Just one thing, it may have been mentioned in the last ~20 or so pages but if people think that the 737 terrain radar is the first implementation in FSX ever they are sorely mistaken...[snip]Quick question though, I hope some of all these uber-details can be scaled back a bit? Ala J41's configuration...If one can run the high-res J41 cockpit at a good 20-30ish frames can we expect similar in the 737's office?

Patrick-Couple of points- since you are getting nit-picky:1) Terrain RADAR is a military application and does not exist in the GA/Airliner world. I posted an explainer on what EGPWS Terrain Awareness is earlier in the thread- but it has nothing whatever to do with radar. (Good luck finding it... I think it's around page 14... LOL)2) As explained in that same post, we are not the first to implement this technology- but I believe this will be the most complete implementation from a visual and technical point of view. There are a couple of developers out there claiming to be first, but they are...well... abusing people's intelligence.3) We expect that we will provide more information on performance about mid-way through beta testing.

So, is the drogue and sensor plug used only for testing the prototype 73, or are they used for the test flights of every 737 prior to delivery?Travis Menard

So, is the drogue and sensor plug used only for testing the prototype 73, or are they used for the test flights of every 737 prior to delivery?Travis Menard

Just the prototypes in the test fleet.Tom

Patrick-Couple of points- since you are getting nit-picky:1) Terrain RADAR is a military application and does not exist in the GA/Airliner world. I posted an explainer on what EGPWS Terrain Awareness is earlier in the thread- but it has nothing whatever to do with radar. (Good luck finding it... I think it's around page 14... LOL)2) As explained in that same post, we are not the first to implement this technology- but I believe this will be the most complete implementation from a visual and technical point of view. There are a couple of developers out there claiming to be first, but they are...well... abusing people's intelligence....

Ohh many thanks gang for the quick reply!Ohh yes I'm now aware of of my gross indiscretion regarding :( calling it a "terrain radar" oops, you guys caught correctly that I was referring to getting ground returns off a traditional weather radar. In hindsight I should have known better, remembering a EGPWS installation on a old Citation II in my earlier days, which in addition to deriving information from the ADC to determine what mode and warnings the thing should be spitting out, used a terrain database to supplement it's logic and to provide a terrain display...which how I suspect it is implemented in the NG 37's.My current employer has a smoke load of Dash 8's and I had a bucket of questions for you Robert regarding your guys' upcoming release of that type from an AME standpoint..but because of your ohh-so quick and correct reply I'll have to give you guys a break for today! Just thought I'd put a little nudge in there for ya guys to perhaps enlighten us with a little story on progress regarding that bird...hahahCheers all,Patrick

Dear Capt. Randazzo,"Explosive decompression"! I've always wanted someone to model that - I think it would be a mighty challenging problem to deal with and a lot of fun (on a sim, that is!)Simply brilliant screenshots - thank you!Cheers,Pat

Shane, The antenna humps on top of the fuselage like Westjet has are modeled in the same style as Westjet's and there are several other operators that use the same style dome. SWA on the other hand is a slightly different style, its much taller height wise and will also be modeled too, for the -700 series. Cheers,

Excellent!Thanks for taking the time to answer that Jason. I was always curious if PMDG would model this or not. Interesting side note- When we (WJA) installed this system for the first time, It took over a year for transport canada to certify it. Way too much aerodyamic testing and red tape.The level of customizable options is truly amazing.Brings up another question, When the Sat TV is selected in game, does the OEW of the selected models change with these TV systems? As well as performance differences due to the increased weight? I know our live TV systems increases the OEW by approx 1000lbs.

Dear Capt. Randazzo,"Explosive decompression"! I've always wanted someone to model that - I think it would be a mighty challenging problem to deal with and a lot of fun (on a sim, that is!)

Haha I can see all us simmers out there trying to 'simulate' decompression procedure's with our faces all puffed up and red from not breathing...hahaAlthough for ultimate fidelity we should throw on some masks..LOLPatrick

Some "'interesting' screenshots on the PMDG facebook page!haha - hacker I guess? Disgruntled PMDG employee?? :(

How is explosive decompression modelled? I'm quite curious about that, what is there to model besides the decrease in pressure?

German people says Geil Geil Geil <<< Hot :( I love this Bird where is the cable for the Matrix ??thanks PMDG thanks this Bird make the FSX beutiful and ORBX MAM, REX 2.0 , FSopen, SimWings !ps.Can someone tell me what B737NG operate in australia (Qantas , VirginBlue) its clear are any cheeper airlines frome new zealand or any ???? Thanksbest regardsChrisand Ps. the best airports in Germany are Munich and Dortmund

Virgin Blue and subsiduaries Pacific Blue and Polynesia Blue. Virgin Blue use 737-700 and 737-800 (and E190/E170) on Domestic flights inside Australia. Pacific Blue fly international flights to destinations such as New Zealand, Bali, Cocos Keeling Islands, and various other destinations on 737-800 only. Polynesia Blue fly to Samoa (Apia) to New Zealand and East Coast Australia (Brisbane, Sydney). Virgin Blue aircraft have the Live2Air TV system with associated system attached to the aircraft's fuselage.Qantas operate aircraft equipped for Cat III Autolands and have HUGS/HUD. Virgin Blue does not operate HUGS/HUD or Cat III Autolands. (reference: http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/fog-plan-hits-turbulence-20100604-xkq7.html )Air Pacific (Fiji) also operate 737-800 into Australia from Nadi Fiji.Air New Zealand use 737's but I believe they are -300 and -400 aircraft, not NG's.oh and Orbx make Brilliant Australian Scenery. especially Brisbane, Melbourne, Canberra and Cairns.

Congratulations Mr. Randazzo & team,This is going to be a formidable product, its definitely going to take the FS world by storm.Can you guys move on to the 777 now?Nice job guysCarlos A M Doria

Dear Capt. Randazzo,"Explosive decompression"! I've always wanted someone to model that - I think it would be a mighty challenging problem to deal with and a lot of fun (on a sim, that is!)

That's the first failure I'll simulate. There are so many animations in it that perhaps, when the decompression happen, we'll see an explosion and a hole in the fuselage when we switch to spot view .Please PMDG, don't tell me you have already modeled that!? :(

During the course of the weekend we are going to add more images to this thread. The new images will focus on some in-close details of the airplane as we take you on a virtual walk-around... As well as some exciting night shots to show you the internal and external lighting in glorious detail!

Cant wait for the exciting night shots!Great job guys looks very good.Kimo Wiliams

Talking about landing lights... one more question: in the real world, if you select the Retractable landing lights ON (switch directly through EXT to ON), from the outside you will see a light beam, which is pointed straight down, pitching forward. I saw this when I was on a beach at night watching the traffic coming in, and it took me a while to find out that as soon as you select the retracts ON, they illuminate, even if the lights itself aren't fully extended at that point. Is this also simulated in the model or is it impossible because of FSX limits?

I've seen this in real life too, but the problem here is the idea of "beams" in FSX - in the real world this is caused by the lights reflecting off particulate matter in the air - ie dust, water droplets in high humidity etc. It doesn't happen all the time. We *could* do it but I'm almost positive we won't because it would take a ton of extra geometry and animations at this point.

just wondering, but could you maybe make a seperate plane where the sounds are all just interior sounds so that we could have the wing view with VC sounds. I'm not a developer but just thought this might be possible, but I could be wrong :S Just mentioning this, because I for one would not mind at all if you didn't have exterior sounds for one of the planes, because me personally, I fly with cockpit view, and wing view, so I would not miss the external sounds. Sorry if that seems a bit incoherent, but its 0400hrs here :Pkind regards,Suraj Hussain

I will ask Armen about this - it might be possible to have a sound.cfg that does this. No guarantees though and we won't do it unless it's extremely easy to do - we're not making a passenger simulator here and we're not going to put a ton of work into such applications of the airplane.

Do you know how it says 'Terrain' on the ND?Is it not supposed to say it on the HUGS?It's not important, I'm just wondering.

The same disclaimer applies to all the shots of the NGX we've ever posted - this is a work in progress, alpha version etc - there are some things you'll always be able to find in such shots that aren't done or correct yet.

2. is it possible to have engines at takeoff power with parking brake on? or is this a problem with FSX? i have allways wondered why this wasnt possible on other aircrafts.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here - I've never had this issue.

Gents,Out of interest does anyone know (guessing the PMDG devs will :( ) what sort of drag penalty the Wi-Fi domes add? Seems to me that these days even tiny percentages in reduction of efficiency lead to big costs? Surely these domes stuck on top of the fuselage cost something in terms of airframe drag?(If it does, I bet the team have modeled it :()Thanks

The drag penalty is likely extremely small - airlines wouldn't be doing this if it was costing them a ton in extra fuel. That would require creating an entirely different flight model anyway, I don't think we'll be doing that. The weight addition from it that Shane mentioned is probably possible though.

You know Benjamin, not that this is pointed at you, but it seems a lot of people who remain on FS2004 to fly airliners do so for that fact that they get great performance, which is understandable if you have an older rig that just wont cut FSX at medium to high settings. However, in the same sentance, 99% of the time the same guys always throw in the term "I can run FS9 with 100% AI which is very important". Which in the end seems that for a lot of people who like to fly airliners in FS2004 do so mainly cause they like a boat load of AI.(etc...)

For what it's worth I run 100% UT2 in FSX and I'm happy. Am I getting 200FPS like I would in FS9 on my system? Of course not, but it looks a bazillion times better and more realistic in FSX.

ok, let me say I do have concern about stuff herenow, let me preface it by saying, yes I'm going to buy it, yes it looks freakin' fantasticbut what I'm concerned about, is, ... and I know everyone has there own flying style. I for one fly it from the vc and only the vc the whole flight.. so what concerns me is having the detail of the jackscrew in the flaps, I mean, isn't this going to cost me frames? and shouldn't this kind of detail be left out? or do you have a way of "hiding" it if I'm not looking at it?

The external model is not loaded while you're in the VC. The wings that are in the VC are not fully modeled for precisely this reason - it's just enough so that you can see the last segment of them like you can from the cockpit in real life.

Talking about landing lights... one more question: in the real world, if you select the Retractable landing lights ON (switch directly through EXT to ON), from the outside you will see a light beam, which is pointed straight down, pitching forward. I saw this when I was on a beach at night watching the traffic coming in, and it took me a while to find out that as soon as you select the retracts ON, they illuminate, even if the lights itself aren't fully extended at that point. Is this also simulated in the model or is it impossible because of FSX limits?

I've seen this in real life too, but the problem here is the idea of "beams" in FSX - in the real world this is caused by the lights reflecting off particulate matter in the air - ie dust, water droplets in high humidity etc. It doesn't happen all the time. We *could* do it but I'm almost positive we won't because it would take a ton of extra geometry and animations at this point.

The default grumman goose does something similar to this, you switch them directly to on and the light 'runs' across the ground while the lights are moving into position.