Really...what inaccurate modelling? Very interested in this, PMDG said that they used Boeing specs throughout. Hate necro-threads, but this caught my eye

HelloHave a close look at the area directly below the displays in the VC, then check the 737-NG cockpit shots on Airliners.netThe i-Fly has this area correct.

I think it all depends on your definition of "value". If you prefer quality over quantity then you should go pmdg.If on the other hand you prefer quantity over quality then you could either pick the more simplistic ifly or even better download one of the many freeware models and purchase ernie's simavionics package instead.This way you can save the $54 and you can use the gauges with many other airplanes.

Then I guess it would also depend on your definition of "quality". For me, quality is a complete package, not just the aircraft itself. For example, someone has an issue with the NGX, they go to the NGX support forum and ask a question. 20% of those responses will either be people flaming the person, or self-appointed moderators posting useless rhetoric about not signing a name properly. Sure, the answer to the problem MAY come out in the end, but by the way people are treated on that forum, I'd say the quality is pretty low. Second, iFly allows for a 30-day, no questions asked refund policy. Don't like the aircraft? Simply return it, now that is quality that PMDG cannot match. Now, if you want to talk about the quality of the VC, ok, I'll give that one to PMDG, but again, this all comes down to one person's definition of quality. I do own both, and while the PMDG aircraft has an excellent looking VC....it means absolutely nothing to me. I have a home cockpit setup so my "VC" is actually tangible and thus, I fly with no panels up on my monitors...simply the view out the window. Currently, I can only use my setup on the iFly because of the release of the SDK, which PMDG has yet to release for theirs. When it comes to systems, quite honestly, I don't see much of a difference. Both do the exact same thing for my flying, and since neither one of them can fly an RNP approach (which PMDG claimed the NGX was supposed to do), to me, they are on par with each other. Oh, and not to mention, when flying the iFly, I don't have to turn off turbulence or wind effects to stop it from rocking back and forth. Point to this post is, we all have our own opinions and neither one of them are wrong. If someone wishes to make their own mind, they should buy both and decide for themselves. Not be pushed about by a bunch of fan-boys.

If you have an issue with the PMDG you submit a ticket on their website. That is the official support channel - the forum is "community" support. Much as I like the broad range of models with the iFly, system-wise it doesn't hold a candle to the PMDG,

If you have an issue with the PMDG you submit a ticket on their website. That is the official support channel - the forum is "community" support.

And where exactly does it say that? The board index is PMDG Support Forum >> PMDG 737NGX. No where does it state, it's a "community" support forum. Many developers, including Flight 1, have both a support ticket system and a support forum. Both avenues of which are available for technical support on the product. To a newbie, all they see is support forum and assume if they post a support issue, they are going to get support.

Much as I like the broad range of models with the iFly, system-wise it doesn't hold a candle to the PMDG,

Would you care to elaborate??? What exactly does the PMDG have in your eyes that the iFly doesn't as far as systems go? People want to know the pro's and con's of both. You can't just say one is better than the other without giving a reason.

The PMDG forum does seem to have well more than it's fair share of annoying, self appointed moderators. But it isn't the least friendly support forum I have visited.Can't fault the support ticket system though.G

You can't just say one is better than the other without giving a reason.

I can, with exactly the same ease that you can declare them equal without providing any detail. However, I'll offer you a couple of examples: Can you do an IAN approach in the iFly? Does it model the difference between fail-operational and fail-passive autoland? For the record, I think that the iFly offering is very good value for the money, with a level of complexity that will satisfy most and a lot of variety in models to choose between. But it is not the equal of the PMDG in terms of system depth.

I can, with exactly the same ease that you can declare them equal without providing any detail. However, I'll offer you a couple of examples: Can you do an IAN approach in the iFly? Does it model the difference between fail-operational and fail-passive autoland? For the record, I think that the iFly offering is very good value for the money, with a level of complexity that will satisfy most and a lot of variety in models to choose between. But it is not the equal of the PMDG in terms of system depth.

Tom, Just a question here about Fail Op. My research indicates that for Fail Op/Land3 a third autopilot system with separate reference info has to be available. AFAIK no NG's anywhere have a 3rd AP so all should only model Fail-passive. Does the PMDG have a 3rd AP? And if not, how is the Fail-Op modelled then? Thanks,

Two autopilots are sufficient, but three inertial sources are required as well as assorted sensors and monitoring circuitry to ensure that a single fault cannot prevent the autopilot from making an automatic landing. It's a Boeing option (still a rarity in the real world, I believe), and an option in the NGX too. Some info here: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_22/737approach_story.html

However, I'll offer you a couple of examples: Can you do an IAN approach in the iFly? Does it model the difference between fail-operational and fail-passive autoland?

Valid points, Tom.

system-wise it doesn't hold a candle to the PMDG

Regarding some myths, I've got some for you. 1) How's the landing attitude of the PMDG modelled?2) Are the lower Vrefs of the SFP modelled?3) Why do people lose fps when going around?4) Why does the FMC lose all data when doing touch & goes?5) How are manually entered waypoint handled?6) What about RTA?7) Is there a maintenance mode in the FMC?8) Why is the mousebug even more prominent than on the iFly?9) Why do VOR course lines cause another fps drop?10) Why, if the thing is so detailed, are electrical loads on the APU modelled the wrong way and why are the dependencies of e. g. the galley/util bus wrong?11) Why doesn't a change of carbon brakes or the left out airstair lead to another weight of the plane?12) Why can one freeze the FMC when flying an offset route?To name a few. And some on the soft skills.1) Why did the issues tracking thread get deleted?2) Why does it take more than one well explained attempt to convince PMDG about some necessary changes or, at least, comment on some issues?3) Why do they throw stones at you in the first place (together with the fans), instead of listening?4) Why do they call people asking questions and referring to the given manual values 'wannabes' when they still have a valid point?5) Why would other devs be concerned about freezes, CTDs and activation problems, while you can only read 'it's only a small percentage' over at PMDG?6) Why is there no refund policy when the thing is available since the 4th of August and people are still having activation issues in September?7) Why did they have to stress the rock solid testing and even had threads with 'we don't envision many problems after product launch' (now deleted, I guess) while giving that sort of freeze, CTD, activation and e. g. FDE flaw show?8) Why are their fans so upset about a competitor with a nice forum mood, a fast support (in those forums), no self-proclaimed mods and a fair refund policy?9) Why could we all read this ignoble iFly bashing from PMDG itself just after their release?To name a few. And general ones.1) Since the NGX came reduced in models and features, how will the production keep up with the schedule?2) Multicrew, more detailed FMC, new waypoint format those all were 'envisioned' to be there at the release, but now are items to still get worked (and tested) out, while the current flaws and problems add to the workload of course3) How does this affect older products, the SP2 for the J41 or the final SP for the MD-11? They are all parked with the vague 'after the NGX' sentence. I'm running both detailed 737s, technically, all three since I own the Ariane too.While I've 'envisioned' a nice release from PMDG, sadly, with their still unchanged attitude, I received a flawed product on some vital parts. Parts, where I ask myself if it really needs 'real pilots' to test things or just real testers since this one still runs on a PC, with FSX and no real passengers.I'm not so happy if the thing freezes but the EGT stays correct then. This may be a personal preference of course. The attitude shown is either helpless (freezes, CDTs, activation), arrogant or insulting, stating that all the guys with trouble can't run the sim at all, their systems are faulty or some other things.While this may apply to single digit numbers, you may look into the forums to catch a glimpse on problems, even on some fan computers (which, as we know, normally run extra smooth).If one likes to pay 70 Dollars without a refund option, then believes that the extended download service is a good buy too and also believes in the 'it's a small percentage talk' while the forum shows exactly the opposite, than he may have another impression of quality indeed. Combine the above flaws and soft skills and receive a picture where the product really shines in its appearance and also love for details on the one hand, but where the attitude of the company and also the nontransparent handling of current flaws severely impacts that nice impression.If you are currently suffering from CTDs, freezes or even activation issues, that insulting 'small percentage' info and the deletion of issue tracking threads may not be as helpful as some guys around think. Funny thing, they don't know why the thing works at the one end while struggling at the other one. If they did, the talk would be much less 'I'm the dev, I know it all' but more 'you may check this or that, glad I could help you' or not? If this enables the superior impression some people promote, well, then we should all but the PMDG right now, huh?Running her besides the other 737s, I can only wish PMDG good luck to get on some flaws with the SP1 release, because, apart from brilliant optics, I don't have much interest in her now, failing on landing, go-around and simple touch and go training for example. If that's the great system depth everybody assumes, I may not be a fan of this. So maybe I'm just a wannabe, wanting to have a working product. Interesting thing, other devs let me be that wannabe, which I've paid for and don't raise the 'dare you!' speech when somebody points out a thing to be worked on.Attitude, not only on landing, that's what defines value and makes products even better.

Regarding some myths, I've got some for you.

Quite a few, many very subjective, and mostly completely irrelevant in the context of comparing system depth. You clearly have much spare time.

4) Why does the FMC lose all data when doing touch & goes?

I think this behavior is correct according to the FCOM v2 chapter 11 it says:

Flight CompleteAfter landing, the flight complete phase clears the active flight plan and load data.Some preflight data fields initialize to default values in preparation for the nextflight.

I presume you fill in the same for both departure and arrival. So the system will conclude that you finished the flight when you touchdown. I agree that this is annoying when performing touch and goes. But I think you can thrust PMDG to have put a large effort in simulating the systems.

Wow. Sooooo boring...Always the same thing to say about PMDG and iFly.

system-wise it doesn't hold a candle to the PMDG

+1 I personaly can even begin to understand how people can compare those two system-wise...Even with the bugs...Even without RTA (wich is coming later)...Even without Maintenance pages...... the NGX is just much more advanced than the iFly (and the Ariane of course)...

Really...what inaccurate modelling? Very interested in this, PMDG said that they used Boeing specs throughout. Hate necro-threads, but this caught my eye

There is a small issue between the upper and lower EICAS display. In a real aircraft, the lower is a bit (approx 1cm) lower than PMDG modelled in the NGX. Absolutely no biggie... In fact, I wonder why anyone would even care.

There is a small issue between the upper and lower EICAS display. In a real aircraft, the lower is a bit (approx 1cm) lower than PMDG modelled in the NGX. Absolutely no biggie... In fact, I wonder why anyone would even care.

HelloI care as it should have been addressed, in fact I wonder how all the beta testers missed it.

Then I guess it would also depend on your definition of "quality". For me, quality is a complete package, not just the aircraft itself. For example, someone has an issue with the NGX, they go to the NGX support forum and ask a question. 20% of those responses will either be people flaming the person, or self-appointed moderators posting useless rhetoric about not signing a name properly

Jeremy, I agree with you. Support is important when it comes to software. In my experience if you go to the pmdg support forum you will not get flamed if you have issues with the ngx and ask for help.However, if you start comparing the ngx with other simplistic/basic whatever planes, start saying things like other vendors "offer more for less" and in general make other statements that have the same delusional feel to it you will get flamed. That is nosurprise tho.You are bringing ridicule upon yourself. I should also add that if you go to the ifly forum and dare objecting to the supremacy of the glorious 737ng you will beattacked by an army of ogres headed/followed by the otherwise sleepy and clueless forum police (self-appointed and not). BTW.Self-appointed mods, wannabes, professional and/or full-time praise singers and other plagues frequent all forums and the ifly's is no exception. "Point to this post is, we all have our own opinions and neither one of them are wrong. If someone wishes to make their own mind,they should buy both and decide for themselves. Not be pushed about by a bunch of fan-boys. " Correct.Keep in mind tho that not every one can afford to buy both planes and so every one's opinion is important.Also thefanboys', provided it's not oneliners and stuff like " this plane's sounds are the best o most realistic ever because a mod/a mandown at the bar or at the convalescent home says so".