Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mrchrsrider

777-200LR Landing in PGUM

Recommended Posts

Enjoy, this flight was so much fun... No Filter, or Extra Scenery

 

777_v10_4_zpsb74cfc14.png

 

777_v10_5_zps4655eaa0.png

 

777_v10_6_zpsc4ceddc0.png

 

777_v10_2_zpse5280f19.png

 

777_v10_1_zpsc299b876.png

 

 

Thanks for looking,

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

What 777 is this?

It's ramzesses 777-200LR professional and it's incredibly realistic PMDG quality or better in my opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistic? With the engines off while in mid air?

Do you own it? Cause last time I checked the engines have to be running for it to fly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ramzesses 777-200LR professional and it's incredibly realistic PMDG quality or better in my opinion

PMDG: often imitated, but never duplicated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha I see I have started a war by saying that, fine I take back my previous statement, and issue a new statement that this 777 is In a class of its own

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outstanding shots! They look almost real (except for the engines which do indeed look like they're off -_- , but if NaMcO hadn't said that I woudn't have recognized)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha ya I know exactly what you mean with the engines, when you shutdown your plane in xplane and load up the replay it keeps the engines off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ramzesses 777-200LR professional and it's incredibly realistic PMDG quality or better in my opinion

It may be good, but it's not better than PMDG will be as it doesn't have a prototypical cockpit for a 200LR

 

1. A fictitious TO/GA button on the MCP

 

2. It has standard standby gauges as would be found on the 200 or 200ER. The 200LR should have the ISFD gauge.

 

3. The EFB is not modeled like the real one. Even the CS777 got this one right!!!

 

Edit: Also why does Ramzesses think passengers exit from the right on the 777?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be good, but it's not better than PMDG will be as it doesn't have a prototypical cockpit for a 200LR

 

1. A fictitious TO/GA button on the MCP

 

2. It has standard standby gauges as would be found on the 200 or 200ER. The 200LR should have the ISFD gauge.

 

3. The EFB is not modeled like the real one. Even the CS777 got this one right!!!

 

Edit: Also why does Ramzesses think passengers exit from the right on the 777?

Ya tf51 I understand where your coming from, what makes it a better aircraft in my opinion is 1. the systems for the most part are realistic, aside from a couple tiny things that don't matter to me like a TO/GA button on the MCP and an EFB you never use because you usually have the charts on your knee anyways. PMDG also has a fake TO/GA button on the MCP 2. Coupled with flight dynamics xplane has, you don't feel like your flying something on rails. Also I know this is not important to most but the fact that they took the time to model the whole entire plane, instead of just the cockpit. So you feel more immersion in the plane instead of feeling like your flying just a cockpit. I know they don't model the entire plane due to lack of resources however as the hobby moves into the future MSFS is showing its age and if I were to recommend an updated platform and realistic plane it would be ramzesses 777, because sooner or later we are all gonna have to face the music that MSFS is an aging system and can no longer compete with newer products.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PMDG also has a fake TO/GA button on the MCP 2

 

Except theirs is invisible, so it maintains the prototypical look of the cockpit. This is what should have been done here.  The rest we'll just have to agree to disagree!! I think when FSX final day's finally arrive, XP may be the sim to move to, but that day is a long way off. Especially if Austin holds firm on his stance on AI/ATC. All you have to do is look at the AVSIM demographic survey to see that. I don't see P3D as viable only because of it's licensing. It's too much of a question mark! Even PMDG, is staying away from it. For the record, I use XP10 (The North American edition) and enjoy it as a second sim that I use to fly around and explore. There are some areas that look pretty good, like my home area in Florida. There even is a house where mine would be albeit a 2 story instead of a 1 story. Other areas though, there is just no resemblance to reality. XP10 really needs to

update it's land class. As well as improve it's cityscapes for it to take over the reigns from the FS franchise!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except theirs is invisible, so it maintains the prototypical look of the cockpit. This is what should have been done here. The rest we'll just have to agree to disagree!! I think when FSX final day's finally arrive, XP may be the sim to move to, but that day is a long way off. Especially if Austin holds firm on his stance on AI/ATC. All you have to do is look at the AVSIM demographic survey to see that. I don't see P3D as viable only because of it's licensing. It's too much of a question mark! Even PMDG, is staying away from it. For the record, I use XP10 (The North American edition) and enjoy it as a second sim that I use to fly around and explore. There are some areas that look pretty good, like my home area in Florida. There even is a house where mine would be albeit a 2 story instead of a 1 story. Other areas though, there is just no resemblance to reality. XP10 really needs to

update it's land class. As well as improve it's cityscapes for it to take over the reigns from the FS franchise!!

 

I don't think we disagree so much, the points you make are very valid and I completely agree with you about ATC and landclass, I also agree with he you that P3D is not a viable option, as for me I own all three and I own PMDG products as well as other 3rd party developers and enjoy them quite a bit. I guess every simmer/pilot has his/her own nuances and enjoys the sim in each their own way haha so discussing personal preference is kind of like talking religion haha. All In all I spend as much time flying MSFS as I do X-plane and the more I fly in RL and in the sim I lean towards xplane for a couple reasons... Framerates, physics, actual crosswinds, and 99% less tinkering when you get xplane set up how you like it. As far as MSFS I still fly it for the scenery (I love being able to fly into my city) the 3rd party programs like Radar Contact and being assigned realistic approaches, and the feel of actually having a crew be able to assist you...... Not to mention 1000's of 3rd party aircraft... Enough of my bantering all in all I think we agree... Just not on this aircraft haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's enjoy the images and take the "mine is bigger than yours" discussion to the appropriate forum.

 

In picture #1, isn't he about to hit the antenna?  Shot must have been taken with a super high speed shutter to get the engine fans to stop like that.

 

These shots are very realistic.  Sometimes I wish I had XP, especially when I see this 777 already out.  Great reviews about it.  Froogle loves it.

 

But alas, I have a gazillion dollars tied up in FSX, and I'm afraid I'll be dragged away kicking and screaming.  Interesting times ahead, for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites