Space between glareshield and overhead panel.

[MrPlaneDriver 41]

Sorry To bring back this topic !

 

So guy's you still think I was stupid to ask about this subject ? :huh: Not anymore after reading that right ? :ph34r:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653089

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653500

 

My 2 cent's !

 

Revenge, sweet revenge.  B)

[Airbusman330 300]

Revenge, sweet revenge.  B)

 

I love rubbing it in when proven right against the majority as well  ^_^

[Vagabondo 23]

Trust me, those photos are misleading The gap doesn't look that narrow when seated and operating the aircraft. I presume the photos are distorted by the camera field of view and position.

[eNuffSaid 4]

I'm really glad someone noticed this actually - it's something I started asking Vin to take a look at after I flew the level D 777 simulator last year.

 

 

 

Those new angles aren't the same angles as your RW shots. Give it a rest, will ya'? 

 

 

Care to comment, Zach? 

[Paul_Smith 92]

If you want to compare apples and oranges, off you go, have fun.

 

However, if you want to compare apples with apples, why not sit in the pilots seat and correctly adjust it as per Boeings instructions (FCOMv2, 1.40.44) and then take your picture. Lets see how that compares to the VC as presented by PMDG, again, with the viewpoint correctly adjusted as per instructions.

 

If you don't know why this is important or what difference it makes, then now is a good time to find out.  

[aceridgey 330]

Sorry To bring back this topic !

 

So guy's you still think I was stupid to ask about this subject ? :huh: Not anymore after reading that right ? :ph34r:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653089

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653500

 

My 2 cent's !

 

I read through your OP with interest, and was just wondering why you didn't take a picture in the sim of the same angle [would have solved a lot of heated replies]. But I do agree with you, and you have been proved right. So bask in your victory of the interwebs today! .

[tcas_climb 45]

Sorry To bring back this topic !

 

So guy's you still think I was stupid to ask about this subject ? :huh: Not anymore after reading that right ? :ph34r:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653089

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/405970-follow-pmdg-facebook-something-happening/?p=2653500

 

My 2 cent's !

Fatality!

 

Good job.

[Spook 96]

Josua, that last post contains images both from the sim, so you've essentially invalidated your argument.For those who believe there is an issue, google "parallax" among other visual oddities. More specifically here, the apparent distance between the glareshield and the overhead depends completely on your angle of viewing.Stand near a doorway and place the door at 45 degrees from being closed. Stand facing the doorway (perpendicular to the doorframe). You'll see that the apparent distance between the door and the frame is maybe a third of the total door width. Now, stand facing the doorway at the same angle as the door. You'll see that the apparent distance between the door and the frame is the entire width of the door.Welcome to the Three Dimensional World!!!

Those new angles aren't the same angles as your RW shots. Give it a rest, will ya'?

Ohh sigh...Where's that funny other red MS Paint wrong dimensions thread... From a whiles back. That one made me chuckle.Really, I'm pretty confident PMDG got it right. Even if they didn't it's such a negligible difference in my mind.

Ya'll are impossible...Really?Are there the proper amount of screw fasteners on the overhead? What about the breakers? Are we missing one? What about the positioning of the white crosses on the panel elements?By the way, the gap between the edge of the radio elements and the pedestal is actually off by 3 micrograms....I swear, I could sit some of you in the cockpit of a real aircraft and you'd tell me the dimensions are off. How many times does it have to be pointed out that PMDG was given access to the design files of the NG - the actual NG - for measurements. Somehow that falls on deaf ears.

I can't believe this thread has made a second page. My runway lights arn't the excactly the same size as the runway lights at the real heathrow airport, some of my controls are moved by using a mouse and I have no real people sat in the cabin. Am I really concerned if the space between the glareshield and overhead is the exact size. Reality check people, this is a addon, all being an excellent addon but an addon all the same for a 6 year old bit of software from a company that has turned it's back on it. Not a multi million pound aircraft or professional simulatior. I'm all for realism but when I take off from 3D rendered airport and sail into the 3D rendered sky in my 3D rendered plane, I think "Wow, it's amazing how a company has made this (insert your favourite addon here) look so good", not "Oh no, that measurement is a little short"

 

[Lek767 37]

I hear crow can be quite delicious, if prepared properly.

[Glynn 405]

The window size of the NGX is wrong, it might be correct as far as the boeing blueprints are concerned but it turns out wrong in the Sim.

The fan boys will deny this all day long but it just does not look right.

The i-Fly NG gets it closer to be honest, hard to accept for many but the truth non the less.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Okay, so I'll be the first one to step up and admit defeat.

 

 

 

As an aside, it says a lot about a person the way they react to winning an argument, especially in regards to those who contributed nothing, yet are clearly present in commentary from the peanut gallery.

[Joduv 90]

Thanks guy's for your comments

 

As an aside, it says a lot about a person the way they react to winning an argument, especially in regards to those who contributed nothing, yet are clearly present in commentary from the peanut gallery.
 

 

What do you mean by that ?

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

What do you mean by that ?

 

It wasn't aimed at you.  Your post, referring to the new posts supporting your argument, was predominantly harmless.  I wouldn't have dredged up an old topic to wave a victory flag at everyone like that, but at the same time, it's not unwarranted or distasteful.  Some of the other responses, however..

[Joduv 90]

I see what you mean now Kyle, thank you

[Spook 96]

I hope you're not refering to my response...as it was clearly a poke in the ribs - no disrespect ment, if any taken.