Exactly this!
1 Like
Yes Iâve heard that before too and only assumed what it meant. I said above âwhispererâ but I think âwhisperjetâ is more accurate.
The first-officer has control of the Main Valve and 1 of the two Pax Oxygen Valves. The Captain has the other Pax Oxygen Valve on their side.
Only one of these two Pax valves need to be turned on (clockwise) to indicate a full reading on the âPax Supplyâ dial (FOâs side). So in other words, this can be done by either pilot, but, it makes sense that the FO is on top of this since the guages are on their side.
Page 127 if you need any clarity. 
2 Likes
Thank you for clarification.
The manual does not say that there is only one main valve, the one at the right side.
It says:
on the left and right side panels, open the oxygen main valve
So that was a bit confusing. I assumed there must be a main valve for pilots oxygen on the left side as well.
Yep, looks a little incorrectly worded.
Iâm VERY sceptical that there are around 140 in active service. Looking on Ff24 right now, there are five in the air: one firefighter in the eastern US and four freighters (one Cobham, three operated on behalf of Qantas) in Australia. And this includes the later Avro RJs.
No idea but itâs probably what is registered to fly.
Yes, as the parts market dries up, many frames ostensibly registered as airworthy will have been cannibalised.
Perhaps yes. Thereâs an interesting article I read before that describes what you just mentioned. The last two RAF 146âs that were sold recently were shipped out in a non working state after removal of certain systems due to confidentiality and the like. Some of the parts were salvaged by the buyer and the rest I seem to remember donated to a museum. Iâll see if I can find it.
Duxford society have released an interesting read that I will post below. Prince Charles who is now king ditched one in Scotland. Which I found quite amusing, apparently overshot the runway. Iâve done that toođ
This aircraft has some history..
1 Like
Here it is
1 Like
I canât help but think if Charles had stuck his head out of the window he would have reached flaps 40 and stopped short of crashing.
Caveat and disclaimer: Apologies to the sensitive royalists and our King Charles, although Iâm pretty sure Charles if reading this will see the humour that is intendedđ
2 Likes
Here is another neat option I discovered the other day. If you have an iPhone that is:
Sync makes sense to me.
Sync can be engaged in TGT mode though as well as on its own. It syncs gas temp with engine 1 as default target. I think you can change which engine to sync off of too.
Okay, weâre close on a week after release of the two most complex airliners to hit Xbox so far⊠whatâs the verdict on the 146 compared to PMDGâs 737?
I was adamant that I would only buy one of the two but, judging by whatâs being said here, the 146 seems such a fun aircraft to fly⊠so I may have to reconsider!
2 Likes
Yes but although my below comment is not necessarily consistent with the flight manual I pretty much fly the aircraft from takeoff to landing manually with assistance of AP to reduce my workload. That considered I know what the engines are capable of and how far I can push them. That considered I like sync because all my engines are synchronised in terms of power output and Iâm not wasting fuel. Furthermore as long as I manage them correctly and they are in sync I can do the rest manually.
The system is not meant be automated and thatâs why I like it. Yes I do use TO and quickly switch to MCT on takeoff when appropriate. I am focused on my airspeed, altitude, pitch etc at this point. After that I manually fly until AP is feasible. Then post take off checks etc.
I know itâs not correct but itâs fun to me and probably how a lot of pilots would have liked to fly it. Iâll start at some point getting deeper in the groove of correct procedure, but right now Iâm really enjoying flying it this way. But I hold my hands up itâs not correct. 
Iâve flown it manually start to finish a number of times. Just donât do it in IFR areas youâre required to use an AP for.
The exRAF QC is with a freight company in Australia I think, and the two CC2s are in museums in the UK.
Itâs a matter of choice. Different aircraft but both very well modelled in the sim. Personal preference will only distinguish them. I canât put the 146 down, and Iâve flown the 737 on pc. But on Xbox with the 146 Iâm super impressed.
Depends on your mood I guess but both are great.
For me currently 146 but that may not last and I wonât talk bad of the 737 because in a few weeks Iâll be hooked on that too.
So both but personal preference is 146 right now.
Edit: itâs just awesome and keeps getting betterâ:+1:
1 Like
I love the 737, itâs one of those airliners thatâs so complex in the sim youâre discovering something new every flight! But it does instantly CTD without fail at certain airports, while at others with a similar level of detail it runs as smooth as silk.
Weâre only a week after release of the pair, though, so I expect both PMDG and JF will take on board community feedback and offer further optimisations and improvements. Theyâre developers with proven track records.
2 Likes
You fly it how you want to buddy I always get her up and down safe and sound. You mention IFR and it worries me not. Trust your instruments. However if itâs foggy and cloudy Iâll be completing all checklists like a new born Christian whoâs just discovered the Bible. Itâs essential to do if you canât see â â â â .
All your instrumentation is all youâve got so if your putting your life in the hands of an instrument, then make sure youâve calibrated it.
Yes this is a sim but you see my point. Irl youâd check it 3 times in the sim once.