Regardless, by that metric, it's still accurate to what's below you. Weather radar is not. It never will be, with the current weather engine. Can we stop flogging this horse yet?

There's still an inch or two on the tail we haven't beaten yet

There's still an inch or two on the tail we haven't beaten yet

By the way, how is the radar altimiter modeled in FS planes? Do they actually simulate sending out a beam down and recieving the reflected beam to indicate the AGL figure I see on the instruments?

This is rather a very poor analogy between wxr and radar altimeter. If you knew something about real flying you would know that radar altimeter (in commercial aviation) is only used to determine DH during ILS CAT II or III approaches. So actually it is enough to just simulate correctly the proper RA reading during the final say 20 sec of flight before landing and you accomplished the goal, you in fact provided full utility of radar altimeter. This is very easy - just subtract geometric altitude from airport elevation and you are done. There is no such shortcut in simulating wxr.

... I lost a cabin crew member I loved in this crash, so please keep AF447 crash out of the PMDG NGX discussions.

I'm extremely sorry to hear that. I don't think that means potential causes of the accident shouldn't be discussed though - I thought it was relevant to the discussion about the dangers involved in wx radar use. It may turn out this had nothing to do with the crash, but that danger is real and I know it's being discussed by the investigators.

Its nice, but its not the first or only plane in FSX that has this.

It's the first one that fully simulates all the modes and the exact logic with the color bands that we know of. We have all the options that are there on the real Honeywell EGPWS unit - peaks mode, water displayed in cyan etc.

Maybe, but it is the first one that read your mesh not a default one.

The ND actually uses a DEM database now - we did figure out a while back how to read the mesh in real time (the VSD still does) but the effect on performance with the large areas on the ND was too great. The real thing uses a database anyway too, it's not a "radar" or anything like that. The database we created is very similar in resolution to the one in the real life unit - you can load up the same terrain location in a real airplane/sim and in the NGX and they look nearly identical. We did that with a bunch of different places when it was being coded.

How will this DB be up2date? Do we need to run it from an external program or the mcdu?

The altitude database up to date? Good thing that mountains dont grow, or at least very slow. I dont think we need to worry about updating the altitude database to be honest

Earthquake and volcano zones? Surface altitudes just change a few feet just from the tectonic plates sliding and lava build up I would think.

The altitude database up to date? Good thing that mountains dont grow, or at least very slow. I dont think we need to worry about updating the altitude database to be honest

This is rather a very poor analogy between wxr and radar altimeter. If you knew something about real flying you would know that radar altimeter (in commercial aviation) is only used to determine DH during ILS CAT II or III approaches. So actually it is enough to just simulate correctly the proper RA reading during the final say 20 sec of flight before landing and you accomplished the goal, you in fact provided full utility of radar altimeter. This is very easy - just subtract geometric altitude from airport elevation and you are done. There is no such shortcut in simulating wxr.

Dude, this isn't real flying. It's an entertainment software. You can take whatever shortcut you want to take. I don't recall bringing up the use of RA in real flying, just whether or not the beam has to be modeled to be certified good enough for flight sim entertainment software. And thanks for the lesson on 'real flying,' always love that putdown. Pat

The altitude database up to date? Good thing that mountains dont grow, or at least very slow. I dont think we need to worry about updating the altitude database to be honest

I'm not certain about the resolution of the 737's EGPWS, but I know that GA TAWS include obstacles such as radio towers.

If we had access to an obstacle database it'd be there. There aren't any publicly available databases that we know of though... perhaps we can get this as part of the deal for the RNP approach data that was discussed in another thread... the terrain is the hard part, obstacles are pretty simple by comparison, just need the data. (of course you'd then have the problem where the real world obstacle data doesn't sync up with what's in the FSX world...)

How will this DB be up2date? Do we need to run it from an external program or the mcdu?

I'd venture that the terrain DB isn't going to need to be updated unless a cataclysmic world event happens... if that occurs, I'd bet flight simming will be the last thing on anyone's mind. Seriously though, the EGPWS is there to keep you from crashing into terrain at night or in low visibility, it's not some hyper-accurate and detailed topo map. The resolution of the real life unit's terrain is pretty low compared to the terrain mesh addons you get for FS actually.

If we had access to an obstacle database it'd be there. There aren't any publicly available databases that we know of though... perhaps we can get this as part of the deal for the RNP approach data that was discussed in another thread... the terrain is the hard part, obstacles are pretty simple by comparison, just need the data. (of course you'd then have the problem where the real world obstacle data doesn't sync up with what's in the FSX world...)

Have you all thought about making a deal with Jeppesen (or Garmin, as I am more familiar with them) where one can purchase a special subscription (perhaps once a year or 6 months) that is compatible with PMDG. Or creating a converter for the raw Jep/Gar data where one can purchase their own Obstacle cycle and run it through, where obstacles will appear in the 37. I have not actually looked into our Garmin data to see how encrypted it is, so it might not be possible at all anyway.

I'd venture that the terrain DB isn't going to need to be updated unless a cataclysmic world event happens... if that occurs, I'd bet flight simming will be the last thing on anyone's mind. Seriously though, the EGPWS is there to keep you from crashing into terrain at night or in low visibility, it's not some hyper-accurate and detailed topo map. The resolution of the real life unit's terrain is pretty low compared to the terrain mesh addons you get for FS actually.

thanks for the info ryan :-)my first flight will be from vienna to innsbruck, i think this will be a nice route to see the nd working

Have you all thought about making a deal with Jeppesen

Sure, great idea :( :( You got people here who are not sure if the NGX will sell of $85 or $95 and you would have them purchase obstacle subscription from Jeppesen/Garmin that would run 10 times that much (conservatively speaking). Obstacles that by the way would not even be visible in the FSX's terrain. What for?