Thank you bombardier

still think the classic a330/a340 cockpits look better

It’s a Dreamliner-like cockpit with Airbus-like sidesticks and the radio controls on the upper dash, plus it can go through checklists by itself. The A220 flight control system combines the best of Boeing and Airbus hardware and software, although some pilots say the A220 flies more like a 787 with a sidestick with the blistering performance of a high-end 757.

no

Collins Aerospace (I still refer to them as Rockwell Collins) Proline Fusion Avionics Suite. Since Bombardier chose them over Honeywell (Hallelujah), it became the standard fit for their advanced models, including this one before they handed it over to the French. I work with this suite often, mostly in the Global Bizjet line.

He didn’t with that rough landing 😂😂

Exactly my thoughts

No relation

@@Alexius1Komnenos no kidding..

More like miniature b787

I hear that certain parts are still made of wood.

easy only going 137kts at full flaps 31ILS :)

@@jjstevenz I guess that would make sense. Nonetheless very buttery.

@@lordxandalf Buttery? No, they SLAMMED it down - that's the opposite of buttery! Clearly the pilot is ex-Navy. Flare? Gently greet the runway as smooth as you can? NAH - I'ma SMASH it into the touchdown zone and grab the number 3 wire!

@@marklnz You don't get a FOQA call for firm landings, but you sure as heck do if you land outside the touchdown zone even if it's the greasiest landing ever performed (greasy is definitely not the standard at LGA with its short-ass runways). Last time I did the RNAV X 31 I had a tailwind and I just barely made the last TDZ marker. We were among the last to land before they switched runways.

To me the touchdown sink rate looks way beyond normal, i.e. it was a hard landing.

​@@deepsky3001 well it's a short runway. For me, I'd rather have a positive/form landing than a smooth landing that would burn through a few hundred extra meters.

@@deepsky3001 Not even close to a hard landing

@@Diego38019what is considered a hard landing to you then?

Short runway. Exactly what you want to do in this situation.

@@CoDWiiPS3Gameplay 2100m is not a short runway in a A220 mate.

@@thomaswheeler9565 short enough you want to make sure you've got everything deployed correctly as you've got the drink at the end of the strip. Mate.

@@thomaswheeler9565You don’t want to have to cross the intersecting runway at LGA

It already looks 98% like that.

@@athgt6630 minus the weird sunset and sunrise colours and the night scenery but yea, pretty much

@@athgt6630 All the runway and aircraft lights remain the same size and intensity regardless of your distance from them. The night lighting uses a sepia mask overlay on the ground textures. There's no distortion on the windscreen. Just from a lighting perspective alone, MSFS is barely 10% the way there. Like the OP said, maybe in 20 years, or after companies start using AI for programming code.

@@camcherta dont forget about pollution effects

@@WestAirAviation we are a long ways from AI self writing their own code, god help us when that happens, the last of the worries will be a PC flight sim

MSFS but with raytracing

one of the hardest approaches to do at night from the FO seat with no guidance. The base to final turn is crucial

@@AirmanBrown It is lively! :)

@@climbmaintain Thats a tough one to, you cant see a thing flying over fhe water

Do they make the landing with Autopilot? Espacialy the curve?

@@ch36799 no it’s hand flown

Stress-testing the passengers.

There was a flare 😛

Yes! Or the A350. Wish there were more quality study level aircraft in MSFS.

@@MithradatesVIEupator i’ve heard that somebody is working on a study level A350 right now, not sure how far along it is though

@@barrel6468 just checked, you are right! Just read an article on Digital Flight Dynamics. Unfortunately the release date will probably be 2030 lol

Smooth is not what you want, particularly at LGA. On centerline and on aiming point sure would have made me proud.

autopilot took care of the turn

@@arturdlucas yeah. Visual approach my but. These planes RNAV visual approaches these days.

sounds like sped up airbus cavalry call lmao

That's why A330s don't land at La Guardia...

Because those callouts aren’t specific to an instrument approach. Those callouts are always made regardless. It’s called EGPWS

@@nuneze23 That's not true, minimums call are not always made. If you accept a visual approach it's because you're already visual and you need to maintain visual, so you usually cancel the minimums and the call it's not made.

@@Dani1996ITA yes you are correct I was half asleep when I made the comment and thought he was referring to RA callouts of the GPWS. I currently fly the 757/767 and only times we ever get the “approaching minimums/minimums” callout is when we set the RA bugs for Cat2 and 3 approaches.

the title is misleading... this is actually rnav x into lga 31, not the expressway visual

It was bought by airbus

Bombardier but taken over by Airbus.

Everything in the fuselage from the front door to the empennage is made by a chinese subcontractor and shipped to new Orleans. Let's see how the 220 airframes hold up after a C check or two.

except when the 10 and 5 are .001ms apart

Holy shit when is this dumb myth going to stop popping up. The '5' callout has absolutely nothing to do with how smooth or "buttery" the landing will be. It is part of a pre-determined package the airline orders based on which callouts they want.