Applepie81 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 68 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5337 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.
Applepie81 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4994 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.
Thrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2691 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4918 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.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4500 posts, RR: 19
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4881 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.
D-aqui From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 206 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4850 times:
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.
Flyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1990 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4688 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.