I use FMC or not... depending on the aircraft.
For now, the only payware aircraft I got is Wilco / Feelthere Airbus (volume 1). Although there are a lot of features incorporated in their FMC, which make it interesting to use, there are some severe limitations too:
- It is VERY sensitive to changes (it is an adventure to change the STAR while airborne, and sometimes the result gets so messy that only the manual flight option remains available)
- The SID/STAR processor only understands "track to" legs, while in the real procedures there is a lot more (procedure turns, heading to intercept VOR radial etc.)
Due to these limitations, I only use fully the FMC while flying offline, by checking in advance the runways in use at both origin and destination, and planning the whole route before getting airborne. I tried a couple of flights online but every time I had to fly the arrival / approach procedures by hand.
How to use the FMC (one of the questions of the original post), however, was never the issue, roughly everything is explained in the provided PDF manual (as chapter referred, but not included in the printed manual!).
My experience in payware FMC is about to "double" though, because I just bought the Flight1 ATR - waiting for delivery as I write this - so I will let you know how I feel about it.
I tried the vasFMC, an older version I think, but although it includes a lot of good work for an interesting results, I don't use it on a regular basis for several reasons:
- The same limitation as above in SID/STAR procedures (with a difference though: the vasFMS manual clearly states this limitation, while in the case of Wilco I had a long e-mail conversation with the support people, who in the end did not provide an actual answer to my question about it).
- A very personal motive - due to the same limitation and a procedure turn gone bad, which led to one of my very few "avoidable crashes" with the EHM fleet.
- The version I tried was a standalone application, partially integrated with FS, which was not a big plus for realism.
I need also to mention that auto-flying SID/STAR/approach procedures is not a most desirable feature for me because this is exactly what I like to do manually. In fact, the flying style I like most is semi-manual, that is controlling via the AP "hold airspeed", "hold heading" and "hold altitude / vertical speed".
However, as a professional software engineer, I find very appealing the idea of programming the whole flight (into the FMC) then relax and let the machine do its job while enjoying the landscape.
Thus FMCs are definitely a subject of interest for me.
Andrei
P.S. Dominic, in your original post I think you forgot one possible reason for not using a FMC: "I use INS instead"
