Mike,

I am afraid that you actually CANNOT properly handle an engine failure with PMDG (fair to say not because of PMDG but due to FSX limitations). I am sure R&P B777 (or any other plane in that matter) will simulate engine failure more realistic due to X-Plane advantage here.
It would be also fair to say, that R&P were working YEARS on the B757, nothing quickly baked as you were implying.

Mike,

 

I am afraid that you actually CANNOT properly handle an engine failure with PMDG (fair to say not because of PMDG but due to FSX limitations). I am sure R&P B777 (or any other plane in that matter) will simulate engine failure more realistic due to X-Plane advantage here.

It would be also fair to say, that R&P were working YEARS on the B757, nothing quickly baked as you were implying.

I have the 777 I tried to follow the QRH for a engine failure I had with it but the engine EEC is not properly simulated, in the PMDG plane you can follow the QRH because the systems work as they should thus the buttons do what they should when you hit them.

 

Here is one for you try to do a derated takeoff in the 777 using assumed temp, it throws a higher N1 back at you. You would never see that in a plane from the developers I mentioned, I bet in the IXEG plane I would be able to derate based on assumed temp and get a proper takeoff rating.

 

Mike,

 

I am afraid that you actually CANNOT properly handle an engine failure with PMDG (fair to say not because of PMDG but due to FSX limitations). I am sure R&P B777 (or any other plane in that matter) will simulate engine failure more realistic due to X-Plane advantage here.

It would be also fair to say, that R&P were working YEARS on the B757, nothing to quickly baked here.

 

Very true... No multi-engine, even the top models you can name for FSX (and I own at least the A2A b377 and the PMDG 737 NGX and 744x), can give you a credible engine-out effect on the various possible flight situations you can get into it...

 

The same inability applies, for instance, to:

 

- the lack of proper reciprocating (aspirated) engine simulation regarding the correct relationship between MP and RPM, as well as Mixture. The well known mixture bug causes your FF to actually increase as you lean when you start leaning above around 3000'...

 

- the limited capacity to simulate flight in side/fwd-slip, although some tweaks can be applied but result in an irrelistic need for rudder input during turns (to keep coordinated)

 

- the poor rotary wing model

 

- the, although a lot better through good weather injector, not to the level of X-Plane, simulation of turbulence and wind shear / variation effects

 

etc...

 

I am using LM P3d (I actually sold my copy of X-Plane10 Global to buy it...), and I really like it, but, following the progress I was told about with 10.21, I decided to re-installed X-Plane10's demo, and I acknowledge that progress, and that it is converging towards an even better platform.

My preferred simulation right now is DCS World, and I LOVE IT!

 

But, regarding future, I wouldn't mind having 2 simulators, one for the Civil, another for the military side of flight... I would like to see the potential of X-Plane's FDM getting to the level of the add-ons we presently have for DCS World, and, being in constant development and with the energy of the team behind it, I am almost sure they will be able to get there !!!!

 

This is something I will never be able to achieve with an ESP-based platform.

 

And, I know LM is working on P3D 2.0, so, I want it to be very good as well ;-)

 

I have the 777 I tried to follow the QRH for a engine failure I had with it but the engine EEC is not properly simulated.

 

Here is one for you try to do a derated takeoff in the 777 using assumed temp.

 

I did. There was a lot of discussion about this over at x-plane.org, where I posted some proofs and pics (if fdrmike is you by any chance you know what I am talking about). EEC normal is properly simulated and the systems work as they should, so that you can follow QRH.

Derated T/O using assumed temps have strange behavior at small number of airports and works quite flawlessly at all the others.

I did. There was a lot of discussion about this over at x-plane.org, where I posted some proofs and pics. EEC normal is properly simulated, derated T/O using assumed temps have strange behavior at SOME airports and works quite flawlessly at the others.

 

I am sorry but I saw your  pics it was not properly simulated, alt eec does not work. Yes EEC normal sort of works.    Derate does not work  properly at any airport..  I decided not to bother posting about it over there anymore because I got the hint that it was not going to be fixed or even looked at, and to be honest the plane is in my dustbin. 

 

 

Sure I can load up the 777 right now fail one engine and make the other engine overboost but the point I am tying to make is it does do so in a manner that the real plane would.

 

What happened to me was I had a assumed temp derate plugged in  ( I had to use a negative temp because this plane does not simulated assumed temp properly.  LOL) on takeoff I lost one engine so I started to follow the engine out checklist.  My remaining engine was STUCK at 87 N1 firewalled. I could not override the derate in the FMC no matter what I did.   

 

Yes without a assumed temp when a engine goes out it will allow you to overboost the other engine if you need too but it's not done using the steps needed in the real plane so the NNC or QRH is useless.  

Very true... No multi-engine, even the top models you can name for FSX (and I own at least the A2A b377 and the PMDG 737 NGX and 744x), can give you a credible engine-out effect on the various possible flight situations you can get into it...

 

The same inability applies, for instance, to:

 

- the lack of proper reciprocating (aspirated) engine simulation regarding the correct relationship between MP and RPM, as well as Mixture. The well known mixture bug causes your FF to actually increase as you lean when you start leaning above around 3000'...

 

- the limited capacity to simulate flight in side/fwd-slip, although some tweaks can be applied but result in an irrelistic need for rudder input during turns (to keep coordinated)

 

- the poor rotary wing model

 

- the, although a lot better through good weather injector, not to the level of X-Plane, simulation of turbulence and wind shear / variation effects

 

etc...

 

I am using LM P3d (I actually sold my copy of X-Plane10 Global to buy it...), and I really like it, but, following the progress I was told about with 10.21, I decided to re-installed X-Plane10's demo, and I acknowledge that progress, and that it is converging towards an even better platform.

My preferred simulation right now is DCS World, and I LOVE IT!

 

But, regarding future, I wouldn't mind having 2 simulators, one for the Civil, another for the military side of flight... I would like to see the potential of X-Plane's FDM getting to the level of the add-ons we presently have for DCS World, and, being in constant development and with the energy of the team behind it, I am almost sure they will be able to get there !!!!

 

This is something I will never be able to achieve with an ESP-based platform.

 

And, I know LM is working on P3D 2.0, so, I want it to be very good as well ;-)

 

 

I was talking about the response of the planes systems in the current batch of payware planes to the failure, not the way it flies or the flightmodel.   I think right now both sims leave a lot to be desired in the flight model aspect of it.

Mike,

 

I consider PMDG planes to be top products and in the spirit of this post I am really looking to have them in X-Plane. I am also not saying that the R&P B777 is perfect nor I am trying to compare those two.

 

Nevertheless in regards with the matter of an engine out failure, even with the shortcomings of B777, you will actually get results which are closer to real plane behavior with this B777 than with your PMDG, purely due to the respective sim platform shortcomings.

 

Anyway, we are getting either off topic or into much details here...

I was talking about the response of the planes systems in the current batch of payware planes to the failure, not the way it flies or the flightmodel.   I think right now both sims leave a lot to be desired in the flight model aspect of it.

 

 

Also true Mike, and actually the reason why I diverged to Prepar3d for the heavy metal experience and am enjoying the 737 NGX and now the AXE too so much, but!!!!! I look forward for the day I'm able to take the plunge back and get into the X-Plane10 World again ;-)

 

 

No offence but there are better planes in xp10 right now that match or surpass PMDG, and more our coming. For around $40-$80 you can fly and enjoy both sims :drinks: I don't understand most of these comments: "I will join if PMDG joins!" "I will eat this if PMDG eats this!" "I will buy this if PMDG buys this!" "I will wear this outfit if PMDG wears this!" :lol: :lol: If PMDG goes bankrupt in a few years, will you stop Flight simming? <_<

 

Is there a as good as or better 737NG in X-Plane?  Then, I should probably add too, what about the eye candy for scenery/airports?  I don't think that's quite there yet in XP either, or is it?

 

 

Is there a as good as or better 737NG in X-Plane? Then, I should probably add too, what about the eye candy for scenery/airports? I don't think that's quite there yet in XP either, or is it?

 

Hi Kevin,

 

PMDG are still the reference when it comes to heavies and their NGX remains unmatched. As far as eye candy, the scenery developers are making giant strides to narrow the gap between the best of FSX and X-Plane. On the other hand I'll add that some freeware scenery, especially those done by Chris K. are on par or better than most FSX payware.

 

X-Plane is headed in the right direction, up... ^_^

Is there a as good as or better 737NG in X-Plane?  Then, I should probably add too, what about the eye candy for scenery/airports?  I don't think that's quite there yet in XP either, or is it?

 

This is not about what is better x-plane or fsx.. In the long run you will see X-plane shine,  I think it has a lot of potential to be truly great...

 

Check out the previews for the IXEG 737 it's a classic but it looks to be one of the best planes for any sim once it comes out. 

 

Also true Mike, and actually the reason why I diverged to Prepar3d for the heavy metal experience and am enjoying the 737 NGX and now the AXE too so much, but!!!!! I look forward for the day I'm able to take the plunge back and get into the X-Plane10 World again ;-)

 

Same here,  thats why I can't wait for a few products  that are on the horizon for X-plane.  

Mike,

 

I consider PMDG planes to be top products and in the spirit of this post I am really looking to have them in X-Plane. I am also not saying that the R&P B777 is perfect nor I am trying to compare those two.

 

Nevertheless in regards with the matter of an engine out failure, even with the shortcomings of B777, you will actually get results which are closer to real plane behavior with this B777 than with your PMDG, purely due to the respective sim platform shortcomings.

 

Anyway, we are getting either off topic or into much details here...

 

I agree with you there,  BTW if you want to experience some cool single engine op's check out the majestic q400  I would like to see what you and jcomm think of that.  It's flight model is outside of FSX kind of like what IXEG appears to be doing with the 733 in x-plane.  

 

 

I agree with you there,  BTW if you want to experience some cool single engine op's check out the majestic q400  I would like to see what you and jcomm think of that.  It's flight model is outside of FSX kind of like what IXEG appears to be doing with the 733 in x-plane.

 

Will try engine out failure with Majestic Q400, it may be interesting to compare with the same kind of failure with Rollon's Jetstream on X-Plane.

 

 

Hi Kevin,



PMDG are still the reference when it comes to heavies and their NGX remains unmatched. As far as eye candy, the scenery developers are making giant strides to narrow the gap between the best of FSX and X-Plane. On the other hand I'll add that some freeware scenery, especially those done by Chris K. are on par or better than most FSX payware.



X-Plane is headed in the right direction, up... ^_^

 

Yeah, I've seen some of the screen shots of the X-Plane scenery done by people like Chris and I agree, I think it can be even better than FSX.  So, don't get me wrong at all, I'm following X-Plane very closely and unless something else comes out of nowhere to replace FSX, X-Plane will be the future for me.  It just needs to narrow that gap a little more and just get a PMDG version of the 737NG for it.

 

 

It just needs to narrow that gap a little more and just get a PMDG version of the 737NG for it.

 

I'm also wishing it will be their excellent NGX. A smart move however might have been to release their T7 as a cross-platform airliner. Whether this can be accomplished or not is another matter. This is a well guarded secret at the moment.

 

I think a lot of things will be announced at the time 10.30 X-Plane turns up.

 

Here's hoping... :lol:

When it comes to passion, I don't think you will ever find a more passionate group than flight sim enthusiasts, and their opinions on their preferred platforms and aircraft. And I think the passion of simmers is the fuel for the passion of the developers. It is our constant arguments around what is the defacto high standard of simming that drives the top notch developers to make something that is even better.

Being a devout member of the FSX camp, I also watch with interest the development of new and existing simulators, because like it or not, I will have to choose a new one some day. Here's to continued success for ALL simulator developers! :drinks: