737NG questions and comparison to LDS767

[schmeeling 0]

Hi all.I'm a happy user of several complex add-ons, incl. the ATR and the LDS767. I really enjoy the 767, but given time real-world time constraints, I tend to fly shorter routes more appropriate for a 737. (I also fly Westjet alot in the real world, so...). To be honest, after reading the forums and reviews it was a coin toss as to which I bought first.I owned the PMDG757 way back in FLY!, and am familiar with their outstanding quality and service. My point then? I'm just trying to decide whether/what to drop my next $60+ FS dollars on, and I'm wondering if there's much difference in how it "feels" (at home in front of the computer) to operate and fly the 737NG vs. the LDS, or whether in practice I'd be better off spending on something altogether different (maybe Vancouver+, or an ERJ-145 say (???)).Can anybody who owns and flies both weigh in? Perhaps asked another way, for those that fly the 737NG more often, why do you load it rather than the LDS or something else.Secondly, any comment on "how much" better the full 800/900 package is than the 600/700? If you own both and somebody took the 800/900 away from you, how upset would you be?Thanks,Chris

[markadeane 272]

>Can anybody who owns and flies both weigh in? Perhaps asked>another way, for those that fly the 737NG more often, why do>you load it rather than the LDS or something else.Hi Chris,Product comparisons are generally not invited on these boards, you'll find the same at the LDS boards, but seeing as how your question is a reasonable one to ask I'll say this as a user of both:The PMDG 737NG is still the best 737NG available, and I expect this will remain the case for the rest of FS2004's life.It is an immersive and well crafted add-on and was my first ever addon so I have fond memories of it. However, attmepting to compare the 737NG with the 767 is unfair on the 737 and misleading to the prospective user because the two products were developed at different times with different FS SDK knowledge.Put in one sentence: If you want a 737NG it is the ONLY sound choice. >Secondly, any comment on "how much" better the full 800/900>package is than the 600/700? If you own both and somebody took>the 800/900 away from you, how upset would you be?The 800/900 add-on bought with it some considerable improvements in performance and functionality. I'd recommend it.

[schmeeling 0]

I certainly mean no disrespect to any developer, and apologize if this wasn't an appropriate spot to pose the question. I was hoping that those frequenting this forum would be "users" and I wouldn't be inciting any "Curly's better than Moe" controversies.It's clear from all of the reviews I've read that the NG is universally enjoyed and respected. I suppose my comparison was meant to be less a PMDG/LDS comparison, as a question of whether a well developed 737NG "feels" much different than a well developed 767.Thanks for your response.

[Guest Hawkeyeted]

Both are quality add-ons. The question you should be asking yourself is; what will I be flying most? Long hauls (>8 hours) or short hauls (<6 hours). That should answer which aircraft to purchase. Keep in mind, there are over 5,000 737's in service.Additionally, here is a website for reading up on "all things 737".http://www.737.org.uk/

[michal 44]

>whether a well developed 737NG "feels" much different than a>well developed 767."Feels" can be interpreted 1000 different ways. Like it was stated above the PMDG 737 and LDS 767 represent different levels of technology so direct comparison is hard to do and really not fair. Perhaps you should come up with a list of features that are important to you in which case you may get more concrete replies.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[Orlaam 306]

No doubt the PMDG 737 is a wonderful product. Does the LDS have some things over the PMDG 737? Sure, but I still find it's performance and handling exceptional. The AFDS is a real joy, and CWS is really fun to play with. One really needs the 800/900 add on though to get the most out of it. The TCAS II integration and other added features, as well as the enhanced panels make it complete.

[schmeeling 0]

Thanks for the great responses, and a great question regarding "feel".I would respond as follows: From cold-and-dark to parked-and-shutdown I find the Aeroworx B200 feels different than the ATR, which feels different than the 767. I own and enjoy all, and don't really compare between them, and I select my flight-du-jour based on...???Effectively each add-on models (very well) a class of aircraft which feels different to me the desktop pilot. In the real world the 767 is a different class than the 737, but I'm wondering if there's a tangible difference to how it feels (that word again) to fly the virtual models.Seems a bit woo-woo as I read my comments, but I think feel is what separates the PMDG/LDS/ATR/B200/(your choice here) from the others. Rather than a list of features, I would list items of importance (to me) as:- start-up and set-up complexity and accuracy (more=better)- the "feel" of hand-flying a take-off and transitioning to AP-LNAV- the "feel" of flying an approach, slowing down, adding flaps etc. both with and w/o AP- the "work flow" of moving from sub-panel to sub-panel during these efforts (I'm mostly a 2D guy)If the 737 handles just like the 767, with similar functionality, then maybe something else. If it "feels" noticeably different, then Westjet here I come!