+- FsPassengers Forums (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum)
+-- Forum: FsPassengers (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: FsPassengers General (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Yet another idea for future updates (/showthread.php?tid=538)
Yet another idea for future updates - James - 23-07-2005
here is a report of a flight I've just completed:
Flight ID: EI225
Pilot: James O'Grady
Company: Aer Lingus
Aircraft: A320-214 EIN
Flight Date: 23 July 2005
Departure: 21h16 (20h17 GMT)
Arrival: 22h02 (21h03 GMT)
From: EGPF - Glasgow - United Kingdom
To: EIDW - Dublin - Ireland
Nbr of Passengers: 90
Report:
Flight Distance: 159 Nm Landing Speed: 124.92 kt
Time Airborne: 00h41:55 Landing Touchdown: -256.15 ft/m (nice)
Flight Time (block): 00h50:31 Landing Pitch: 3.92°
Time On Ground: 00h16:02 Landing Weight: 61172 kg
Average Speed: 228.23 kt Total Fuel Used: 2854 kg
Max. Altitude: FL 240 Fuel Not Used: 2782 kg
Climb Time: 00h09:04 Climb Fuel Used: 1323 kg
Cruise Time: 00h10:02 Cruise Fuel Used: 478 kg
Average Cruise Speed: 448.25 kt (M0.71) Cruise fuel/hour: 2861 kg (calc)
Descent Time: 00h22:49 Descent Fuel Used: 1052 kg
Passenger Opinion: Exceptional flight (100%)
-Were pleased by the music on ground. A very nice addition to their flying experience.
Financial Report:
Ticket Income: +5'232€ (159 Nm)
Cargo Income: +6'894€ (10434 kg)
Services Income: +0€ (0 sandwich 0 hot food 0 drink)
Services Cost: -0€ (58% quality)
Fuel Cost: -1'583€ (2854 kg Jet-A1)
Airport Taxes: -115€ (Large Aircraft)
Insurance Costs: -523€ (4.32% rate)
Total Real Income: 9'904€
Total Income: 495'229€ (real x50)
Fleet Bonus: 51'001€ (1 aircraft)
Total Sim Income: 546'231€ (total income+fleet bonus)
Company Reputation:
Considering that the flight was perfect,the tickets price low,and there was no service aboard,passengers on this flight think that your company's
reputation should be 100%
Your company reputation is now: 80% (+1.98 increase)
Overall Flight Result: Perfect
Pilot Bonus points: 230 points
You made a very nice landing. (+50)
Perfect Flight, no problems and very satisfied passengers. (+150)
You landed at the scheduled airport. (+30)
Now although this seems like a good report, its actually not accurate and is quite unrealistic. When we departed from Glasgow, we got moderate
turbulence which raised the adreneline a bit for the PAX's but this hasn't come up in the above report because if I were a PAX I know I would've
mentioned that as an uncomfortable stage in the flight.
Another thing I find wrong is that when we were on the approach, we had to do a go-around. Not only is this not mentioned by the PAX's in the above
report but the FA never came on in the flight explaining the situation to calm the PAX's and their fear(adreneline) never rose but I'm sure we'd all
be a bit worried or curious as to why the plane had to go around in bad weather.
I think there should be an announcement made to the PAX's to explain what has happened and that we're going around and will attempt the landing once
again and we should be on time. Their adreneline should also rise a bit I think.
What do yeahs think about this issue?
Post Edited ( 07-23-05 23:27 )
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - SWAFO - 23-07-2005
I agree. A go-around is a rare, and frankly fear-inducing event... especially for the PAX. I haven't had to do a go-around yet with FSP, and I
expected that the PAX fear would rise, and that the event would be recorded in the flight report. I don't think the PA's are absolutely
necessary, but I think increased fear is a good idea.
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - DanSteph - 23-07-2005
GA have a special sound played by co-pilot and an announce and also increased fear but the GA must be triggered
precisely to be detected by FsP... (otherwise you would have a lot of false GA detected)
Well I don't recall precisely but I think you must be under a certain altitude
with flap and/or gear lowered and press the GA button on thruster lever.
I can be more precise but I must watch the code..
Dan
Post Edited ( 07-24-05 00:28 )
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - James - 24-07-2005
Thanks for the info lads. I'm actually in a flight atm and I'm gonna do a go-around when I land to see if it works under the certain conditions listed
above but the only problem is I have no GA button on my throttle quadrant. I'm using Ken Mitchell's A320 panel and I can't find it anywhere on this
panel. I know most panels have that button but this one doesn't. Is it absolutely necessary and definitly required for the procedure to work?
EDIT: While on final for Dublin this evening, I made a go around and I did this at exactly 400ft and I raised the nose to the full 20 degrees and put on full throttle and took the gear up and reset flaps to position 2 of my A320. Fear did increase in the PAX's but this was because of turbulence and not the fact that we did a GA. Could it be that the GA procedure never activated because of the fact that the GA button MUST be pressed?
Any more info would be apperciated...
Post Edited ( 07-24-05 03:32 )
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - DanSteph - 24-07-2005
I'm sorry but there is no "safe" way to detect a go around without this button so yes
you must have it. Notice that you *might* have a keyboard key in Fs2004 to trigger
the "GA" button even without the button. (by default it might be unassigned so you have to edit
your Fs2004 keyboard key)
Dan
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - SWAFO - 24-07-2005
I know that the TOGA button that's supposed to be on the throttle in the 737-700 is hidden in a secret click spot on the upper right hand
side screw of the MCP in the PMDG NG panel. Can't help you out with any other panels though. You'd have to look in the manual, or
contact the provider of it directly. Also, check if you can set a keyboard command for it. That might be a little easier.
Dan, thanks for clearing that up about the PAX fear with the GA's. I figured there would be increased fear if you did a GA, I wouldn't think
you'd leave something like that out
Re: Yet another idea for future updates - James - 24-07-2005
Thanks for the info Dan. I e-mailed Ken Mitchell on the issue and he's gonna try sort something out for us which is great but in saying that I
shouldn't have to do another GA for quite a while but when I do I'm sure it'll be very realistic.