Quick question:I have never seen the oil temperature fluctuate during taxi or flight. When referencing the the operations manual, it states that oil temps may rise quickly when facing downwind or during taxi. It also states that oil temps may rise during prolonged taxi in high ambient temps. For high ambient temps I would expect 33C to be pretty high but I haven't seen any fluctuation on the gauge at all. I also would expect the fuel temp to fluctuate a little as well especially when the ambient temperature changes during flight. NHeither one of these gauges seem to display fluctuations and they are displaying the same value regardless of what the weather/flight conditions are. Is anybody else seeing the same thing or am I "special"? :(

Quick question:I have never seen the oil temperature fluctuate during taxi or flight. When referencing the the operations manual, it states that oil temps may rise quickly when facing downwind or during taxi. It also states that oil temps may rise during prolonged taxi in high ambient temps. For high ambient temps I would expect 33C to be pretty high but I haven't seen any fluctuation on the gauge at all. I also would expect the fuel temp to fluctuate a little as well especially when the ambient temperature changes during flight. NHeither one of these gauges seem to display fluctuations and they are displaying the same value regardless of what the weather/flight conditions are. Is anybody else seeing the same thing or am I "special"? :(

I am seeing the same as you. Unfortunately I now understand that PMDG developed this bird with more attention to detail in the VC Graphics and 3d design (Which is absolutely mindblowing and by far the best to this date in my oppinion) then they did simulating the aircraft systems. It seems the J41 is an "express" product and targeted more towards the majority of FSX users than the hardcore simulation enthusiasts. I also believe that PMDG as a company, will benefit greatly by these types of products, since the return is probably better than compared to the return of the "Study Sims" that they are famous for.Hopefully they will figure out a way to make half of a product for the majority of simmers and then complete the same product, maybe called a "Pro" version and charge more for those who are looking for the complete simulation in typical PMDG style.JB

This is NOT an "Express" product. Every single gauge in the J41 is custom programmed. Look at the 1900 Express products - those are stock FS gauges with a nice model and FDE, that's it. No custom FMS & autopilot, no custom engine programming, no systems like fuel, pressurization, hydraulics etc.What you're seeing with the oil temp is a limitation of what we could do with FS's horribly broken turboprop engine model. There are tens of thousands of lines of code attempting to tame FS with respect to those engines - we got 99% of the way there but some things just aren't possible within the limitations of what we've been given by FS. I say with absolutely no reservations that this is the most accurately modeled turboprop engine (and the only one of a geared turboprop) in the history of FS. Stop watching oil temps trying to find "gotchas" to nail us with and just enjoy flying the airplane.

This is NOT an "Express" product. Every single gauge in the J41 is custom programmed. Look at the 1900 Express products - those are stock FS gauges with a nice model and FDE, that's it. No custom FMS & autopilot, no custom engine programming, no systems like fuel, pressurization, hydraulics etc.What you're seeing with the oil temp is a limitation of what we could do with FS's horribly broken turboprop engine model. There are tens of thousands of lines of code attempting to tame FS with respect to those engines - we got 99% of the way there but some things just aren't possible within the limitations of what we've been given by FS. I say with absolutely no reservations that this is the most accurately modeled turboprop engine (and the only one of a geared turboprop) in the history of FS. Stop watching oil temps trying to find "gotchas" to nail us with and just enjoy flying the airplane.

Hi Ryan,I am not on board with the guy that posted above and I am not criticizing the product. I just wanted to make sure that the behavior I am seeing is "expected" and that I didn't have some kind of install problem. Thanks for all the hard work on the product.

This is NOT an "Express" product. Every single gauge in the J41 is custom programmed. Look at the 1900 Express products - those are stock FS gauges with a nice model and FDE, that's it. No custom FMS & autopilot, no custom engine programming, no systems like fuel, pressurization, hydraulics etc.What you're seeing with the oil temp is a limitation of what we could do with FS's horribly broken turboprop engine model. There are tens of thousands of lines of code attempting to tame FS with respect to those engines - we got 99% of the way there but some things just aren't possible within the limitations of what we've been given by FS. I say with absolutely no reservations that this is the most accurately modeled turboprop engine (and the only one of a geared turboprop) in the history of FS. Stop watching oil temps trying to find "gotchas" to nail us with and just enjoy flying the airplane.

Tabs, I have purchased and will purchase without a second thought anything that you guys produce. I believe that you have created the best and most acurate FSX turboprop to this date and to prove it, I just upgraded my computer, purchased and reinstalled XP64 bit, am in the midst of tuning the overclock all specifically for the J41. This is the only addon aircraft in my virtual hanger for now and I don't plan on simming anything else for a while. With that being said, I am enjoying the addon tremendously and not looking for "Gotchas", but in the midst of enjoying this amazing FSX turboprop, I am realising that it is not living up to my opinion of the PMDG hype. Yes it's the greatest Turboprop available for FSX, but possibly not the greatest TP simulation for flight simulator (including FS9). Yes it is the first and best simulation of geared TP's in FS history and probably the best VC in FS history, but thats where it ends. After startup and before shutdown, there is nothing else to keep the challenge or complexity up, unlike the last 2 PMDG products. Yes, my expectations of the J41 were high, but based entirely on PMDG's track record alone. Please... don't get me wrong, I am not thrashing on the addon, it's a piece of art and the engine simulation is great for startup and shutdown, but I expected a simulation from PMDG, not a screenshot subject and I am hoping that I am not the only one here who holds PMDG at the top of thier list counting on PMDG to make the last of the true Study Sims. I am not a coder so I can't tell you I understand the limitations of programming for FSX or I would be lying. I appreciate everything your company has done and I show my support by purchasing your products and will continue to do so. What really kinda bent me outa shape though, is the fact that PMDG built the hype with the mention of a "Newly designed failure module" designed for the J41. Then without a mention, scrapped the idea and didn't admit they did until after release, eventhough I had asked numerous times on the forum before release on how the new failure module was progressing. This was the one feature I was really looking foreward to, as it's existense meant that with sucha failure mod, that most, if not 90% of the systems would need to be simulated to represent and support sucha feature. I only hope that you guys continue with future products to target the "Study Sims" as these are, in my humble opinion, what keeps flight simulation alive. Once again, thanks for a great product, just tellin ya how I feel with no BS.JB

After startup and before shutdown, there is nothing else to keep the challenge or complexity up,

This is interesting statement. Are you a real pilot?. Because this statement only makes sense if either you are some sort of an ace pilot or you never piloted anything. If you ever tried to pass an IFR checkride which basically is everything what happens after startup and before shutdown you would no longer makesuch statement (again, unless you are some sort of test pilot by profession and 'normal' flying bores you).And ask any pilot operating real turbine equipment - those temperature can be like frozen. You read some theory in the manual and make sweeping generalizationsabout the software, what works what doesn't, how things fail etc., with no real experience in actual aircraft. We know by know you love failures but I have no idea what you would do in real life flying where serious failures are exceedingly rare and probably over 90% of pilots go through their whole career without seeing one.Your other statements are equally controversial and opinionated but I got no time for this stuff ...

This is interesting statement. Are you a real pilot?. Because this statement only makes sense if either you are some sort of an ace pilot or you never piloted anything. If you ever tried to pass an IFR checkride which basically is everything what happens after startup and before shutdown you would no longer makesuch statement (again, unless you are some sort of test pilot by profession and 'normal' flying bores you).And ask any pilot operating real turbine equipment - those temperature can be like frozen. You read some theory in the manual and make sweeping generalizationsabout the software, what works what doesn't, how things fail etc., with no real experience in actual aircraft. We know by know you love failures but I have no idea what you would do in real life flying where serious failures are exceedingly rare and probably over 90% of pilots go through their whole career without seeing one.Your other statements are equally controversial and opinionated but I got no time for this stuff ...

Funny how the all so typical "Real Pilot" question comes up on the flight simulation forums... So you say that if in fact I am a real pilot, and not an ace or test pilot as you say, then I should find everything between startup to shutdown enough activity to keep me busy and challenged correct? Well I don't consider myself an ace, nor am I a test pilot, but I have flown "something". I just did my bienial last year for my AMEL with instrument rating after getting back to Flight simulation from FS2000. I held a CFII and my ATP when interviewing with the regionals in 1998. Yes it was FSX that motivated me to get back into flying again after being completely burnt by trying to support a wife and 2 kids on an FO's sallary. I owned a Cherokee 140, tail number 3451Q I bought in Paso Robles in 96 and sold it in 2005. When I was borred, yes borred of flying friends to Catalina and the cool diner at Santa Paula, I took up Aerobatics. I was doing aerobatic training with Randy Gagne outa Attitude adjusters at Van Nuys in a rented Pitts S2B before he killed himself and the womans european National Aerobatic champion out in the high desert. Above the 2300 hours TT and over 200 hours actual, I have, I have acumulated 80 in a Zlin and around 200 hours in S2C's and B's. I worked for Jet copters outa Van Nuys flying Tom Story around in a 172 for traffic watch, Gotta job flying Chieftains and Senecas for a crappy part 135 company called AEX outa Bracket Field and flew for Ameriflight in the Lance, Chieftain and an FO in the Lear. I also had a short stint flying for two regional air carriers as a FO until post 911 and realised I would be better off going back to my land based job before the regionals so I wouldn't get my family deeper into debt. So there's my resume, you asked Michal... Now I don't consider myself an Ace, cause once you put yourself on that pedistal, you usually kill yourself or others around you... But, I have flown something and I find everything past flap retraction boring on the simulator unless I'm being surprised by some sorta failure that isn't expected. Is that too hard for you to understand? Sure I find Simulated Actual IFR challenging in FSX as you don't have the butt gauge to give you cues of vertical acceleration, but it's manageable since I have tons of hours in Frascas and all the other fixed training devices they drilled us in durring the Interviews and the Checkrides... That kinda reminds me... maybe what I'm looking for, is the same adrenaline I got when sitting next to another new hire in IOE on the fixed simulators doing holds in icing while the check airman fails number 2... Anyway... I don't like failures per say, I have had my stress level very high when flying single pilot IMC in the hardly maintained twins of both Ameriflight and AEX, no offense to those two organizations, but what I do like is simulating on FSX and making it much more interesting through the use of a random failure generator.My post before you chimed in was about the J41 made by PMDG and how I was hoping that they continue the develoment I don't know why you chose to stick your head in here if this is too contreversial for ya? Best advice is to avoid the threads or posts that raise your blood pressure... If you really wanna help, then come in here with something usefull to say.JB

JB,The price on this product is $45. You're asking for 744/MD-11 type features that would have cost double or more. We tried to strike a balance here between including enough "hardcore" features to satisfy tech-heads while still ensuring that we could get a product out and not take 5 years to do it. What I said about the oil temps and the FS turboprop model is absolutely true. The failures thing was a combination of someone jumping the gun on talking about something that hadn't been developed yet - I also think this person (it was a tester who said this if I recall) may have taken what we'd said regarding the engine management failures (the locks, fires etc) to be a complete failure simulation.Also, please do not insult us with "screenshot machine" like we're only making visual models or something. 99% of what a person actually simulating a regular line flight with this aircraft needs is there and functional.

JB,The price on this product is $45. You're asking for 744/MD-11 type features that would have cost double or more. We tried to strike a balance here between including enough "hardcore" features to satisfy tech-heads while still ensuring that we could get a product out and not take 5 years to do it. What I said about the oil temps and the FS turboprop model is absolutely true. The failures thing was a combination of someone jumping the gun on talking about something that hadn't been developed yet - I also think this person (it was a tester who said this if I recall) may have taken what we'd said regarding the engine management failures (the locks, fires etc) to be a complete failure simulation.Also, please do not insult us with "screenshot machine" like we're only making visual models or something. 99% of what a person actually simulating a regular line flight with this aircraft needs is there and functional.

Ryan, I appologise for the comment about the screenshot machine. I didn't mean it that way and it was a lousy way to try and get my point across. Please accept my apology for that. In regards to the mention of the failure generator, I remember who it was, it definately wasn't a tester and I'm not gonna point fingers cause I think maybe my motivation for the J41 has already caused a bit of strife, so I will back off. On pricing point, I understand that increased complexity means more development time and that means a higher price point. Just for my own curiosity, is it entirely outa the question to continue coding for the J41 and release an addon pack that would be a seperate purchase? No promises, I'm just curious thats all.In regards to real airline pilots and failures, I'm all too aware that they hopefully never happen and if they do, they happen very rarely. Not all failures require a change in the flight plan. Alot of failures that don't result in an incident, do result in the use of different procedures or planning limitations such as the loss of a system or systems that arent on the MEL (Minimum Equipment List). Numerous times we have departed without a 100% functional aircraft and by type certificate and company OP's were required to change the profiles and or flight plans. But this isn't real life, this is a simulation and I have always found flight simulation much more chalenging when there is something challenging you. Without failure possibilities, there is no necesity "To get it right" by the book. But I understand all the limitations and I will stop my rant...Again, please accept my apology for that inapropriate and wrong comment.JB <----------- Who will be flying the J41 as soon as the munchkins goto sleep..

Hi,http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=248521&hl=Like you JB I was a bit suprised that they were not going to follow through with what they had earlier said. I still like the job they did and really enjoy what we did get for the money. I did not buy the plane right when it came out so I knew before hand and by reading these forums that the failure module would not be part of the software release or an update but I could understand how someone who bought going on what was posted without knowing what they had decided would be a bit upset.PMDG nice work, I have hours of enjoyment with your new JS41 already and know I will have many more.Thanks,John L

Hi,http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=248521&hl=Like you JB I was a bit suprised that they were not going to follow through with what they had earlier said. I still like the job they did and really enjoy what we did get for the money. I did not buy the plane right when it came out so I knew before hand and by reading these forums that the failure module would not be part of the software release or an update but I could understand how someone who bought going on what was posted without knowing what they had decided would be a bit upset.PMDG nice work, I have hours of enjoyment with your new JS41 already and know I will have many more.Thanks,John L

John, thanks for finding that post, I didn't really wanna look for it as I figured someone from PMDG woulda taken it upon themselves to acknowledge the statements made. Atleast I can't be acused of it being my imagination or just wishfull thinking. Now you can see where I got my expectations of the J41.JB

I will speak with Robert about his promise on the failure generator this weekend in Reno - thanks for finding that, that gives me something to go to him with. I would very much bet against it happening though - he posted that assuming it would be developed, I think he just didn't mention later on that we'd decided not to do it. (and as always please don't make assumptions about the NG2 based on this - that aircraft is going to be the most ridiculous thing ever seen for FS, don't worry)

I will speak with Robert about his promise on the failure generator this weekend in Reno - thanks for finding that, that gives me something to go to him with. I would very much bet against it happening though - he posted that assuming it would be developed, I think he just didn't mention later on that we'd decided not to do it. (and as always please don't make assumptions about the NG2 based on this - that aircraft is going to be the most ridiculous thing ever seen for FS, don't worry)

Thanks Ryan... If it becomes an issue of development costs, then I will be the first person to buy it and also donate if needed...JB

John, thanks for finding that post, I didn't really wanna look for it as I figured someone from PMDG woulda taken it upon themselves to acknowledge the statements made. Atleast I can't be acused of it being my imagination or just wishfull thinking. Now you can see where I got my expectations of the J41.JB

JB, I am amazed by the quality of this model that PMDG has produced, but like you, I was looking forward to much more. RR said specifically that a failure module for this aircraft was DEFINITELY going to be made available, if not at the release date, then as an update in the future. I quote:-"There is some question in my mind as to whether this module will be ready for release-time, but WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED. If it doesn't make the release- it will come to you in an update FOR CERTAIN. (We HATE not delivering a finished product... so we'll see how it plays out...)" End quote.If it I am not trying to stir up controversy here, as I truly do enjoy this aircraft but, I do feel 'let-down' as we were not kept posted. Please excuse me, I am not "shouting", but just trying to emphasize what I based my expectations on, as JB did too. Similarly, I was reproved a few months ago for questioning the failure to produce the promised Advanced tutorial for the complex MD-11. To date, that still has not seen the light of day. I even lost my 'cool' and contemplated not purchasing any more PMDG products but, knowing their product quality, my 'ponderings' were useless, as I was one of the first 'in line' to purchase this beautiful JS4100. To be truthful, upon installing and using this craft, I questioned myself as to why the heck did I bother to purchase the PAOB J41 over one year ago !!! There is absolutely no comparison at all.I truly wished that PMDG could have been more forthcoming with respect to what they were going to leave out, and in explaining Robert's definitive words,..."If it (the failure module) doesn't make the release- it will come to you in an update for certain. We hate not delivering a finished product... so we'll see how it plays out...)" Robert, I am not trying to put you on a hot seat, but how do you justify this failure to live up to your words.Best Regards,GodfreyG :(

I will speak with Robert about his promise on the failure generator this weekend in Reno - thanks for finding that, that gives me something to go to him with. I would very much bet against it happening though - he posted that assuming it would be developed, I think he just didn't mention later on that we'd decided not to do it. (and as always please don't make assumptions about the NG2 based on this - that aircraft is going to be the most ridiculous thing ever seen for FS, don't worry)

Sorry Ryan, I made my post and observations above, before seeing your reply.Thank you for considering and interceding.Best Regards,GodfreyG :(

I will speak with Robert about his promise on the failure generator this weekend in Reno - thanks for finding that, that gives me something to go to him with. I would very much bet against it happening though - he posted that assuming it would be developed, I think he just didn't mention later on that we'd decided not to do it. (and as always please don't make assumptions about the NG2 based on this - that aircraft is going to be the most ridiculous thing ever seen for FS, don't worry)

So what did Robert Say?JB