Does anyone know how one gets the Terrain function to work?Jim C

Does anyone know how one gets the Terrain function to work?Jim C

Don't really understand the question. If you are adding a terrain file, the readme should give you all the instructions to get it installed and functioning.Jim D.

Don't really understand the question. If you are adding a terrain file, the readme should give you all the instructions to get it installed and functioning.Jim D.

Under the VOR2 switch there is a button marked 'TERR' with (presumably) is an abbreviation for 'Terrain' and allows the terrain to be shown on the navigation screen. I cannot find a reference to it in the PMDG instructions not can I get it to work. Any ideas?Jim C

Under the VOR2 switch there is a button marked 'TERR' with (presumably) is an abbreviation for 'Terrain' and allows the terrain to be shown on the navigation screen. I cannot find a reference to it in the PMDG instructions not can I get it to work. Any ideas?Jim C

It's probably not modeled in this version as the manual doesn't even mention it, at least as far as I am able to determine.Jim D.

Not modeled.

Not modeled.

In other words, it is there but it doesn't work. I wonder why they didn't link in the FS GPS which would have been better than nothing.

The default FS GPS wouldn't be realistic. It doesn't look like the Boeing terrain feature, and PMDG is about realism, not compromise.

The default FS GPS wouldn't be realistic. It doesn't look like the Boeing terrain feature, and PMDG is about realism, not compromise.

If the terrain function is missing then you have not got realism and under that circumstance, a compromise must be acceptible.

Not true. If it is not modeled correctly, it is not realistic. If it is not modeled, it can be considered inoperative. This is the same argument used in response to weather radar. It's not modeled because it cannot be modeled realistically. In the case of terrain, I'm guessing they either couldn't at the time, or couldn't without a huge hit to FPS.If you want compromise, there are other developers on which you can blow your money.

I have to say that I have not come across a flight sim developer that can compare with PMDG - however, if they have decided to make something inoperable, such as the terrain, it would be helpful if they could say so. It saves you wondering at which end of the line the problem lies.

Gents, this product was PMDG's first effort in FS and was originally designed for FS2002. There are many functions on the airplane not modeled due to the state of technical development 9 years ago. Given we are still chatting about the product in 2010, IMHO they did a pretty good job don't ya think? :(

Gents,keep in mind that in spite of age, pmdg 737 is still the best 737 NG for FS existingi until now: I've compared several times its performances vs. real bird (by using the Continental 737 FCOM performance tables) and always it was in the correct range well within the 5% of margin required to "level-D" real FFS (attitudes, fuel flow, VNAV/LNAV etc.etc.) maybe there's a very light lack of acceleration during takeoff roll (slightly under the real) and the brakes couldn't keep in account the rwy condition (dry/wet/slush/snow/ice), but until now I know only one add-on able to keep in account that brake conditions...Recently I've tested a new one 737NG add-on for FS but also nw, after the first SP it's still far from PMDG 737 performances...That shows how good was the initial PMDG project (considering the age of that add-on) so I can just imagine what we could fine in the next NGX (the onlt mistake of pmdg, according to me is not having developped a version for FS9 being a lot of people here in europe not loving fsx too much, but certainly a business company has to consider also the loss and profit curve...)Happy New Year 2011 to all!CiaoAndrea

will it be in the ngx?

What about the 747 for FS2004?

What about the 747 for FS2004?

Not there either...DJ