Hello PMDG,this aircraft is still amazing! Own it since day one and I don´t get tired of it. I have noticed a small issue. When fuel is at zero, the indication of all pictures I have seen show "0" instead of "000" as you can see in the PMDG aircraft.http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=7207285&nseq=4Probably easy to change?

I'm starting to think it may be a company option, or changed somewhere down the line?http://www.airliners[dot]net/photo/Copa-Airlines-Colombia/Boeing-737-7V3/2016303/L/&sid=f46909cf9ae5aa78dabdcc3aa59b9c6ehttp://www.airliners[dot]net/photo/Varig/Boeing-737-8AS/2013152/L/&sid=f46909cf9ae5aa78dabdcc3aa59b9c6e

I haven't checked for a while, but last time I did 0 = 0.00 = 000 = zero........Sorry, couldn't help myself. Why are some people so enthralled with such minor issues??

Because I love details and PMDG apparently too if you see their aircrafts!Dont´t know where your point is!? Just ignore the thread if you don´t like it ...

There was a thread about the number of Passengers awhile back and PMDG stated it would be near impossible to modify the plane for each and every airline and their specific equipment configuration. Whether its 0 or 000 it still means the same thing. I think this is a stupid thing to nitpick over. Example I never see anyone complain about the FMC? There are some extra options in the real world FMC that are not included in the PMDG model. But rather than complain about this people are nitpicking Zeros and whether or not the windshield is the right height?

Edited January 22, 201214 yr by UAL115

There was a thread about the number of Passengers awhile back and PMDG stated it would be near impossible to modify the plane for each and every airline and their specific equipment configuration. Whether its 0 or 000 it still means the same thing. I think this is a stupid thing to nitpick over. Example I never see anyone complain about the FMC? There are some extra options in the real world FMC that are not included in the PMDG model. But rather than complain about this people are nitpicking Zeros and whether or not the windshield is the right height?

I disagree. It may be a small thing but 000, if wrong, would be extremely easy to fix. In fact the service packs have had many similar minor fixes. Such is the realism of the NGX that such details are all there is to notice.

Well good luck with that...

Well good luck with that...

What do you mean? If it's a fault and PMDG choose to fix it that's great. If it's not a fault then that's great too. Luck is not required. Telling people what they should or shouldn't report isn't needed either.

Just take a look at the photos I have linked, guys...

Just take a look at the photos I have linked, guys...

Neither of the two CWT contents appears to be showing zero in the second post, certainly not three zeros although it's hard to tell what the digitsactually are. The first of the two appears to be showing an arc too.Looking at the FCOM the only picture I can find which shows low quantity in the centre tank shows 0050. I have seen a couple of pictures on A.net with near zero quantity and what looks like four digits, however both were simulators, not aircraft. So maybe this is an option or an earlier configuration.

Edited January 22, 201214 yr by kevinh

That's because the bottom two are the wing tanks, and since they're not full, the centre tank must be empty. Since there are obviously three digits, "000" is what it has to be displaying.

I searched pictures containing 000 but I've not found, and the 2 linked above are unclear, probably they are not 0.All planes I've seen ad the 0 indication, and this is logical, it is to remove the info that are not needed and that could lead in a reading error (000 can be seen as 900, as 800, as 300 and so on).Tere are reason for most things.Now, as for other topics, people are telling that this kind of details are useless.Ok, What do you think if all the numbers in the displays have a couple of zeros before them?IAS on ground 045, egt on ground 020, hyd pressure 0000 and so on.It is something not like the real, it is right to point it to the developers, and as they always did, will see or not, will fix or not.As for other not simulated items, it is a pmdg choice to fix or not. But, it is a good idea to post what is wrong. It is done to improve the product.If you're happy with it, I already told in other places, don't waste time here to attack who found a difference with the real one.

That's because the bottom two are the wing tanks, and since they're not full, the centre tank must be empty. Since there are obviously three digits, "000" is what it has to be displaying.

The fact that wings are not full does not mean that the center is always 0.

That's true, but if I can see it correctly, the Copa Jet is descending into 12000 feet, making this about 15-20 minutes before landing. The wing tanks have about 2/3 left. If the center fuel tank had been used during the flight, wouldn't the scavenge pump be long done with pumping before this phase in the flight?

That's because the bottom two are the wing tanks, and since they're not full, the centre tank must be empty. Since there are obviously three digits, "000" is what it has to be displaying.

Heres a better photo, taken just after landing, showing less than full wing tanks and what appears to be 290 in the centre. Hard to be sure but it's certainly not 000. The scavenge system or the indication system may not be perfect in real life.www.airliners[dot]net/photo/ArkeFly-(Miami-Air)/Boeing-737-8Q8/1757379/L/&sid=165c3a4cb0aac44801561960fcf4a895

Edited January 22, 201214 yr by kevinh