iFLY vs. PMDG?

[Dillon 2,198]

The iFly's spoilers in their current state will give the user a 10 degree nose down pitch and a 8,000fpm+ descent rate in the full down flight detent. That is not realistic.

Can't argue with this. I read this in the iFly forum but hadn't tested it because I was tied up with testing the EFIS/MAP gauges. For the record I've never applied full spoilers in flight since I had this add-on. We are still testing the gauges and FMC. Oh, P-Factor only comes in play with piston aircraft not jets... I understand the point your making concerning FDE/Thrust but we'll have to agree to disagree on this issue and move on. :(

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Cmpbellsjc wrote; "...I'm always up for making easy money, so I would be willing to bet you all your money that your wrong about that, especially since Ryan posted the other day in the PMDG section that the a/c is currently in alpha".Yep, and they also said they were making the 737NGX for FS9, but look what happened to that.

I will gladly take your money as well if you want to wager on the FSX version not comming out :(

[c402_cvs 0]

Since there will not be a new PMDG 737 for fs9 again I think this whole argument between which will be better regarding the iFly and NGX is trivial. Once the FSX version of iFly is released then go for it :( The visual model between the FS9 versions of the two simply do not compete! The iFly is tons better and they are still working on it, which cannot be said for the PMDG version. I'll buy the NGX once it's released for sure, PMDG's track record speaks for themselfs. Thing is the iFly is out now, satisfying my 737 needs perfectly, and out for fs9 which still has a ton of supporters.

[Tabs 2,790]

I would like to know what gives you the right as a developer to diss another developers product regardless of whether in your opinion its flawed or not?In my opinion that is just plain wrong and will open up a can of worms.Moderators?

I didn't "diss" anything. Someone started a thread on a public forum called "PMDG vs. iFly" and I'm supposed to stay quiet when I see certain things being used to imply that the competing product is better when they aren't actually true? The time-to-climb numbers are in the Boeing documentation - this isn't just my opinion about their product or something like that. And by the way, I did pay $54.95 to iFly for their product just like any of you - I buy almost any major addon that comes out. Firstly because I'm still a simmer despite my job, and secondly why wouldn't I want to see what the competition is doing? They're certainly free to buy our stuff too - all I ask is that if criticisms of us are made, that they be *factual.* Many of the points Dillon raised were in fact correct and I acknowledge that - our FS9 NG is a 7 year old product, it's not surprising that one made today is better in certain respects.=========Dillon, I have some real world data for you now - one of our pilots climbed just a few hours ago tonight in an extremely lightly loaded (109,000lbs) 737-700 with 24K engines from sea level straight to FL410 and he timed the climb for me with the chronometer. 17 minutes, verified with flightaware's transponder returns too. I just did that climb in the iFly 700 with a full TO 2 derate and CLB 2 and it took 13 minutes *at 154,500lbs maximum takeoff weight.* No way is that correct. I think iFly knows this and they'll fix it. I just want to put a stop to the notion that our climb performance isn't correct based on what people see in the iFly plane. Dr. Vaos works way too hard in both his real life job designing these aircraft systems and in modelling them in software for his work on the performance data to be ridiculed like it has been.

[flightwatch 68]

I actually agree with you Ryan...as a matter of fact, I think Les is the only one saying that the climb performance is realistic. Anybody that has ever been in a 737 can tell you that it is way off. Heck, I highly doubt an empty 757 could make it from sea level to 41,000ft in less than 15 minutes. Anyways, I'm not trying to call anyone out.I think one of the major dilemmas going on here is that both of you have signatures that affiliate you with a company. Les has his "iFly Ground Crew" signature, and you have your "PMDG Developer" signature. Regardless of whether or not your post is of your own opinion, people see the signature and think that your post is the particular company's stance. That is the main reason why I won't add my affiliation with iFly or Flight1 in my signature. I want my posts to be my own and not be misconstrued that I am speaking for a developer. Just my 2 penny's.

[SteveA300 7]

Hello Everyone,Having read this post I don’t understand why people have got so hot under the collar about having choice. As Ryan has posted we are all simmers here and I for one have had many happy hours flying my PMDG aircraft. Now I am offering support for the iFly 737, what does that change? Mostly I have very little free time to fly other aircraft other than the 737NG testing and addressing users issues. Does it change my opinion of PMDG products no, does it mean I will never buy another PMDG product no. As a simmer you have different companies offering there version of an aircraft, I can’t see how that can’t be anything but good. I couldn’t believe someone said that PMDG won’t release there 737NG. Both PMDG and iFly will release their 737NG’s for FSX and as a consumer you will have a choice and like Ryan when he bought the iFly aircraft I will buy the PMDG aircraft as a simmer and to see how they have push the boundaries this time.Les has posted his opinions in the forum and those are his own regardless of his name tag and don’t necessarily reflect that of the iFly development team. I am well aware of the current weaknesses in the iFly model which was released 4 weeks ago. The time to judge will be when it is patched and the developer feels the product is complete. I think it is unfair to both companies for people to stir up trouble where none exists and I am extremely disappointed I had to post here like Ryan.

[Benjamin J 751]

Hello Everyone,Having read this post I don’t understand why people have got so hot under the collar about having choice. As Ryan has posted we are all simmers here and I for one have had many happy hours flying my PMDG aircraft. Now I am offering support for the iFly 737, what does that change? Mostly I have very little free time to fly other aircraft other than the 737NG testing and addressing users issues. Does it change my opinion of PMDG products no, does it mean I will never buy another PMDG product no. As a simmer you have different companies offering there version of an aircraft, I can’t see how that can’t be anything but good. I couldn’t believe someone said that PMDG won’t release there 737NG. Both PMDG and iFly will release their 737NG’s for FSX and as a consumer you will have a choice and like Ryan when he bought the iFly aircraft I will buy the PMDG aircraft as a simmer and to see how they have push the boundaries this time.Les has posted his opinions in the forum and those are his own regardless of his name tag and don’t necessarily reflect that of the iFly development team. I am well aware of the current weaknesses in the iFly model which was released 4 weeks ago. The time to judge will be when it is patched and the developer feels the product is complete. I think is unfair to both companies for people to stir up trouble where none exists and I am extremely disappointed , I had to post here like Ryan.

Very well said, you and Ryan. I fully agree on all accounts. I think what's important, is that in FS2004 we now have a very good Boeing 737NG package that will even be expanded upon in the future. Soon, we will have a choice in FSX. Whether one is better than the other is something we'll only be able to judge when both products have been released.

[Dillon 2,198]

I actually agree with you Ryan...as a matter of fact, I think Les is the only one saying that the climb performance is realistic. Anybody that has ever been in a 737 can tell you that it is way off. Heck, I highly doubt an empty 757 could make it from sea level to 41,000ft in less than 15 minutes. Anyways, I'm not trying to call anyone out.I think one of the major dilemmas going on here is that both of you have signatures that affiliate you with a company. Les has his "iFly Ground Crew" signature, and you have your "PMDG Developer" signature. Regardless of whether or not your post is of your own opinion, people see the signature and think that your post is the particular company's stance. That is the main reason why I won't add my affiliation with iFly or Flight1 in my signature. I want my posts to be my own and not be misconstrued that I am speaking for a developer. Just my 2 penny's.

Where in this thread did I say the climb rate of the iFly 737 is realistic? :( I talked about the PMDG model getting out of KMDW in which I found problems with it but I didn't say anywhere the iFly model had correct engine performance climbing to altitude. Ryan raised the climb issue but my original point was only concerning starting at a cold stop to the time it takes to get wheels off the ground 'on the takeoff roll' at an airport like KMDW. That's totally different than climbing to altitude. Go back and read carefully what I said in this thread.My original point:

16. Proper engine thrust for the various models, the older PMDG version was underpowered. Taking off from KMDW was almost impossible yet real world Southwest 737NG's have no issue.

[flightwatch 68]

Where in this thread did I say the climb rate of the iFly 737 is realistic? :( I talked about the PMDG model getting out of KMDW in which I found problems with it but I didn't say anywhere the iFly model had correct engine performance climbing to altitude. Ryan raised the climb issue but my original point was only concerning starting at a cold stop to the time it takes to get wheels off the ground 'on the takeoff roll' at an airport like KMDW. That's totally different than climbing to altitude. Go back and read carefully what I said in this thread.

That being said I stand on my perception that the iFly model had the correct engine performance. I'll actually admit I'm wrong if real pilots of the NG say otherwise because I didn't have that climb to altitude experience when I flew the Level-D sim.

[Tabs 2,790]

Hello Everyone,Having read this post I don’t understand why people have got so hot under the collar about having choice. As Ryan has posted we are all simmers here and I for one have had many happy hours flying my PMDG aircraft. Now I am offering support for the iFly 737, what does that change? Mostly I have very little free time to fly other aircraft other than the 737NG testing and addressing users issues. Does it change my opinion of PMDG products no, does it mean I will never buy another PMDG product no. As a simmer you have different companies offering there version of an aircraft, I can’t see how that can’t be anything but good. I couldn’t believe someone said that PMDG won’t release there 737NG. Both PMDG and iFly will release their 737NG’s for FSX and as a consumer you will have a choice and like Ryan when he bought the iFly aircraft I will buy the PMDG aircraft as a simmer and to see how they have push the boundaries this time.Les has posted his opinions in the forum and those are his own regardless of his name tag and don’t necessarily reflect that of the iFly development team. I am well aware of the current weaknesses in the iFly model which was released 4 weeks ago. The time to judge will be when it is patched and the developer feels the product is complete. I think it is unfair to both companies for people to stir up trouble where none exists and I am extremely disappointed I had to post here like Ryan.

Steve,You're a class act, thank you. I'm certainly not going out of my way to criticize you guys unprovoked and I know you guys aren't doing it either - I realize it's not iFly saying things I'm disagreeing with, it's just customers independently. Competition is a good thing and we do welcome it - it has already pushed us to do several things with the NGX that we might not have done otherwise in fact... Both products will be better for it in the end, and that's all that should matter to our customers!

[Dillon 2,198]

That being said I stand on my perception that the iFly model had the correct engine performance. I'll actually admit I'm wrong if real pilots of the NG say otherwise because I didn't have that climb to altitude experience when I flew the Level-D sim.

And if you read everything in context in this thread I've went above and beyond to clarify my position even in this sentence. The second part states "I didn't have that climb to altitude experience when I flew the Level-D sim". That's why I told you to read everything I've stated in this thread and not stay stuck on a mis-perception of where I'm at (I will say it looks like I didn't do a good job in stating where I'm at :( ). I've clarified things with Steve over at iFly before this thread was started with much of what I wrote above. Clarification again:On initial climb out the iFly bird seems right the way it is now. As it climbs to altitude you shouldn't be able to achieve a climb rate of 2800fpm at 32,000ft with a full load. That's where the problem is. Taking off of KMDW or KLGA the current iFly model lift's off like Ryan stated above or in the case of KLGA the video below... I know we can't go on videos alone but this was my experience in the NG sim. This real world video is of a real 737NG taking off from KLGA. No we don't know the load but it's apparent the NG is no slouch. The climb rate is steep as soon as the wheels leave the runway.

let's move on.

Competition is a good thing and we do welcome it - it has already pushed us to do several things with the NGX that we might not have done otherwise in fact... Both products will be better for it in the end, and that's all that should matter to our customers!

I hope one of those things is an FS9 version... :( Ryan for my part in this I apologize to you guys for stiring the pot. Yes I'm ticked you guys have left FS9 and yes I stand on the fact that for me the PMDG NG seemed to have trouble with getting out of KMDW or should I say shorter runways like KBUR. I've read post by others on this but it's water under the bridge. There are no more updates coming for the original NG and their shouldn't be with the NGX around the corner. We need not go on about this because you guys have left FS9 and the only option for those of us that still use the sim is to make the iFly the best it can be. In the FS9 world there is no competition when it comes to the NG so all this is irrelevant. When 'Flight' comes around I'll buy your work then and enjoy that version of Flight Simulator if it's any good...

[Epikk 66]

... Competition is a good thing and we do welcome it - it has already pushed us to do several things with the NGX that we might not have done otherwise in fact... Both products will be better for it in the end, and that's all that should matter to our customers!

GOOD!

[out 769]

Ladies and gentlemen! :Applause:I haven't seen such a perfect compatibility in AVSIM forums for a long time:

It is justified by the mere fact that competition is always good

Competition is a good thing in our community

competition is GOOD.

I the end, competition is good

As a simmer you have different companies offering there version of an aircraft, I can’t see how that can’t be anything but good

Competition is a good thing and we do welcome it

Let it live long in all of us. :Hug:Happy simming!

[Dillon 2,198]

Here's some pics from one of my trips to the NW simulators. Wish I had some pics of the NG and Airbus simulator... The graphics in the Airbus sim are very nice but not on the level of FSX or FS9.75. I just wanted you guys to know I'm not blowing smoke about my time in the simulators. My perspective on the NG, 744, and Airbus is based on actual experience in the closest thing many of us can get to flying the real birds.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Cool pics from the sim Les. BTW, up until a few days ago I always thought your first name was Dillon until I noticed it was Les in your iFly sig.Are your kids interested in flying and do they or the older of the two fly FS9 with you?