Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is The 737-300/400/500 Really A Rocket?  
User currently offlineApplepie81 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 68 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4447 times:

Hi there, i have recently installed Flight Simulator 2002 on my computer and i am downloading some aircraft types. There is a delicious looking 737 series (designer name to be withheld) that i have downloaded and although it looks great, it seems to take off like a rocket. I like my simulator to be realistic and i am in two minds whether or not to keep the thing or not. Can the 737-500 really take off with ease with a full fuel load and healthy amount of passengers on a 4,000ft strip?
Somebody please tell me, i thought these birds needed a good 6,500ft strip if full.

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4402 times:

No,

NEVER take flight dynamics on Flight Simulator seriously.


User currently offlineIfly2eat From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 8 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4373 times:

The -300, -500 and especially the -400 are dogs!


Fly the friendly skys and stay out of mine.
User currently offlineRockyRacoon From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 975 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4374 times:

The real rocket that's currently flyign around is the 757-200. They get off the runways fast as hell. I've seen them take less runway up than CRJ's @ CVG plenty of times.

peace


User currently offlineEce441 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

Applepie--where were you able to download new planes for Flight Simulator 2002?

User currently offlineRyanair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4286 times:

Ece441,

You can download aircraft for FS2002 at http://www.avsim.com.

Ryanair737


User currently offlineKGAI From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4140 times:

Applepie81,

One thing you might not have considered is that required field length in the real world includes runway needed for takeoff, AND runway needed for braking in case of emergency.


User currently offlineShamrock_747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4124 times:

On a 737-300 takeoff from LGW I felt more acceleration than Concorde - when full thrust is used they can certainly get going very quickly, but nearly all takeoffs use de-rated thrust settings.

User currently offlineApplepie81 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4104 times:

For all you Orange county fans,
I remember taking off in a 737-300 with about 40 pax on board. We had the engines run at half power to the brakes for a few seconds then full throttle and I swear that was the steepest climbout i've ever had in my life, we were up to 35,000ft in no time at all. Who needs a 737-700 when you've got a 300.


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4048 times:

"NEVER take flight dynamics on Flight Simulator seriously."

It's funny that you don't know what you are talking about.



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2690 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4028 times:

The 747 is definently not a rocket. The last time I saw a 747 take off was at JFK when I was on board an AA MD-80 waiting in line to depart for STL. I had arrived from LHR on an AA Boeing 777 not two hours before. Sadly, the JFK-STL route for has now been cut by AA. Anyway, back to my story. A British Airways Boeing 747-400 departed from JFK probably for LHR. The aircraft used up a lot of run away, and when it did take off, it was a slow gentle lift-off. It took the aircraft a few seconds to adjust the steepness of its climb.


Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3991 times:

Flight dynamics on Flight Simulator are hardly ever "to-the-point" accurate, regardless of what InnocuousFox might tell you. I'm sorry to burst his bubble, but it's true.

No matter how much work you put into the flight dynamics, they will always be off somehow. That's part of it. Bottom line, it's still a game. While lots of things are accurate, I think you might find X-Plane (by Austin Meyer) a better flight dynamics platform.

The 733's you've downloaded, trust me...I know which designer...flies wildly innaccurately. If you look hard and tinker long enough, you can calm it down...but it takes a lot of hard work. It's a shame, too; their visual models are great.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineD-aqui From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 203 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3960 times:

@Applepie81

You ought to check out the Boeing-website for the real performance figures. As far as I can recall the minimum for the t/o roll for a 737-500 would be at least something between 3000 and 4000 feet under ISA at a low t/o-weight.

D-AQUI


User currently offlineInnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

"The 733's you've downloaded, trust me...I know which designer...flies wildly innaccurately. "

That much I can believe... but that's not the responsibility of the physics system or the flight dynamics ing... it's all parametric.



Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1878 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3798 times:

first of all... about the 744, the size often confuses people to make it look like its going slow... when that isn't the case what so ever.

And as far as seeing a 757 use less runway than a CRJ... Happens all the time. The CR1/2 DO NOT have LED (Leading Edge Devices) to help generate more lift, so they actually tend to really "Run the runway" if you will.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3614 times:

InnocuousFox,

That much I can believe... but that's not the responsibility of the physics system or the flight dynamics ing... it's all parametric.

To a certain extent I do agree with you on that. I'd say that the problems are 90% parametric...but FS still has a long way to go before becoming THE definitive Flight Simulator.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlinePositive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3541 times:

first of all... about the 744, the size often confuses people to make it look like its going slow... when that isn't the case what so ever.

That's right. When you see a 747 rotate you forget that it's actually doing around 260km/hr only it looks a lot slower due to its enormous size.



User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3470 times:

Not to mention that a 747 on a long international flight is carrying a LOT of fuel.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is The 737-300/400/500 Louder Than NGs posted Sun Nov 25 2001 05:06:27 by JetBlue320
Boeing 737-300/400/500 Interiors posted Mon Jun 12 2006 10:20:24 by BR715-A1-30
Longest Non-stop 737-300/400/500 Routes. posted Mon Sep 26 2005 07:42:15 by Gilesdavies
Anymore 737-300/400/500 W's? posted Tue May 3 2005 14:41:28 by MauriceB
UA And US 737-300,400,500...are They Compatible? posted Thu May 25 2000 19:26:00 by KALB
Is The 737-800 Really Delta's 727 Replacement? posted Sun May 7 2006 23:40:20 by 1337Delta764
What is the difference between the B737-300, -400 etc posted Mon Mar 15 2004 18:51:03 by Catholic2006
MD 80 Series VS 737-100/200/300/400/500 posted Sat Dec 30 2000 22:14:18 by TWA
Is The 737-900ER Extra Door Same As A 757 Door 3? posted Mon Aug 14 2006 18:35:04 by Speedmarque
Why Is The 737-8 Bigger Success Than The 737-4 Was posted Sun Apr 2 2006 13:56:50 by Vfw614