I misunderstood something Vangelis had told me a while back - just clarified with him and we're doing both the 110 and the 115 - you can all relax now lol.

I misunderstood something Vangelis had told me a while back - just clarified with him and we're doing both the 110 and the 115 - you can all relax now lol.

That's great news, also how people freaked out over, 5000lbs lol

I'm guessing some people on the forum have seen my love for the 777 and is definitely very evident ha! The 77W is probably what I'm most looking forward too, apart from getting the base pack of course ;)

 

with your spotting location I am surprised your not looking forward to the 200er

I misunderstood something Vangelis had told me a while back - just clarified with him and we're doing both the 110 and the 115 - you can all relax now lol.

 

Great! Making only the 115B made no sense given PMDG's crusade for accuracy.

with your spotting location I am surprised your not looking forward to the 200er

 

Spotting location? You mean from Youtube? About that, still trying to get the BAW 77W Head on taxi video.. I am looking forward to all the models but have to say 77W more ha.

Spotting location? You mean from Youtube? About that, still trying to get the BAW 77W Head on taxi video.. I am looking forward to all the models but have to say 77W more ha.

 

I mean Heathrow, spotting location. :P.

 

Heathrow is heavy in density with 200er, Little 300s 200LR compared.

I mean Heathrow, spotting location. :P.

 

Heathrow is heavy in density with 200er, Little 300s 200LR compared.

 

Hmm, more and more 300ER's coming in! LR's I've only seen Air India, Qatar, Emirates & Air Canada.

The difference is a line of coding in the EEC (FADEC) to limit the maximum available thrust to 110K, that is all, it results in lower temperature in the core engine which means less wear and tear and a lower maintenance bill. If the airline operate from hot and high airports, then the 115K is required, otherwise you might have to offload revenue load on a regular basis, not a good idea!

 

Best regards

Palle H. Jensen

The difference is a line of coding in the EEC (FADEC) to limit the maximum available thrust to 110K, that is all, it results in lower temperature in the core engine which means less wear and tear and a lower maintenance bill. If the airline operate from hot and high airports, then the 115K is required, otherwise you might have to offload revenue load on a regular basis, not a good idea!

 

Best regards

Palle H. Jensen

So essentially the the 115K is the better engine, allowing an extra 5k of thrust?

So essentially the the 115K is the better engine, allowing an extra 5k of thrust?

 

considering the following...

 

The difference is a line of coding in the EEC (FADEC) to limit the maximum available thrust to 110K, that is all, it results in lower temperature in the core engine which means less wear and tear and a lower maintenance bill.

 

i don't see why it's a big deal. yeah, it will be cool to simulate our favorite liveries, but at the same time.....it's not like we're actually paying for it (as in the increased cost due to increased engine performance vs. maintenance).

 

While we are paying for the increased realism (***gladly***), I don't think it's anything to have gotten upset/panicky over.

 

I really feel it's time to just let PMDG do what they're gonna do. They haven't let us down yet.

 

And if anybody claims they could do better, they're full of IT. Based on the fact that I haven't seen/heard of any competitors in the same ball park.

 

 

 

 

I apologize.....I'm just getting sick of reading all of the "BUT IT SHOULD HAVE/SIMULATE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!" threads. They're a highly professional business. Let them work their magic. :)

considering the following...

 

 

 

i don't see why it's a big deal. yeah, it will be cool to simulate our favorite liveries, but at the same time.....it's not like we're actually paying for it (as in the increased cost due to increased engine performance vs. maintenance).

 

While we are paying for the increased realism (***gladly***), I don't think it's anything to have gotten upset/panicky over.

 

I really feel it's time to just let PMDG do what they're gonna do. They haven't let us down yet.

 

And if anybody claims they could do better, they're full of IT. Based on the fact that I haven't seen/heard of any competitors in the same ball park.

 

 

 

 

I apologize.....I'm just getting sick of reading all of the "BUT IT SHOULD HAVE/SIMULATE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!" threads. They're a highly professional business. Let them work their magic. :)

 

+1

So far one needs only the fingers of 1 hand to count the number of meaningful threads started in this 777 board...

If you went to Boeing Co. today, and asked for a 737, they would offer you somewhere about three engines per variant. For ex, 700s are routinely around with 20, 22 and 24K ratings, plus maybe a bump to 26. You can get an 800 with 24K or 26K. The classics had at least 18,5K, 20K and 22K (that was 500 or 300 I think).

 

However, they were all the same engine, physically. The difference was in software. You could even change it on an operating engine (meaning, it flew in operation, not that it is running), but it would be expensive and I guess it would screw up your engine lifetime computation...

 

Same story here.

i don't see why it's a big deal. yeah, it will be cool to simulate our favorite liveries, but at the same time.....it's not like we're actually paying for it (as in the increased cost due to increased engine performance vs. maintenance).

 

While we are paying for the increased realism (***gladly***), I don't think it's anything to have gotten upset/panicky over.

 

I really feel it's time to just let PMDG do what they're gonna do. They haven't let us down yet.

 

And if anybody claims they could do better, they're full of IT. Based on the fact that I haven't seen/heard of any competitors in the same ball park.

 

 

 

 

I apologize.....I'm just getting sick of reading all of the "BUT IT SHOULD HAVE/SIMULATE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!" threads. They're a highly professional business. Let them work their magic. :)

 

While I respect that you have your opinion on this issue, I must say I disagree. We don't have any real control over the development decisions made at PMDG, but as customers we can certainly make clear what we would like to see. Also I find it hard to believe PMDG does not look at some of the feedback on the forums and use it to guide the development of future products. I don't think they just magically know what their customers respond to in a positive manner. Now I think some of the threads people post are silly, but I don't think this one is. There was a valid question that got answered. Furthermore I think many people learned something about the 777 and its engines that they may not have known before.

Sebastian-

 

I think what people are referring to above is that the operational differences between the two engine types being discussed are so minute that not one of you would be able to tell the difference operationally.

 

I've flown airplanes that have engine type differences- and from a developer standpoint I find threads like this to be more humorous than anything else. 95% of the crews flying 777s for large lines probably can't tell you what manufacturer made their engines- never mind what model number or total thrust....

 

(That probably pulls the curtain back on a side of aviation that surprises most simmers- but seriously: I knew more about the 747 when I was just a simmer than I knew about it after completing my rating... Could be a function of advancing age- but it is reality. )

 

Now as for the detail work: As Ryan already said, we are modeling both engines. This sets us up very well to move quickly through the various body/engine combinations on the 777 TDS. What order we elect to do them will have more to do with our own internal mapping than anything else... But in the end you guys will have a 777 simulation that is appropriately detailed- provides incredible depth of simulation- and gives you a host of options from which to choose...

[...] This sets us up very well to move quickly through the various body/engine combinations on the 777 TDS. What order we elect to do them will have more to do with our own internal mapping than anything else... [...]

 

What does TDS mean, is it something like TBD [to be decided] or TBC [to be confirmed]. Lets wait and see, I don;t think PMDG 'move quickly' on anything ;) :P. But I for one would love the 200ER RR' and GE engines to be modelled.

 

Alex