headwind, but I'm nearly there.

And arrived - runway 31 landing! Not the IGS, the straight in ILS31. Very straight forward, except for the go-around caused by the slow plane still on the runway. Second time no issues.