Hi thereI've been following the PMDG 737 NGX development for some time now. I have been a big fan of PMDG and think PMDG 747-400 is best thing happened to FSX and FS 2004.I almost fly it daily even for domestic routes .PMDG had made the things that the other developers could only dream of.I was very much amazed with sounds of PMDG 747-400,but [A.P.U] sound is not modeled at all, all you can hear is Avionics Fan ,Packs ,Fans ,Battery ,Electricals inside the aircraft when initiated but all these sounds even outside the aircraft.I was just wondering that is [A.P.U] Sound modeled in the NGX from the inside and outside? And all of these sounds [Fan ,Packs ,Fans ,Battery ,Electricals ] can be heard only inside the aircraft with a the [A.P.U] sound and ?And all of these sounds [Fan ,Packs ,Fans ,Battery ,Electricals ] can not be heard outside the aircraft except the [A.P.U] I wish the [A.P.U] Sound is modeled .Can’t wait to fly this beautyThanking YouSameer R Mankame

I would certainly hope so considering it was modeled in the MD-11... :(

I would think it will be modeled, if anything, this is going to be PMDG's flagship product with no compromise when it comes to the balancing two previously diametrically opposed goals of previous addon aircraft: plenty of eye/sound candy AND nerd level systems functionality. From what I have read, PMDG has confirmed that most features everyone is asking for are going to be in the NGX, including things that we were led to believe were impossible in FSX, i.e., more realistic ground handling. That "other" NG that was recently released has an excellent recreation of the APU sound, and true to life, it is only heard in the external view. It even spools down when shut down realistically. I'd find it hard to imagine that PMDG won't match, or even exceed, their soundset for the APU. They even have an "audiophile" putting each of the sounds through a fine tooth comb, meticulously adjusting the sound levels and pitches to match reality within the confines of FSX's sound engine.I'm sure we will be very impressed!

I would certainly hope so considering it was modeled in the MD-11... :(

But not from the external model it isnt.

APU sound can not be heard from the flightdeck. Only outside the aircraft you can hear it.Would love it though if PMDG recreates the spool-up and spool-down of the APU in the outside sound-set.

This is probably the most realistically simulated APU yet in fact - the startup and shutdown and associated gauge needle movement were mapped exactly to multiple real life videos of it happening and there's numerous failures you can trigger that relate specifically to it. The EGT changes realistically with the electrical and pneumatic loads placed on it too. It has sound (recorded from the real thing) in the exterior view - you cannot hear it from the cockpit, it's too far back.

Nevermind.

Which model of APU is it that is simulated, or is there more than one?Al

Honeywell/Allied Signal GTCP 131-9B, which is the only APU used on the NG.

I know it's a little nit picky, but when you set the APU switch to start, does the EGT needle bounce around a bit before indication? I have noticed this perticular behavior in several (World Air Routes) DVD's. Boy, I'm a nerd eh? :(

One question that I have about the APU is will it burn fuel? I have noticed that the PMDG 747 and the Level-D 767 APU's don't burn any fuel. Perhaps a bit of added realism for the future.

One question that I have about the APU is will it burn fuel? I have noticed that the PMDG 747 and the Level-D 767 APU's don't burn any fuel. Perhaps a bit of added realism for the future.

Oh I am certain this will be modeled. There are a couple other NG sims that model APU fuel burn. However, their accuracy may or may not be accurate. I am sure these guys will ace the APU fuel burn. APU runs off the NO.1 tank I believe.

Honeywell/Allied Signal GTCP 131-9B, which is the only APU used on the NG.

Yup, probably didn't phrase my question properly in saying 'model', what I was inquiring about was was a bit of a nit picker, but since I know PMDG are 'really going for it' as far as detail goes on this one, I thought I'd ask:When the Honeywell 131-9B was introduced on 737s, it was a bit notorious for the starter not being hugely reliable and so of course Honeywell tweaked that and now it's a lot more robust. I know you are including a lot of realistic wear and tear features on the PMDG NG, but because you've been developing it for a while, I was wondering if the reliability of the APU was kind of 'frozen in time' from the point where the APU was a bit more dodgy if that was when you were doing the study of the particular NG you used as a reference, or does it reflect the improved reliability of the things these days as far as the wear and tear simulation goes? I guess what I'm asking is, is this one of the things we could set the reliability of?It'd be cool if stuff like that was in there, as I always find it a bit dodgy when one can abuse the starters on FS aerolanes with never a risk of any kind of hot starts or any malfunctions of any kind even when there's a hurricane blowing up the tailpipes LOLAl

Yup, probably didn't phrase my question properly, what I was inquiring about was was a bit of a nit picker, but since I know PMDG are really going for it on this one I thought I'd ask:When the Honeywell 131-9B was introduced on 737s, it was a bit notorious for the starter not being hugely reliable and so of course Honeywell tweaked that and now it's a lot more robust. I know you are including a lot of realistic wear and tear features on the PMDG NG, but because you've been developing it for a while, I was wondering if the reliability of the APU was kind of 'frozen in time' from the point where the APU was a bit more dodgy if that was when you were doing the study of the particular NG you used as a reference, or does it reflect the improved reliability of the things these days as far as the wear and tear simulation goes? I guess what I'm asking is, is this one of the things we could set the reliability of?Al

Ahh. The "accusim" level of detail! Wear and tear/maintenance would be a great future addon module (if it isn't already done). Imagine having to address worn brakes, tires, lights and dealing with LAV draining. I have allways thought it would be cool to be able to do a virtual "walk around" pre flight. During night ops, the mouse curosr could double as a flashlight for nighttime preflights. and on..... and on.... and on...... :(

One question that I have about the APU is will it burn fuel? I have noticed that the PMDG 747 and the Level-D 767 APU's don't burn any fuel. Perhaps a bit of added realism for the future.

APU fuel burn isn't very high, you have to let it sit for quite a while before you'd notice any drop in the tanks... The 400 most definitely does have it modeled and I'd bet the 767 does too.