Following from Ryan's video post, here is the article from Flightglobal:-http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/08/26/346652/video.html

Man, I wish that PMDG would just scrap all their other planned aircraft after the 737NGX and begin work on the 787 with haste.They already have good working relations with Boeing and all the work has been done on Boeing's side in terms of realistic / level D simulation already.One feature that rocks on the 787 is the electronic flight bag built into the ND (See video). You can view the runways and taxi wayson the ND. Awesome stuff. I took their static simulator for a spin at the Cape town air show a while back. Everything was so familiar and it wasa breeze to take off, fly circuits and land without any assistance from anyone.The argument that because the aircraft hasn't entered service yet isn't a realistic excuse not to model it and develop it NOW!from what's already been done.Come on PMDG, be the first to realistically simulate the World's future, most popular aircraft.I know you can do it and I know that you know it will be your best seller ever!

Pretty sure it's the VSD "width" display. The highest terrain between the dashed lines is displayed. It is tied to the RNP as that is the maximum width permitted while flying that leg. You can see that on final approach the RNP goes down (the width is smaller. On older aircraft that have them, such as the 737, the VSD lines are drawn along the current track, not along the flight route. Guess more processing power in the 787 allowed them to do this.

Yeah but I guess it is just like on the 737 (just straight ahead along your track, not along magenta line) when you're not using something like LNAV. Doesn't quite make sense in HDG SEL for instance (in case the 787 still has such basic functions! haha). BTW, RNP on approach is what...? .03nm or somethin?

Sweet video! The graphics in that one seemed MUCH better and what I would expect them to have (ok, I want one). The traffic was sweet but it looked like they had a few old UTX (Or rex) textures where the cars were flat images haha.

Yeah but I guess it is just like on the 737 (just straight ahead along your track, not along magenta line) when you're not using something like LNAV. Doesn't quite make sense in HDG SEL for instance (in case the 787 still has such basic functions! haha). BTW, RNP on approach is what...? .03nm or somethin?

I've never seen RNP below 0.1. Actually RNP 0.3 is plain enough for an approach without ILS trough close terrain such as Innsbruck or Tibet (Lin Zhi). RNP 0.3 could very well replace ILS especially CAT1. But if you are not flying an RNAV approach RNP is not specified so I would guess there on screen the approach set is an ILS and the RNP in terminal area should be RNP1. And enroute around Europe it is RNP 5. So the wider area is RNP5 and the final leg is RNP1, but that's just a guess, without seeing the FMC's MFDs.Later Edit: Checking the initial video you can see I was wrong with the previous statement. The RNP is 1 since it is in the TMA already. And from that it goes down to I guess 0.3. You can see that in the initial video at 2:22. On the bottom of the ND you'll have showing RNP what is the requirement for the leg and ANP (Actual Navigational Performance) which is much less: 0.02. That is a very precise ship. And if we get P-RNAV capabilities in the NGX then you'll have that showing on the bottom of the Navigation Display such as that video. Plus a constant localizer-like display (with one deviation bar) all the while you are in RNP airspace on the PFD.

That video was excellent. The 787 truly is a magnificent achievment for Boeing.

I've never seen RNP below 0.1. Actually RNP 0.3 is plain enough for an approach without ILS trough close terrain such as Innsbruck or Tibet (Lin Zhi). RNP 0.3 could very well replace ILS especially CAT1. But if you are not flying an RNAV approach RNP is not specified so I would guess there on screen the approach set is an ILS and the RNP in terminal area should be RNP1. And enroute around Europe it is RNP 5. So the wider area is RNP5 and the final leg is RNP1, but that's just a guess, without seeing the FMC's MFDs.Later Edit: Checking the initial video you can see I was wrong with the previous statement. The RNP is 1 since it is in the TMA already. And from that it goes down to I guess 0.3. You can see that in the initial video at 2:22. On the bottom of the ND you'll have showing RNP what is the requirement for the leg and ANP (Actual Navigational Performance) which is much less: 0.02. That is a very precise ship. And if we get P-RNAV capabilities in the NGX then you'll have that showing on the bottom of the Navigation Display such as that video. Plus a constant localizer-like display (with one deviation bar) all the while you are in RNP airspace on the PFD.

Hey thanks for the detailed reply. Guess I had somehow mistaken .03 to be .3 which sounds a lot better indeed. Still, maybe I simply have never understood the whole RNP thing but I don't quite get how a .3nm accuracy could replace ILS. Doesn't that simply say the aircraft needs to be within .3nm (>500m!) in 95% of the time? I don't know about ILS requirements but I feel even flying CAT I the LOC needle will tell me very precisely if I am even only slightly off centerline. You know, I just can't get the .3nm in there. As I understand it that would allow me to be 500m off course. If you can please elaborate, I'd appreciate it. :(