This plane is pretty good, and performs well. Have you tried turning up your texture resolution settings, it looks good on my system

I agree, to fully enjoy this 777....you need to setup the textures to:  Very High or Extreme

Of course my textures are on extreme with compression off. It doesn't look good to me. I'm very picky when it comes to graphic, every small detail counts. Compared to the screenshots I've seen of PMDG's 777, it's not even on the same level. Far from it.

Having followed PMDG for years absolutely nothing I have seen from them indicates they would take the easy road or come into a new market with a lite product.   I would expect nothing less than the NGX for their first offering. They do not need to rush into the market and when PMDG first went to MSFS from FLY! they did not go with a lite product, they released the 737NG for msfs2002 

extreme with compression off

  you running an Intel i8 9.0ghz :lol:  :lol:   try landing at KJFK Payware with those settings :ph34r:  Do you have a 2gb or 4gb card?

Going off that recent interview I'd put money on a DC family plane, probably the DC6 given the DC3 is already available.

Going off that recent interview I'd put money on a DC family plane, probably the DC6 given the DC3 is already available.

 

I don't think they would venture on that given, the "torque bug" that still plagues XP10... Anyone designing a prop aircraft with non-counter-rotating props will face it, and after that, the comments from it's users... PMDG will most certainly choose a less compromising task, most surely with a jet aircraft... Although Robert referred to the way LR was open to their requests for features, I'm not that positive about thinking Austin has finally given up on deffending that the overdone / irrealistic torque effects on XP10 prop aircraft - "are just perfect"...

It's easy for a father to overlook/forgive a child's imperfections.

Austin also thinks the current XP10 ATC is "awesome"! (Or some similar adjective)

It's easy for a father to overlook/forgive a child's imperfections.

Austin also thinks the current XP10 ATC is "awesome"! (Or some similar adjective)

you're off course pappa tango pappa :lol: 

I don't think they would venture on that given, the "torque bug" that still plagues XP10... Anyone designing a prop aircraft with non-counter-rotating props will face it, and after that, the comments from it's users... PMDG will most certainly choose a less compromising task, most surely with a jet aircraft... Although Robert referred to the way LR was open to their requests for features, I'm not that positive about thinking Austin has finally given up on deffending that the overdone / irrealistic torque effects on XP10 prop aircraft - "are just perfect"...

 

Regarding torque roll, yesterday I asked the pilot of the four engine B-17 "movie Memphis Bell" if torque was a consideration that had to be trimmed. Out. All four props turn the same direction. He said "no".

In fact, I spent a lot of time at yesterday's FBO open house, inquiring about the torque/trim question. This ranged from the B-17, to the Pitts, Cirrus SR22, Cessna taildragger, high powered Cub clone, etc.

 

So, when anyone says that X-Plane is correct with it's requirement to adjust aileron trim in cruise and those power changes........ Just say no! BTW , if DSC requires some aileron for the non-angled P-51 engine during that climb, then it's just fine....

 

 

The NGX made a lot of profit and if I were an employee at PMDG, I would sure try to release it on another platform to make more profit.

 

Would adding a new platform for the NGX generate more revenue?  Sure.  More profit?  Ah... now that's a far more complex question.

 

Lot's of fun ahead though.  Now we can have PMDG release threads in the FSX AND the XP forums.  :blink:

 

Scott

In fact, I spent a lot of time at yesterday's FBO open house, inquiring about the torque/trim question. This ranged from the B-17, to the Pitts, Cirrus SR22, Cessna taildragger, high powered Cub clone, etc.

 

So, when anyone says that X-Plane is correct with it's requirement to adjust aileron trim in cruise and those power changes........ Just say no! BTW , if DSC requires some aileron for the non-angled P-51 engine during that climb, then it's just fine....

 

It does :-)  but, as you gain speed and dynamic pressure, other than when power changes are applied, no trim or aileron input to counter torque are required ;-) 

 

It's another music - DCS - Larry :-)

It does :-) but, as you gain speed and dynamic pressure, other than when power changes are applied, no trim or aileron input to counter torque are required ;-)

 

It's another music - DCS - Larry :-)

 

Good for the DCS model!

Seems another topic has been sabotaged yet again...by the usual suspects, none the less.

here, just for you

 

 

 

can't seem to put the url in....doesn't show up?

Seems another topic has been sabotaged yet again...by the usual suspects, none the less.

here, just for you

 

 

 

can't seem to put the url in....doesn't show up?

 

I know Michel... sorry  :blush:

But I am seriously getting enthusiastic about X-Plane10 again! I am !!!! ;-)