PMDG Still the King of Sim, sorry other add-on

[skyymann 6]

Both aircraft ROCK!!!!!!So, when will the MD-11 be ready :-)(Just Kidding!!!!!)Scott

[Guest Gzr_GreenBean]

I have to agree, the 737NG just feels better than the newer 767, maybe it is because the -800 and -900 are more current aircraft and have better pilot/airplane interfaces with FMC and the autopilot, maybe it is just a case of better programming, I am not sure which. In a short time I have been able to pretty well master the 737NG (can fly from BOS-EGLL 6+30) without any complaints on the critique portion of FS Flight Keeper, while I can barely stay safe in the other plane. Of course, I will need more time and study to learn that one, but the NG is more intuitive. When I was flying RW, we had steam instruments and the autopilot was mainly for altitude hold and to make small course corrections, and the FMC didn't exist. But the NG system is so very nice and it works like it should. Great job, guys.Bill Ehmig

[Mike T 208]

*Ding Ding* and the fights on:Both contenders circle each other respecting eachothers mutual talents, neither anxious to take the first shot:I think that the LDS 767 has quite a few less "bugs" than the original PMDG 737NG offering...but the NG has matured into a world class product without question, whereas the LDS is still cutting its teeth. The 767 has not been patched while the NG has gone through multiple patches so it remains to be seen what the final iteration of the 767 will look like. Will there be any new features? Will all relative bugs be fixed? (Personally, I have not encountered ANY bugs listed on their forum). LDS lands an uppercut to PMDG's jaw.Both offerings offer complete aircraft systems. Both swing and miss, no score.In the PMDG offering, I don't need to leave the VC interface at all. I can program the FMC, Radio stack, overhead et al; everything clickable in the 2D is clickable in the VC. In the LDS, there is a hybrid VC / 2D approach where the FMC is totally non functional in the VC except for a fully functional 2D popup window and many functions of the VC radio stack must be accessed via a 2D popup (most functions however are modeled). For me, I am disappointed with this type of interface as it diminishes slightly my immersion factor. Additionally, tuning the radios is a nightmare in the LDS with no right click to tune in the 100s or 1000s trying to keep up with ATC is no fun. PMDG lands a solid right cross to LDS's head.VC cockpit gauge performance is relatively lagging in both models however, PMDG offers a way to add CPU cycles to bump up the gauge refresh rate while the LDS 767 VC gauge rate is pretty lagging. PMDG slips a quick jab at LDS and they step back a bit.PMDG went the extra mile to model an entire cabin. For me, with an FX-55 I am not concerned with performance loss in most situations so I wish this were an option on the LDS for those with extremely fast computers. For me this is a HUGE immersion factor and I love it. PMDG lands a straight left to LDS's stomach.The LDS models the IRS system, fuel dumping (granted not available on the 737 in real life anyway, but they get cool points because you see the fuel streaming from the nozzles!), has an integrated (albeit rudementrary) copilot that can handle gear and flaps, and ground and cabin crew. LDS lands a huge right hand to PMDG's face, PMDG looks hurt!As far as the external model, both look like their real world counterparts. LDS offers wing flex and PMDG does not on the 800-900 (yes there is noticible wing flex there). Both contenders answer each other's jabs, but the LDS jab is just a little more potent and PMDG forces a clinch.*ding*So, the first fight is over and it goes to the judges, both LDS and PMDG are walking around the ring with their hands raised in victory. And, it looks like a split decision. Judge1: 115 - 112 PMDG, Judge2: 115 - 112 LDS, Judge 3 115-114.... PMDG!!!!And the winner. And STILL the undisputed champion of the worrrrld! Pre-cision Manu-u-als!!! *ding* *ding* *ding* Some of the crowd is cheering and some booing. Both contenders meet in the middle of the ring to hug in mutual respect for each other's magnificant talent, dedication, and deft skill. Both walk away knowing that there truly is no clear winner, but both know a rematch is due.I hear the rematch will be scheduled shortly once LDS bulks up with a new patch! But PMDG is benchpressing 747s in preperation so this promises to be a knockdown dragout fight to the finish!!! :-)Mike T.

[Mats_J 2]

Excellent post Mike>I hear the rematch will be scheduled shortly once LDS bulks up with a >new patch! But PMDG is benchpressing 747s in preperation so this >promises to be a knockdown dragout fight to the finish!!! I love the picture of PMDG benchpressing 747s! :-DCheers,

[krylite 0]

"I also have a number of aviation DVDs and from what I've seen the panels we use in FS are eerily similar to their real-life counterparts both in appearance and functionality." Isn't that the point of these top-notch panels to be eerily similar?:)I'd have to go with PMDG for now. Flight1's ATR-72 also does a decent showing as an interloper with their VC&VCabin clickable doors and toilet flush:)The most annoying thing about LevelD767 was lack of integrating a basic SID/STAR database citing difficulties with their new XML-based FMC interpreter code. On their forum they expect the community to fill the database by contributing to navadata.at; Plus the pop-up 2D FMC in VC I agree was also a disappointment and the final factor in tilting the title to PMDG if I had to judge a competition.BUT, LevelD767 is a very close second!(the sounds and flight modelling are amazing!) and certainly the best 767 simulator for PC's out there now.

[Guest A32X]

PMDG products are amazing, but they're not, so far, up to level-D's standards in my opinion. (Just check the engine start on the LDS 767 compared to the 737.)I believe the original PIC767 was a notch ahead of any PMDG product to date, a proper failures system, IRS all in FS2000 too, but that's just my opinion. ;-)However, I'm sure the 747 will give LDS a run for there money, which is only good for us simmers!

[Qavion 19]

>I got sick of my 737 using up 9/10's the runway.Have you tried narrower runways? Perhaps then you'd get 10/10?The 747-400 will use 13/10's (so be sure to keep the grass on either side of the runway well-watered.... in case you set fire to it).Cheers.Ian

[moss1 11]

The only reason I am posting here is my love for PMDG products. I had to get a refund for the LD 767 due to horrible performance in my system. I thought since the 737NG was good performance wise, the LD767 would be also.I did not think the textures were at all up to the level of the 737NG in and out. I am a Heavy VC user and the PMDG is smooth as silk for the most part as long as I don't get carried away maxing everything out.I couldn't even think about using VC in the 767. I also was not crazy about all of the sounds in the 767. I think they did a great job overall, but I still stick with PMDG. They are in my opinon a better product. But as they say "to each is own" I quess. I really enjoy reading everyones different opinions on the two products. Are we allowed to talk about other developers in this forum? I was not sure as I waited some time to post. Anyway, it is fantastic how far flight simulation has come. I swore I would never buy MSFS after I tried 98, then I saw the commercial for FS9 on a cable station. Now I own more add-ons than I can think of an I am truely hooked!!! The add-ons get better and better. Anyway, have a great night everyone and may we all enjoy these amazing add-ons.Best regards. Moss1

[G7USL 117]

I find it difficult to appreciate that the 'vc' view in the 'LDS767' dosen't run smoothly if, you have no problem doing the same with PMDG?Could this be just sour grapes?All the best,Dave.'Three greens and soft landings'

[Guest 2302rs]

Personally I love both of them. Really. I noticed two things concearning the FMCs:LDS 767 is completely missing a SID STAR database, as mentioned before.But the LDS FMC has some functions that the PMDG FMC is missing: step climb predictions, trim settings for TO, 2nd flightplan (don't think I'll ever make use of that, but it is there anyway...).

[moss1 11]

Actually it's strange, The PMDG used to run poorly in VC. I reinstalled it an always load the default 172 first, then the 737NG, I get an average 27fps I don't know what made things better, but I was not aware of the rule of loading default AC until a few months ago. What a difference it makes! Even the LD767 I was getting about 21fps but it was very jerky at best. I meant to post my specs...Win2000pro / ASUS A7N8Xdeluxe MB / AMD 2800+barton / 1.5gigs pc3200 ddr ram / NVidia 6800GT 256mbAGP / Maxtor80gig 7200IDE /HitachiSuperscan813 21" Mon. / CH Products USB Yoke & Rudder To this day after spending too many hours over the past year, I still can't figure out FS9 to make it work any better than it is. The LD767 should have worked better. Maybe the P4 might be a better solution? Best regards, moss1

[chiswick72 145]

Hi guys,The LDS 767 is a magnificent bird, apart from all that is said, it has a very indepth failure systems capability. I cant believe how much fun Im having creating real life failures and situations, and having to deal with the consequences. Hydraulic failures... one pump or two ? :-lol Then the yaw dampers go offline, and autoland goes down.... nice! Uhoh my destination is IFR only!Dont take anything away from PMDG, but the LDS 767 is magnificent (with a few fixable gremlins). :)Armen at EGLLwww.veryquiet.com

[Guest amtran752]

I agree aswell.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/109142.gif

[Guest Paul Heaney]

>and in particular, especially not the flight simmer who>receives better quality overall!Like I said, I prefer the LevelD 767

[lbarber 20]

What's really dissapointed me in the LDS offering is the lack of update in the user interface. I still have problems with click acceleration on the MCP, there is no right click for changing headings/altitudes in 10/1000 increments, click spots are often hard to find and thus hard to click. It's not a bug, but to me it just represents a lack of attention to some pretty important details. It seems that LDS was satisfied with the code of the original PIC product for things like the autoflight interface and neglected to update it to the standards of more recent addons (eg 737NG or F-1 ATR). The systems seem very well done, but they aren't explained in detail (as with the F-1 ATR), nor does the maunal contain detailed performance and planning charts or detailed abnormal proceedures. These seem like relatively simple things that were overlooked even after months of waiting and hearing "it won't be released until it's ready." It looks to me like LDS cut corners in the end to have the product out early. They didn't even include a working SID/STAR database (yes, the challenges here were huge, but the product isn't really totally functional without it). Yes they've created a highly realistic aircraft simulation, but there was much left to be done to make it as usable and detailed as possible. Attention to detail is everything, when items like this that affect the overall usability of the product are left out, it makes the countless hours of work the LDS team spent on this product look halfassed. -Lee Barberhttp://home.nc.rr.com/uniuniunium/dvasig.jpg