PMDG News Roundup 30JAN06

[B777ER 2,509]

Thanks for the update Robert. Looking forward to seeing what PMDG has in store for us in regards to the future. I personally (so don't flame me anyone) would love to see you guys give the A320 with both the IAE and CFM variants a go even though I know Airbus will not help.About the MD11, thats great to hear about the pax and cargo versions. Hopefully you guys will paint up some previous MD11 users such as Delta.

[neilbradley1 2]

>Thanks for the update Robert. Looking forward to seeing what>PMDG has in store for us in regards to the future. I>personally (so don't flame me anyone) would love to see you>guys give the A320 with both the IAE and CFM variants a go>even though I know Airbus will not help.>About the MD11, thats great to hear about the pax and cargo>versions. Hopefully you guys will paint up some previous MD11>users such as Delta. >Is that why there is no descent A320 available - Airbus wont cooperate - what a shame?Neil Bradley

[NunTsuKao 0]

Hi!!!Thanks for this update. But, what about the B744 tutorial???Finally, i think that is very important for PMDG to offer the most importants heavy airliners in the world..... currently the B744 and the A340-600 (Perhaps the -500 and of course the 777 but no more boeing whitout an Aibus please.... Airbus would allow PMDG to design the complete A31x, A32x, A33x and A34x family.... no comments.....There is not a A346 Payware...... but you can find 767, 777, B744, etc etc etc, and Airbus????????????Kind regards for you all PMDG and captains from Spain and as allways...sorry for my english.....Carlos Garc

[Orlaam 324]

No Airbus won't cooperate. The level of detail you got with the PSS series is all you're gonna get with Airbus, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.Same for Gulfstream by the way. Gulfstream would probably sue any payware developer who made one of their planes, that's how much they hate FS.

[Guest Jeff Berman]

Thanks for the update Robert :)Looking forward to the 400F when released.

[fly_ebos 1]

Robert,Thanks for the update, but I have to ask you again ;): what about the engravity drivers?

[Guest D17S]

Thanks for the update. "PMDG approach. Request."Ya'll have done a great job with the Pax product. I'm really looking forward to the MD11. As the model evolves, I'm sure we we

[Guest james320]

Looking foward to purchasing the 747-400F and MD11 but come on PMDG... how about the following:1) TUTORIAL FLIGHT/S - Six months on from release and still nothing. Such a complex add-on really should come with one of more tutorial flights as they're the quickest and best way to learn about flying the aircraft; far better than studying a 400-page systems manual. I can think of one developer of a competing add-on (not mentioning their name so don't flame!) who have released several excellent free tutorials. PMDG sell the most expensive add-on (?) but are REALLY lacking in this area.2) TYPE COURSE - We got one instalment, then it went quiet.

[Guest Pilot26EF]

Im going to agree with Sam on this one. I am in no way dis-satisfied with the current versions of PMDG's products, and I do also intend on continuing to purchase them, more then likely, even including the 747-400F. I was the one who posted earlier in response to the comment by Leferis this morning. I never even got a chance to see a reply before it was removed completely, but I can see by this posting, that it did not go unnoticed. I would like to thank the PMDG team for all your hard work. I may have seemed a little heated at the time of the posting, but that was truly dissapointing news. However, as Sam has pointed out, wouldnt it be possible to make a simple patch for the PAX version with features that are being implemented in the Cargo version, but would also be native to the Pax version? Just as an example, the hydraulics system logic, or the engine instrumentations for specific engine variants. Both of the products are 747-400's, and although I am no programmer myself, I doubt that it would be too difficult to issue a service update of sorts to add those updated features to the passenger version of the same aircraft. Heck, I would even be willing to pay for the update as well. As an alternative, maybe even adding an option to your 400F installer that would patch the same features on a detected registered version of the Pax model. That would definitely be an extra insentive for me to purchase the Cargo version, and would also be highly welcomed. Please if you will, take this critisism constructively. I mean no disrespect by what I say. I am mearly voiceing my opinion as a concerned existing customer.Kevin M. Stoffel

[Guest Boaz]

Sounds good!Again I am so greateful that you have worked out these two extra engine types, also that you haven't stopped at creating the display modifications, you have also created updated engine behavior for those engine types as well.Very impressive.Boaz...

[Guest Matthias1975]

>No Airbus won't cooperate. The level of detail you got with>the PSS series is all you're gonna get with Airbus, and I>don't see that changing anytime soon.>>Same for Gulfstream by the way. Gulfstream would probably sue>any payware developer who made one of their planes, that's how>much they hate FS.Why do you guys allways want to know what a specific company is willing to do or not to do. It

[macpac22 0]

>as Sam has pointed out, wouldnt it be possible to make a>simple patch for the PAX version with features that are being>implemented in the Cargo version, but would also be native to>the Pax version? Is there such a thing as a "simple patch" on a complex aircraft addon? im sure if that was the case PMDG would have released it

[Guest 3202b]

No Airbus won't cooperate. The level of detail you got with the PSS series is all you're gonna get with Airbus, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.You are completly incorrect - all the required information is available from various different sources. For one, a few months back a RW bus pilot offered to source any information that would be required to model a realistic airbus aircraft. Manuals, guides and performance data convering all aspects of FBW logic and other sytems are all readily available too. Only because Airbus is not as helpful as Boeing doesnt mean you can't do it - this excuse has been used by the community for too long - it's a myth!

[Guest A32X]

I too really would love to see an Airbus on the level of previous PMDG products. And before someone says we already have an Airbus for FS the PSS behaviour is nothing like the real aircraft.I can imagine it would be a difficult project to undertake and the help of a manufacture would be a great asset. I'm sure if Airbus knew what could actually be achieved they might be more interested?-PaulCan't wait for the 744F :-)

[FlyinMisfit 0]

thanks for the update Mr. Randazzo. just one quick question regarding the 747 PAX version. will there be any more "PMDG" liveries released for it? thanks in advance for any info. happy flyin, Tim Wheeler