Thank you very much, Sam and Markus for explaining this to me.
But I still have one question: is there any posibility in 767PIC to encode overfly waypoints in the IAP-database files you can load in the FMC? I know there is at least one editor around for creating procedures outside the PIC FMC (Free PIC Editor 2.35), but it doesn't seem to have this feature.
But I think I remember an editor with more features which I found by accident when looking for tools for Navdash long time ago. I didn't keep it because I didn't own 767PIC in these days.
I hope not to confuse everything, but I think I have seen this future in some SIDS I used recently.
The stategy to make fatures of the FMC available only for pre-coded procedures exists also in the PSS A320 FMC, for example with precoding interception of radials, which is not usable for the pilot. I don't really know if this is exact for real life.
If it is abloutly impossible to use fly-over waypoints in the FMC, raw data flying will become more common for me... I would miss overfly waypoitns espascially for pre-programming missed approach procedures, which very often only use such waypoints.
to Sam:
Although I am very impressed with the 767PIC degree of realism, I still like the PSS A3xx very much.. OK, it has serious downsides on the overhead panel, where they created to many dummy switches, and, more serious, often not even that. The implementation of the logic of every simgle system is the real plus for the 767PIC.
But I like the A3xx for its good recreation of the airbus-philosophy, which I like very much (although non-normal laws are not modelled).
When looking at the panel of the 767, I often feel distracted from the chaos allover the panel which keeps me from looking at the VASI on final and makes it difficult to find informations fast... In these moments, I want my tidy-looking A320-panel back!
But I have to mention that I use 767 and the bus only in "normal laws" and not as a "failure simulator"... I can imagine that in non-normal situations, the PSS A3xx really isn't a good simulation.
Concerning the so-called A320 PIC (so-called beacause it is from a different team), I don't have high expectations. I own Airports 2002 vol. 1 by Wilco, and the included 737-700 (which isn't that bad for a bonus demo aircraft) convinced me, that virtual panels are nice looking, but in my opinion unergonomical (not to talk about FPS). (Although I miss a VP in the 767 for free zoomable sideviews) Getting completly rid of a 2D panel is in my opinion not the right way for complex simulations of jetliners. (Although Wilcos A320-VC looks really fantastic!) I am also disappointed that Wilco didn't want to make an A319 and A321 - the cockpit is simply the same.
But, as many things, this is simply a matter of personal taste and philosophy...
By the way, thank you very much for the great links - smartcockpit.com contains really detailed informations which are very usefull (windshear for example - I lost yesterday one Condor 767 because of it at EDDF)!
Sorry for those many typos and grammar errors, and thank you very much for your help and backgroud infos!
Felix
|