Hello,

 

seeing that the 777 is very close to release (as close as counting in days rather than weeks might be prudent), I shall start asking the questions on the 747v2.

 

First off.

 

For the 747-400, Honeywell offers an FMS upgrade to the "NGFMS", which is purpotedly very close to what the 747-8 has.

What is the plan for the PMDG 747-400 to have included? Will it be the old one, the new one, or possibly, both, to be chosen(on initial, or planner later)?

 

 

Second:

The 747v2 line is told to include both the 747-400 variant and the 747-8 variant (in passenger and freighter hulls).

Which one is planned to come earlier?

 

Obviously the 747-400 is more widespread with airlines, and has simpler avionics, but it has three engine options.

 

Meanwhile the 747-8 is less common, but so is the 77L, which comes first in the 777 lineup. The 8 also has only one engine option, bringing similar benefit to the development as the 77L compared to 77E, 772 and 773. The advanced avionics of the 8 would argue against it, but many differences (the ECL system perhaps the most notable) have been modelled for the 777 already.

Hmmm, after the T7, please give them space for their first X-Plane 10 add-on!!!! It could be the 744 !!!!!!  But they need to concentrate on that platform ;-)  

 

I just hope they don't get dizzy with the torque there.... Well, it doesn't affect jetliners anyway :-)

Hmmm, after the T7, please give them space for their first X-Plane 10 add-on!!!! It could be the 744 !!!!!!  But they need to concentrate on that platform ;-)  

 

I just hope they don't get dizzy with the torque there.... Well, it doesn't affect jetliners anyway :-)

their xp10 addon will be more in-depth because of the 64bit power.  They will be able to add more features that will not impact XP10 on fps like:  weather radar, more detailed passenger cabins, a fully functional EFB, taxi cameras, toilets with flushing water physics :lol: , etc.

their xp10 addon will be more in-depth because of the 64bit power.  They will be able to add more features that will not impact XP10 on fps like:  weather radar, more detailed passenger cabins, a fully functional EFB, taxi cameras, toilets with flushing water physics :lol: , etc.

Properly programmed, it isnt to hard to do pretty much whatever you like with ZERO impact on framerates in FSX....The sim is only as efficient as the addon flying in it.

Within reason Narutokun... won't help you with more detailed models... or weatherradar from nonexistant data.

Within reason Narutokun... won't help you with more detailed models... or weatherradar from nonexistant data.

:wink: Not talking about whether weather radar is possible or not. I may have misunderstood the guy I quoted but his implication (the way i interpreted it) that weather radar, taxi cameras, and EFBs cause bad frames is what i was answering to. I cant really comment on the models as I am not good enough with my hands to do such stuff in the likes of 3DSMax etc but since I spend a lot of time in the code libraries that those programs as well as FSX are based on I can say that the same rules apply. Of course, that doesnt necessarely mean that the modellers/painters will find it easy to go along with those rules...

Within reason Narutokun... won't help you with more detailed models... or weatherradar from nonexistant data.

 

is it the same problem with the weather in x-plane 10 ?

400 will be done first. Yes, the "NG" FMC will be done, probably as part of the -8 addon and an option will exist to retrofit the 400 with it.

 

And btw 32-bit vs. 64-bit has nothing to do with FPS - it's about addressable memory for the sim. The 64-bit stuff will never suffer from the OOMs that plague FSX. FPS is about the sim's graphics engine, about CPU vs. GPU based rendering etc.

 

 

400 will be done first. Yes, the "NG" FMC will be done, probably as part of the -8 addon and an option will exist to retrofit the 400 with it.

 

Cool. Can you also confirm all engine options available at launch? Oh, and 400 basic or ER? Or addon?

 

(and release date? )

I can't confirm anything "available at launch" - we're still working on the product previous to this one lol.

Shucks. I was hoping you were going to surprise us with concurrent release of the 747

I was under the impression the 777 and 747 were being developed more or less in parallel?  Is this not the case?

A while ago I vaguely remembered hearing the 747v2 was around 50% through development, but I think we'll have to be patient for the next release, as I'm sure the T7 has consumed a lot of time and effort (especially after seeing the preview shots). Regardless, it's something to look forward to. After that I'm not quite sure what they'll do. Maybe the DC-6 (after Majestic I'm not sure if they're still pursuing the Dash 8) and after that... well, we can only speculate.

Hello,

 

seeing that the 777 is very close to release (as close as counting in days rather than weeks might be prudent), I shall start asking the questions on the 747v2.

 

First off.

 

For the 747-400, Honeywell offers an FMS upgrade to the "NGFMS", which is purpotedly very close to what the 747-8 has.

What is the plan for the PMDG 747-400 to have included? Will it be the old one, the new one, or possibly, both, to be chosen(on initial, or planner later)?

 

 

Second:

The 747v2 line is told to include both the 747-400 variant and the 747-8 variant (in passenger and freighter hulls).

Which one is planned to come earlier?

 

Obviously the 747-400 is more widespread with airlines, and has simpler avionics, but it has three engine options.

 

Meanwhile the 747-8 is less common, but so is the 77L, which comes first in the 777 lineup. The 8 also has only one engine option, bringing similar benefit to the development as the 77L compared to 77E, 772 and 773. The advanced avionics of the 8 would argue against it, but many differences (the ECL system perhaps the most notable) have been modelled for the 777 already.

This might sound dumb, but what is the 77E?

This might sound dumb, but what is the 77E?

777-200ER.