Hi PMDG,I was wondering if you also gona develope this sort of MCP??http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=597933&size=LThen about the FMC: Will you also make in the future some FMC updates like ALTN DEST., ACARS (which we may expect in the B744), etc.It would be nice to see EEC too.

Hi there, Just checked out the latest version of the B737-800/900 update. My goodness the Pitch Limiting Indicators are still missing from the PFD. When are they going to be added? This is not a demand but a request. PLease help as your great product is just missing a little detail to be perfect in my own eyes. My dad who flies the B747-400 is planning to slow down and request for a downgrade to a smaller fleet like the B737-800s soon. I hope to use your B737-800/900s to help himm get acustomed to the new fleet of planes he will be flying soon. Hey another thing is that in the 2 D panel we cant seem to see the lower pages to see the engine parameters and surfaces movements.Keep doing what you are doing cuz my frame rates seemed to have improved since th last update. I am sure you can even further reduce it. Maybe the graphics being not so nice at the expense of improving frame rates. I am sure most of us wont mind either. Cannot fly with 3 or 4 FPS. Like slide show!Regards,AirbusCaptain

Surely the ALTN DEST function would be very very very appreciated. This is maybe the greatest "fault" in an otherwise complete and fantastic add-on.

AirbusCaptain, sir you must use your real name when posting on this forum, thank you. While the PLI is not there, the AOAindication on the PFD option IS, certainly we are not missing the function that the PLI gives. Nevertheless I believe in a future update this should be addressed IF there is in fact going to be some (I believe they have stated there will be). Ramon, I seriously doubt that such an extreme change will happen with the NG's MCP panel. It is true that all new NGs rolloing out at Boeing field in fact only have this new Collins's MCP unit, it is still in the minority in regards to current productions numbers. Acars is another story but we will have to wait for some word from PMDG when that time comes. If the BBJ becomes a reality certain we should expect to see some neat things, maybe even the weather display depending on what is done on the 744 of course amounst other items ;-)Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4][h3]P M D G's 747-400[/h3][h4]coming to a runway near you[/h4][/font color]Caution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

Sorry about that guys, Thank you for all the fun hours with the 737NGs! Have been going at it for the past 3 days non stop since I installed FS2004! I see that the frame rates are slightly better than those on the B737-600/700 before the latest patch. Good on ya mate! Please include in the PLIs whenever you can to otherwise a fantastic add on to my flightsim! WIll get my dad to teach me how to operate some of the functions too. I think can be recommended to BOEING for cockpit familiarisation too for budding B737NGs pilots. once again Randy continue to do what you are doing as the frame rates are getting better after the latest update!Regards,Darren

Ah not me, but thank Lefteris, Robert, Vin and the rest of the guys for otimizing the newest update. I only get the privlage of testing it prior to release ;-)Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4][h3]P M D G's 747-400[/h3][h4]coming to a runway near you[/h4][/font color]Caution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

About making the graphics less impressive in an aim to increase frame rates, while I can understand the need people feel for this "NOW", computers get faster, gfx cards get cheaper. In a year or less, when some of us upgrade to new gfx cards we will be better off without the gfx being cut down. If they have been cutdown, you will all then be asking that they be bumped back up again.Besides, I have a relatively cheapo gfx card (MX440 128DDR) and all detail sliders maxed (except 3D cloud draw distance), the worst frame rates I get are flying out of bad weather. Removing the weather I get about 20 fps in the NG.I also know that there are gamers who are not happy until they have 50 and 60 fps, well... there is no need really. 25 is enough to give the eye near perfect motion queues. Which is why it is used on TV's, cinema and videos, as far as I am aware.Having said that, landing in pissing rain and gusty winds with 4 cloud layers and the fps drops to about 3 or less, is a nightmare to land.

Hi, Sorry about being a total dimwit, but I have a hard time seeing the difference between the picture and the MCP modelled. Of course, I don't have FS in front of me now, so I cant tell. Can some one enlighten me?Thanks,BoazEKCH

Well that pic does not show the color. The DIGITS are white on a blue background. There are other differences too like the GREEN in the buttons when engaged. Of course there are other things you will notice when looking close. Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4][h3]P M D G's 747-400[/h3][h4]coming to a runway near you[/h4][/font color]Caution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

Hi Randy, Thanks for the info. As I looked closer at the image, I noticed something on the dial to manually set the speed ref. It has positions for Auto, V1, Vr and then VT (or so it looks to me), VREF and some other symbol I can't make out. What is the WT? Or is it just a V2 that has been smudged?Thanks,BoazEKCH

Hi there! Nah I was saying that some of us out here are using laptops and so there is no way for us to upgrade our video cards which is why we rather sacrifice details for performance. Even with the latest upgrade i get 8 FPS at best. I am not saying that it is perfect but was much better than before the upgrade. Actually before the upgradr I grounded my 737NG fleet cuz the frame rates were too bad. If you decrease the graphics tax in future it will make us all very happy. I need those PLIs,better frame rates................. and I will happy. Haha!!! ANyhowz time to fly again.Regards,Darren

So what about us with 2004 spec computers? Are we meant to give up the high detailed models to favour the rapidly diminishing number of under powered users?Tell me, what happens when you turn down the Aircraft detail level? Are you flying with detailed clouds, high or low scenery detail and so on. What fps do you get with the default 737?I suspect if you set everything to medium low or even minimal your frame rate will increase. If it doesn't increase enough to be playable then it's safe to say your computer is NOT of the correct specification to run FS2004. This might sound unfair, but as I said, computers are getting faster every 6 months, arguably doubling in speed every 18months to 2 years (vaguely Moore's law or Bell's law). For the same spec the price is more or less halving ever 2 years. This means that a 2002 good spec machine might cost you, 200 GBP (about $340) or less and that should be at least an Athlon 1800XP with a GeForce MX440 64Mb, which will run the 737NG at a playable speed.Also, I am sorry to say that Laptops are not good for gaming in general, unless you really pay through the nose and get one with an onboard 9800 or simiar gfx chipset. I suspect that for the price of that laptop you could buy 2 desktops.Lets NOT bring the detail down, I would be happier to see it where it is for a while, maybe minor optimization of various things here and there.I would suggest also that you fly without the VC and cabin, which even in 2D can cause less fps.Ideally with a current spec machine the MAX detail should just start to cripple the system, so that when the hardware gets faster it catches up. However the lower detail levels should be playable on "minimum spec" for the game, which is printed on the FS2004 box and also (I believe) on the PMDG downloads page. Does your laptop meet these specs?

"I also know that there are gamers who are not happy until they have 50 and 60 fps, well... there is no need really. 25 is enough to give the eye near perfect motion queues. Which is why it is used on TV's, cinema and videos, as far as I am aware."Actually... TV is 29fps, film is 23.3fps. It is my understanding that these numbers were not "chosen" for the above stated reason. They were merely physical limitations and compromises at the time of standardizing. However, the human eye is said to be capable of distinguishing up to 60fps with relative ease. The reason TV looks smooth despite being at 29fps is a side-effect of the way video is recorded called motion-blur. There have been efforts to mimic this effect on the CG side, most were very nicely done in my opinion, however, it seems most games do not take advantage of them.Either way I disagree strongly. If you are getting acceptable framerates with all the MSFS sliders maxed on that video card I'd bet you aren't running with FSAA or anisotropic filtering. Either way, the previous poster was correct in that the PMDG is a performance stressor. This is not so much PMDG's fault as it is Microsoft's for having a sub-par 3d engine. Sure, it makes things look pretty, but it seems to me that they neglected to utilize many optimizations that could have improved performance across the board (backface culling is a good example).

As far as I remember from studying it in technology, TV depends on the format. PAL-M which is for UK TV runs at 50 1/2 frames per second, this is due to the interlacing on VHS and the 50Hz mains supply. NTSC I believe runs at the higher 60Hz for the 60Hz mains supply, but I will stand to be corrected. The correlation between the main supply and the refresh/frame rate saves in complexity in the timeing and also eliminates some of the interferance in earlier TVs from "mains hum" and phase distortion it causes. Again, it's been a while since I studied this.Actually 12fps is enough to make the eye believe it is seeing motion, as opposed to a jumping image and I believe is still used in stop frame animation, (which arguable IS what gfx cards do). The 24fps is taken as twice this and I believe there are reason behind it choice. Similar to the double of frequency to bandwidth in digital transmittion mediums (Sampling Theorem).CG does suffer where video/TV doesn't in the detail and refresh rates of the monitor being much higher, with TV the screen "memory" is longer due to the lower refresh, so frames blend a little, where as they don't on a monitor.Going beyond 50fps is almost pointless in my opinion. Anything above 20/24 is good.

>> Well that pic does not show the color. The DIGITS are white>on a blue background. There are other differences too like the>GREEN in the buttons when engaged. Of course there are other>things you will notice when looking close. >I guess this picture shows it:http://www.airliners.net/open.file/402148/L/CheersThomas