DreamFleet recently released its much anticipated 'patch' for its much revered (and sometimes reviled) Greatest Airliners 737-400 product. For those who aren't familiar with the GA 737, it's a professionally designed payware add-on that aims to simulate (within the limits of a desktop computer and a $30 price tag) what it's like to command a 737. As far as FS add-ons go, the GA 737 is primarily meant for the more serious simmer who wants a more authentic flying experience than the one currently offered by Microsoft's default 737.
The patch (which is free to registered users and is intended for both FS2000 and FS2002) accomplishes two things:
Second, the patch corrects a plethora of bug issues—especially those related to the much maligned FMC and MCP—that plagued the GA 737 since its initial release almost six months ago.
As promised, the patch also adds new functionality to the FMC, namely, the ability to go direct to a waypoint. What wasn't promised, however (and this came as a bit of a surprise to everyone), was the addition of a new TCAS system that displays FS2002 AI traffic.
Now to say that the new release is a 'patch' is a bit misleading. Yes, the patch does fix pretty well all the outstanding issues, and yes, you will no longer wile away most of your flights battling 'invalid entries' in the FMC. But the patch really isn't a patch—it's more like a major overhaul.
True, with the patch the GA 737 may look more or less the same on the outside with respect to graphics and sound, but take a closer look under the hood (and I'm of course referring here to the important stuff like the FMC, the electricals and Mode Control Panel logic), and it's basically a brand new bird. Or a least a really cleaned-up one.
Now to be honest I've never flown a 737 in real life (or even sat in the cockpit of one for that matter… the biggest thing in my log book is a twenty hours in a Duchess—no FMC there, I'm afraid) so it's very difficult for me to honestly say things like: yes, the plane's handling is realistic, yes, the FMS is realistic, no, the electricals are not realistic.
What I can do, however, is offer my impressions of the new GA 737 based on my experiences with other quality simulators (it may not be fair to compare the two, but Aerowinx's 744 PS1.3 immediately comes to mind here). I can also base my impressions on what I've gleaned in FMC manuals and aviation books.
Now let's break the GA 737 down into components:
The FMC
This is the heart of the GA 737, and DreamFleet has made a reasonable effort to model a reasonably complete FMC. Cost indexes, thrust de-rates, accurate fuel predictions, the ability to now skip direct to an enroute waypoint (that's something the previous FMC desperately lacked); most of it seems to there and then some. And the best part of it all is this – it works.
No hitches. No computer crashes. No yelling at the keyboard. No complaining to DreamFleet that the patch needs a patch. No frustration. DreamFleet really has to be commended for getting the patch right the first time. The amount of development time obviously invested in this patch is really quite something – and it shows.
What you'll also especially like about the FMC is that it includes Prabal Gosh's global SID/STAR and airway database. This makes programming your route painless and fun.
But all is not perfect. Part of being a reviewer means pointing-out some of the weak spots so you can make an informed decision as to whether this product is for you. First and foremost, let me start by saying this: Don't purchase the GA 737 with unrealistically high expectations. The GA 737 is not meant to be a professional training aid (and if you use it as one, please let me know so I can stay as far away from your airline as possible.)
Now at the risk of incurring the wrath of the DreamFleet faithful, here's where the program falls short: The FMC is simplified.
Its Hold Page, for example, has some issues. You can't enter an EFC time, nor can you enter a radial and quadrant should ATC instruct you to hold at a VOR (you have to instruct the FMC to hold on an inbound track instead—hey, isn't what you do when holding at an NDB?). And as of yet you aren't able to add customized instrument approaches. The approaches you can select are all generic approaches.
The FMC is also missing some functions, notably ACARS and a Descent Forecast Page. What's more, many error and status messages seem to be absent – i.e., the 'Drag Required' message should you be too high on a VNAV Path descent—and I have some serious misgivings about how the FMC calculates V1 and the Top-of-Descent. In addition to some concerns regarding the ability of the FMC to capture an altitude in the descent (it likes to undershoot), there's also a bit of a debate surrounding the accuracy of some of the VNAV functions in the FMC, and in particular whether the throttles should go to idle on a normal VNAV Path descent. Currently they don't. But in the end it all boils down to sheer dollars and cents, I suppose, and the relative shallowness of my criticisms illustrate just how good this product really is.
To be fair, DreamFleet's Lou Betti has often stated (quite emphatically I might add) that the development costs associated with producing a genuinely realistic 737 would be huge, and that the price he'd have to charge for such a product would be well beyond what your typical consumer would be willing to pay. Indeed, while DreamFleet does employ words like "realistic," "authentic," and "complete" in its marketing literature, DreamFleet has always made it plain that the GA 737 is not meant to be a 100 percent accurate rendition of a 737, and that many things are not going to be accurate. In fact, the manual clearly states that the GA 737 is meant to be an "entertainment" product.
So if you're looking for a 737 PS1.3 you're barking up the wrong tree. The GA 737 is, after all, only $30 US. 744 PS1.3 costs ten times that amount.
The Mode Control Panel and Overhead Panel
If there is one word to describe the overhead panel, it's complete. My sources tell me that the electrical stuff basically works the way it should. I won't belabor the issue here, and hark on about Transformer Rectifier units, etc., just take my word for it. It's detailed.
As for the MCP: Again, never used the real thing myself, but it seems to function reasonably well. My feeling is that the DF programmers really worked hard to ensure that the MCP follows the correct logic to the best of their abilities. Flight level change, altitude hold, LNAV, their internal logic, their idiosyncrasies, she's all there. The Approach function, mind you, is currently a bit wonky (it doesn't hold the glideslope too well, but that's primarily a Microsoft issue and out of Dreamfleet's hands). Nevertheless, you will be impressed (once you get it all figured out, that is). Just be prepared to spend some serious time reading the manual.
One thing you may not like, though, is that the some of the switches on the GA 737 are dummy switches, and you won't find fire handles anywhere (not that MS models fires anyway, mind you.)
You may also dislike DreamFleet's inclusion of some features that the real 737 doesn't have.
On the EHSI, for example, the identification for the tuned NDB is displayed in the top right corner. And if going FMS direct, the message 'Direct To' is announced on the Navigation Display. The real plane has neither feature. DreamFleet implemented both for the sake of "user convenience." I'm sorry, but if you're going to market your product as being "realistic," be realistic. Why make little compromises that add little value to the final product?
You should also know that, unlike Wilco's 767 PIC, the GA 737 is not an emergency simulator. So if you're looking to tackle hydraulics and engine failures, you may want to look elsewhere.
The Graphics and Sound
There is no real improvement with regards to graphics and sound since the last version. The panels are as good as they can be and, frankly, there really isn't that much to improve (I would, however, like to see a first officer sitting beside me… single pilot IFR in a passenger-carrying 737: I don't that's legal!) A full set of co-pilot calls would be nice, too. The current set is rather limited.
The wing view is still my favorite and I look forward to the day when you'll be able to see the flaps move. (But the current wing is a .bmp so I don't know if we'll ever see moving flaps).
As for sounds: Mike Hambly produced them and I personally find many of them on the loud side, especially the APU sound, which sounds like you're standing right beside the thing even though you're in the flight deck. (Here I think DF is going more for entertainment effect than realism—sound effects for the sake of sound effects). But fortunately in the new patch many of the sounds have been separated from their respective gauges, and are now modifiable with a sound editor. This is good news.
What's not good news, however (and this is very important to know), is that the aircraft model has not been updated to the FS2002 GMax standard. Now the plane still looks great on the outside (not that you'll be spending much time flying from the spot view when there is so much to do on the inside), but you'll notice that when flying at night, your taxi and landing lights are not visible outside the cockpit. Taxiing at night in FS2002 is tough. This makes it even tougher. But you can blame this one on Microsoft. As with a few other things, DreamFleet is waiting for the SDK before they can issue a fix.
Equally disappointing, there is no virtual cockpit. But in DreamFleet's estimation this is not a big issue. But I beg to differ. The virtual cockpit was the default 737's only redeeming quality, and I'm disappointed by the lack of one in this release. But let's all remember here that what DreamFleet released is a "patch." The "upgrade" is still to come.
Flight Modeling and Frames Per Second
The plane seems to handle reasonably well, but I haven't had the chance to cross check the numbers the GA 737 generates against the actual numbers of the real aircraft. Mind you Microsoft's handling of aerodynamics is always suspect (MS propaganda to the contrary, FS2002 still is first and foremost a scenery generator), so I wouldn't be too surprised if there is a large gap between what's "real" and what's "simulated" with respect to how the GA 737 flies. Still, the GA 737 is as flyable by hand as any professionally designed FS aircraft (frankly, I have an extremely difficult time flying any of them by hand). However, with the GA 737 you will not experience any of the weird and wild pitch changes you might experience with some of the default planes.
One thing I should point out, though: In the real plane you can apparently taxi at idle. You can't do that in the GA 737. The authors are aware of the issue, but they claim their hands are tied behind their backs. They say things like, "We're sorry, but FS2002 has its limitations." As an answer a tad cavalier? Perhaps.
Purchasers expect professional developers to work around these kinds of issues—that's what we're paying for after all (and if DreamFleet really put their minds to it a fix no doubt could be found).
With regard to the frames per second what you should expect? Well, for an aircraft as complex as this one – all those zillions of lines of code – you'd expect your frame rate to take a pretty good hit. Well… Kinda yes, Kinda no. Sitting at the terminal at San Francisco (a heavily detailed airport) with cloud coverage and all the sliders close to max (including full AI and ATC) I obtained the following results:
The upshot of all of this is that if you're running on a medium to slow system, you're going to need to adjust your sliders to get reasonable frames while using the GA 737.
Miscellaneous Add-ons
The DF 737 comes with two add-on utilities: The Text-O-Matic and the Load Manager. All the Text-O-Matic does is allow you to easily change liveries, of which there are many (about 200 to be precise).
The Load Manager, however, allows you to configure your aircraft. How many first class seats do you want? How many in steerage? What about cargo? It's a cute add-on, but if you're like me, you'll probably only use it once and then never again.
Documentation
The learning curve for this product is somewhat steep. While an ATPL is hardly a prerequisite, folks with no prior experience with products like PS1.3 or Wilco's 767 will definitely have their hands full. The documentation (which, by the way, does not come in printed form) is as complete as you can reasonably expect.
Summary
The real-world 737-400 is a fantastically complex aircraft, especially once you consider all the internal workings of the automatics. The DreamFleet team took on quite a challenge when they decided to model this aircraft and its systems. That challenge was amplified by the fact that they were forced to deal with FS2002 without the benefit of an SDK. They also had to work within Microsoft Flight Simulator's limitations and eccentricities. Not exactly an easy row to hoe, that. Nevertheless, in this review I tried to be as objective as possible.
Many "reviews" read more like marketing literature and love letters, which doesn't do much of a service for the paying public, or inspire developers to push the envelope. [Editor's Note: Hopefully, that's not the case here at AVSIM Online!] Still, even though I've been a bit picky, I can confidently say that patched GA 737 really excels. A PS1.3? Not yet.
Tomorrow? Well, maybe if Lou Betti and crew win the lottery and can afford to create realistic simulators just for the sake of creating realistic simulators. (Lou would have to be first convinced that the average user would even want a 737 PS1.3—that might be tough). But as far as today goes, the GA 737 truly is the new standard for Microsoft add-ons. It's not the Real McCoy mind you (that would cost millions). But trust me, you'll like what the GA 737 has to offer all the same.
For more information, visit the DreamFleet2000 homepage. The GA 737 is available on CD. It can also be downloaded and purchased on-line for $29.95 US through Flight1 Software. With a credit card, the registration key is sent to you instantaneously, so once you buy the product you don't need to sit around waiting for days for the key to arrive.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
