I am using the World's 100 Busiest Airports package. Does your route actually take you over the canal where you can see it? I think I get close, but didn't make it out.
My route is SKBO SID ABL UL423 ISEBA UG440 LIB UG436 AUR UA552 MTT UJ5 MEX STAR MMMX. It's 10:29 p.m. local (real time) and I'm just abeam Managua; about the half-way mark. Fortunately, nothing pressing at the office tomorrow
Did you see Al's Playboys for the in-flight magazine? lol Somebody has a lot of time on his hands. (Must be Hugh Hefner's private 757.)
I don't know if I'll go for the rather complicated approach or just let Radar Contact vector me in. The weather at Mexico City looked a little challenging when I took off. I am kind of interested in seeing whether I get the approach sliding back and forth others have talked about with real weather. So far, this thing is flawless.
I should have known better than to listen to the naysayers that said fuel consumption was off. I purposefully loaded only 15000 kg (and that's 2000 more than FSX figured). I am feeling a bit uncomfortable with my choice now. Looks like I have 6.6 left. Well, figuring I'll be descending at idle that might do it as long as I don't screw up my approach. I suppose I ought to be picking out a closer alternate, though
UPDATE: I landed with 629 lbs of fuel. Secretly, Avianca applauds my economical planning. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the authorities will have something to say about cutting it so close. I'm glad I added that extra 2000 pounds to what FSX said I would need!
So much for the complaints about fuel consumption being off. And the FMC? Its prediction was dead on.
I was really not comfortable trying the autoland given the low fuel. I'll do some testing later.
Pages: 
Whats with the rabbits? (Read 12839 times)
