Sign in to follow this  
bob34

742 and 744 Market Overlap

Recommended Posts

PMDG Team:I'm curious if you've looked at the VMax 742 and what your thoughts are. Summed up, my thought is it has tremendous potential and not to take anything away from the Vmax team (because I couldn't program a loop in basic nor draw a straight line) I think they are 1 developer and 1 artist away from a tremendous product.Comparing the 742 and the 744 is like comparing diesel and nuclear subs, but I was wondering if you think there's overlap in the market with your upcoming 744?Just to comment on my question... I'm wondering if you have anything that will be put in the package to incent those who may think there is overlap. For example - small aps such as load managers, calculators, importable airline routes etc..The B737 by itself is quite common, and it was the FMC that pried my wallet open - which in turn opened a whole new dimension to FS2004 for me.Curious what the teasers on the 744 might be - fully understanding different strokes for different folks.BobKMEM

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I probably should have been more specfic on the developer statement. I think the "systems" piece of the aircraft are well done. I think the flight model could use some work. Takeoff at heavy weights is well done, but once the aircraft is in the air, it behaves like a modern mid-size jet. Landings need some model mods as well, especially when landing outside the weight envelope. No flap landings over max gross weight are pretty easily done. There just doesn't seem to be any implications for disregarding the control limits.But I'm certainly not Vmax RFP bashing. It's a kick-#### product.I was just curious if PMDG thought there may be some overlap and what the carrot on the stick might be for the consumers who do think there's overlap. Like I mentioned before, the FMC is what pushed me over the edge and opened my wallet. Being an owner of the RFP 742, I'm not quite sure what will help me decide on the 744.

Share this post


Link to post

G'day BobI think that there is very little overlap given how different the systems are between the 400 and 100/200/300.Given the differences its just like flying a new aeroplane.I agree with your comments re the product and it could have been so much more.With no options in what model to use 95% of the market are stuck with a massive model and no way to look at it unless you want to pay extra bucks for Active Camera.Already people have complained at the RFP webpage about how to remove a completely redundant feature that hammers everyones FPS.Real poor decision that one to not give you the option to ditch the interior.The original gauges seem to have been used so its still got those sloppy poor refresh rate ADI which makes instrument flying difficult with no zoom option.Its still a cool addon but with a litle different direction and listening to past complaints and idea's it could have been a killer.Nice to have and fun to fly but oh what could have been.Bye for nowDarren

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Darren,I see your a QF driver. I'm flying on QF26 KLAX-NZAA on Tuesday, too bad you don;t fly the B744, we could meet up! :)Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post

Bob-We don't really see any overlap between the two products. Some folks like the older 747s, some folks like the newer version... From the product development side of things, it's usually not productive to view similar projects from the standpoint of competition or similarity. Both the FRP and PMDG 737s were initially designed for use in FS2002, which immediately adds some limitations and weaknesses to the products from a development standpoint....With the 744, we are able to go "all out" because we made the decision early in development to make the airplane FS9 ONLY...thus we are not limited by some of the FS2002 nuances.So with the 744 we'll have fully clickable VCs with animated 3D knobs and switches, etc.... Stuff that is not reasonable to "reverse introduce" into the 737s because it would require so much "rebuilding" of the existing product infrastructure...So- I think folks should support VMax and their 747.... I think folks should support as many of the development houses as they can- including PMDG. After all- it's the combined efforts of these many skilled designers who keep advancing our hobby forward!

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed. My curiosity alone on what can be accomplished with a FS9 bred product will be enough to purchase. Great point on that. I'm looking forward to an Air Force One.Can't wait to take the 800/900's from Renton to Boeing Field as well. Shame on you guys for actually testing before releasing. You would never make it as MS developers. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Hi nameless,I think the flight model could use some work. Oh really? Have you ever flown a real 747 that you can judge?Takeoff at heavy weights is well done, but once the aircraft is in the air, it behaves like a modern mid-size jet.So is the real thing Sir, as agile like a C-130! No flap landings over max gross weight are pretty easily done. There just doesn't seem to be any implications for disregarding the control limits.I do not know what model you fly but if you try to land the RFP model withpot flaps below limits it defenately will crash. Another example, if you have not proper landing speed (being to slow according flap settings) you will not be able to hold the glide slope as in real life. So where is your problem? :-) ___________________________Best Regards,Bodo M

Share this post


Link to post

Nameless's name is Bob and Bob is your customer, which also gives me the right to an opinion without giving my resume. My log book and type ratings are personal business.We are now obviously on the wrong forum. If you're not so kindly asking me to backup a claim with data, send me an e-mail and perhaps we can discuss some flight model tests on friendly terms.My overall statement was a compliment to the RFP team and it appears your eyes were drawn to the negatives. So my statement was a little strong. More nicely put, I thought the graphics could be a bit crisper and the flight model tweaked a bit. RFP V2 was again a great product, but didn't cure a few things I was hoping for - hence the statement of bolstering the development team. I never would have thought developers to be defensive over their work. :)e-mail is bb1134@yahoo.comBob in Memphis

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this