Dont know why you want to bring it up ryan has stated in a earlier post stop nitpicking, have you counted the rivets as well iam sure there be one missing somewhere on the blue print thats not on the model. You can still fly the plane without any major bugs which everyone wants, and if you want realism then why dont you take a picture of a real aircraft than hang it above your pc and while your flying you can look at it thinking it the one your in.

Dont know why you want to bring it up ryan has stated in a earlier post stop nitpicking, have you counted the rivets as well iam sure there be one missing somewhere on the blue print thats not on the model. You can still fly the plane without any major bugs which everyone wants, and if you want realism then why dont you take a picture of a real aircraft than hang it above your pc and while your flying you can look at it thinking it the one your in.

This post also adds nothing to the discussion.Also, I am unable to locate the post that you are referencing. The time and effort that you spent to write your response would have been better spent to post a link to Ryan's post.

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by ksta

We can speak about sounds... there is a recent topic about engine sounds, and there, noone is telling that new sounds are useless or that a bit of difference in loud is like counting rivets...Sorry, but there are 2 methods of judgment for the details.However, ksta has the answer to his question via PM, he can share if he wants or not. Pictures from airliners.net are clear enaught to answer, mostly because in most of them there is the red line running from krueger to the aft border of the ram air, the line is vertical and it shows clearly where the ram is positioned. This without drawings or other.

Sounds are equally invalid. Sound is even more imprecise than vision in the psychology of the mind. The only time it gains more precision is when the individual is heavily involved in those things that require finely-tuned hearing (musician, sound technician, and so on). Furthermore, those who are making claims that it doesn't sound right generally don't have enough time around aircraft to make that determination. Ever listen to a recording of yourself and think *wait...I sound like that?*Pictures on A.net aren't enough because if you look at enough of them, the line position varies, and in some doesn't exist at all. What's so secretive that it has to be shared by PM, by the way?

Your post appears to contain a lot of frustration. You could have saved yourself a lot of time and effort by only stating your fourth point; it actually sounds like a fairly reasonable assumption, and you may be right. Everything else that your wrote in your message seemed rather unnecessary because it didn't help me or anyone else understand why these types of concerns should not need to be brought up in the future; it only showed me that you are clearly frustrated.It is fairly obvious that you have a bias against people that would like to try to help companies improve their products, and this bias is the driving force behind the way that you word some of your messages (as well as how you perceive other messages). The more that people introduce hostility and frustration into their messages, the more that others will be deterred from listening, and the more that you will see the same things being discussed over and over, which will only lead to more frustration.One way to reduce the amount of "nitpicking" could be to create a tutorial that is located in an easy-to-find place on the forums. This tutorial can explain why inconsistencies exist between simulated and real-world aircraft in order to help people understand these issues. This could also be an effective solution to help to reduce the amount frustration that people like you experience.It's not about having the need to know more than others, it's about having the need to help others.Think about it....

Ken, if you want a discussion, stop telling everyone that their points add nothing to the discussion. That's the first issue with your posts here. It's even more irritating than the nitpicking issue. Just because they don't directly address why your nitpicking is incorrect doesn't mean they are invalid in the discussion. You just refuse to accept them, that's all.Furthermore, I'm not sure I believe you that you're here to "help" the developer. What you are doing is akin to me standing up on my desk and asking the group around me "hey, guys, I think Jimmy's pants are too short, what say you?" Why? If my intentions were genuinely to help Jimmy, I'd address him directly. To me, it seems the only motivation for posting here in the forum is to draw attention to yourself for having pointed it out.Peoples' actions are heavily influenced by the psychology surrounding the situation, which is why I'm making assumptions here. Don't confuse heavy doses of sarcasm and heavy-handed writing for frustration. I just don't sugar coat things. I never really have and I don't see that changing any time soon. It's not that I don't want to help developers improve. It's that if I chose to do so, it wouldn't be publicly....and don't kid yourself about a tutorial. People barely read the tutorial to fly the plane. What makes you think people would read a message on the design of the plane?

This post also adds nothing to the discussion.Also, I am unable to locate the post that you are referencing. The time and effort that you spent to write your response would have been better spent to post a link to Ryan's post.

The time and effort that you spent to write your response, attempting to invalidate a valid point, would have been better spent adding support to your arguments (or going to find Ryan's of Robert's post on your own).

...and I can't find the exact post, but this one's similar;http://forum.avsim.net/topic/337365-737ngx-landing-gear-lever/page__view__findpost__p__1996962

...and I can't find the exact post, but this one's similar;http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__1996962

been looking for the post that ryan made made about the nitpicking but couldnt find it maybe he could chime in here, but since you have found a similar post maybe this will do

@scandinavian13, there is no secret, it was just a drawing showing the wing to body fairing, ram air position compared to the krueger flap position. And there is no difference between -600 to -900.

Ken, if you want a discussion, stop telling everyone that their points add nothing to the discussion. That's the first issue with your posts here. It's even more irritating than the nitpicking issue. Just because they don't directly address why your nitpicking is incorrect doesn't mean they are invalid in the discussion. You just refuse to accept them, that's all.

I refuse to accept them because, even though you think they are full of "sarcasm and heavy-handed writing," it looks like an attempt to take frustration out on me (true feelings and intentions are difficult to convey via the forums).Why is it so diffucult to have a simple discussion that doesn't involve people talking about other people? Talk about the topic, not about how much of a "nitpicker" I am. I want to learn, and I cannot do that when I keep having to defend myself against your type of posts.

Furthermore, I'm not sure I believe you that you're here to "help" the developer. What you are doing is akin to me standing up on my desk and asking the group around me "hey, guys, I think Jimmy's pants are too short, what say you?" Why? If my intentions were genuinely to help Jimmy, I'd address him directly. To me, it seems the only motivation for posting here in the forum is to draw attention to yourself for having pointed it out.

I believe that I am here to help. This thread would have been a great opportunity for people with advanced knowledge to shed insight into why certian visual inconsistencies exist. What this would have done is it would have helped other people better understand the issues so that they wouldn't have to keep posting about them since they already know.

It's not that I don't want to help developers improve. It's that if I chose to do so, it wouldn't be publicly.

You're absolutely right; however, like I mentioned earlier, it would have been nice to also have a good discussion so that other people can learn something from it.

...and don't kid yourself about a tutorial. People barely read the tutorial to fly the plane. What makes you think people would read a message on the design of the plane?

Well, if a tutorial already existed, and I came along and started this thread before I saw it, all that someone like you would have to do is simply direct me to the tutorial. Then, a moderator would simply be able to remove the thread since it is cleary irrelevant.

The time and effort that you spent to write your response, attempting to invalidate a valid point, would have been better spent adding support to your arguments (or going to find Ryan's of Robert's post on your own).

I don't know exactly how much you're looking for out of me, but I know nothing about these visual issues, so I started the thread mostly because I figured that there could be a good discussion about it and that I (and other people) would be able to learn something.

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by ksta

How the forum could help improving the NGX?It can do in many ways, one of them is user feedbacks.In SP1C you will enjoy a fix of the yaw damper limiter in engine out condition that was reported by users here in the forum, then I sent a ticket and they will solve it.I'm pretty sure that pmdg will not do a 3d model modification for around 5/10 centimeters of RAM door position error, but if someone at pmdg is reading and is playing around it...

How the forum could help improving the NGX?It can do in many ways, one of them is user feedbacks.In SP1C you will enjoy a fix of the yaw damper limiter in engine out condition that was reported by users here in the forum, then I sent a ticket and they will solve it.I'm pretty sure that pmdg will not do a 3d model modification for around 5/10 centimeters of RAM door position error, but if someone at pmdg is reading and is playing around it...

True, but I don't see why they wouldn't take the time to fix it since they're already making updates unless, of course, the "error" was intentional, so they had a good reason for making it look the way it does.

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by ksta

We enter in a commercial decision area....PMDG is known for their good products and support, I'm pretty sure that if you send a ticket about it they will answer you, but I also think that this work will take some time for them and I'm also not sure about the lievery compatibility (red lines going into the ram air for example).The team moved into the 777 development, they are continuing to support this product, but, I think they will fix it only for bugs regarding simulation issues.Each minute they spend on the 737 is a minute less in building the new one, and this is not important for us (except for the patience of some simmers) but is important for their own marketing.As I told in some other discussion, I'm (I was) happy to discuss about each wrong rivet in the forum, but as I did some times (maybe I sent 4 tickets to the team) I sent tickets only for the most important things (system related).I don't know what PMDG could answer to a ticket about the position of the ram air, I also wonder that the ram door flap could be moveable, but personally there are other things for the tickets.However, as the pmdg reads the forum, they could find this discussion, and, if they are making a mod in the 3d model, it is possible that could include it ;)It is why I think that this topic is a good topic, a good finding on something that needs to be improved for perfection.People, let's say honestly, with other addons we can search and find big issue, with this bird, if we want to find something (and it is a good challenge) we need to count rivets. This says how good is that product.I remember the first flight I made with the 737 PIC from feelthere... I posted in their forum a list of over 100 issues I found in a single flight.

We enter in a commercial decision area....PMDG is known for their good products and support, I'm pretty sure that if you send a ticket about it they will answer you, but I also think that this work will take some time for them and I'm also not sure about the lievery compatibility (red lines going into the ram air for example).The team moved into the 777 development, they are continuing to support this product, but, I think they will fix it only for bugs regarding simulation issues.Each minute they spend on the 737 is a minute less in building the new one, and this is not important for us (except for the patience of some simmers) but is important for their own marketing.As I told in some other discussion, I'm (I was) happy to discuss about each wrong rivet in the forum, but as I did some times (maybe I sent 4 tickets to the team) I sent tickets only for the most important things (system related).I don't know what PMDG could answer to a ticket about the position of the ram air, I also wonder that the ram door flap could be moveable, but personally there are other things for the tickets.However, as the pmdg reads the forum, they could find this discussion, and, if they are making a mod in the 3d model, it is possible that could include it ;)It is why I think that this topic is a good topic, a good finding on something that needs to be improved for perfection.People, let's say honestly, with other addons we can search and find big issue, with this bird, if we want to find something (and it is a good challenge) we need to count rivets. This says how good is that product.I remember the first flight I made with the 737 PIC from feelthere... I posted in their forum a list of over 100 issues I found in a single flight.

This seems to make a fairly good amount of sense. Thanks. :(

But why oh why waste time fine tooth combing over this perhaps slight discrepancy, if it is even one at all, if it has no bearing whatsoever on the handling or simulation of the 737 in FSX?Get off the forum and into the NGX cockpit... :)If you are now wondering, I am currently descending into Alice Springs in the 600... Admiring the beautiful cockpit work... and no, I haven't had a look at the wingbox all through the flight... :)CheersAndrew

But why oh why waste time fine tooth combing over this perhaps slight discrepancy, if it is even one at all, if it has no bearing whatsoever on the handling or simulation of the 737 in FSX?Get off the forum and into the NGX cockpit... :)If you are now wondering, I am currently descending into Alice Springs in the 600... Admiring the beautiful cockpit work... and no, I haven't had a look at the wingbox all through the flight... :)CheersAndrew

Maybe it is how we feel the simulator, we are all different!You will enjoy the simulation by departing, flying and landing, then do it again and again changing destinations/departures. You will add failures and so on.Other than that, it is good to enjoy the details of the cockpit, cabin, external details, as well as the sounds (there is a discussion about them and are not considered as counting rivets).In presence with such a complex simulation, it is also funny to try things out from the checklist, it is something very important for training, but only if the product reacts as the real.I was previously attacked about some bugs that were present if the aircraft was used out from normal conditions, bugs like this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4J3e9fRn4Qthat was partially fixed with sp1b.Another one is also listed in the checklist (engine out) but reported only by few users:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBPUmUQ57PcOr the fuel scavenge and so on...You will also find nice things like the test of the electric display panel, a nice feature that I'm sure Mr Randazzo added but I think only few tried. :).Searching for details, right or wrong that they are, are to be considered as a training tools

But why oh why waste time fine tooth combing over this perhaps slight discrepancy, if it is even one at all, if it has no bearing whatsoever on the handling or simulation of the 737 in FSX?

As I've mentioned earlier, different people like different things. The exterior of the airplane is modeled because there are people that like to see and enjoy an accurate, digital replica of the exterior.

Get off the forum and into the NGX cockpit... :)

I'd really like to, but my desktop broke in December.

If you are now wondering, I am currently descending into Alice Springs in the 600... Admiring the beautiful cockpit work... and no, I haven't had a look at the wingbox all through the flight... :)

Reference my first paragraph. :(

Edited January 28, 201214 yr by ksta

To settle the argument...There are 12,568 internal and external rivets on a Boeing 737-800 if you ordered all available options before October, 2008."Wingbox Distortion" can be caused by multiple factors, including but not limited to:- Magnetic Variation- Altitude- Lens type, make, model, focus length- Photographer skills with camera and Photoshop- Angle of incidence between photographer and wingbox- Computer specs such as platform, operating system, graphics hardware and settings, monitor size flex model make- Wing load- Engine thrustOther factors too technical to discuss on a basic aeronautical forum such as this.You're Welcome