1. I noticed on Luke's departure from VHHH the *Cabin ready message on the eicas. Does anyone know how that works or why it went off on departure? Just curious to know.

 

2. Does the current Airac data support the T7 through the PMDG package that the NGX,747 etc. uses? Or will we have to wait for a separate installer from Navigraph?

 

 

Does anyone know how that works or why it went off on departure?

 

Not having seen the video, I can't say for sure, but the CABIN READY alert is timed (using the FAA standard of "cabin must be ready prior to taxi," so it may be earlier than some of the non-FAA people are used to) off of a few triggers (can't say what they are specifically, but I imagine it's seatbelts, engines on and a few others).

 

 

 

2. Does the current Airac data support the T7 through the PMDG package that the NGX,747 etc. uses? Or will we have to wait for a separate installer from Navigraph?

 

It's been "PMDG All Products" up until now.  Why would they suddenly change?

(Yes, it's supported off of what's available now)

To add to the Kyle's answer to the first question: the 'CABIN READY' message disappears automatically after 1 minute.

 

 

Why would they suddenly change?

 

I would have at least one reason, however it has been told that that won't make it into initial.

I would have at least one reason, however it has been told that that won't make it into initial.

 

Oh yeah...fair point.  Forgot about that.  That would be a welcomed change, to be honest.

What's that for the rest of us? :-)

What's that for the rest of us? :-)

 

In order to utilize RTF-type data, the navdata will have to be altered in the future, so the installer from navigraph (or whoever) will require an overhaul at some point.

When we do that it's not just going to be a minor change to the data, it's going to be full support for the ARINC 424 standard, all the different leg types and path terminators etc.

And when is that? Based on the upcoming changes in Europe through SESAR and eventually next gen, it will be an almost must. If in fact not already, there are already a number of approaches, and SIDS that can't be flown correctly due to lack of data,. I'd have thought the development of the 777 would have been based on this, due to the complexity required, so you could then role it out across the NGX and then the 747.

It has been told that this basically amounts to an FMS re-write from scratch due to complexity involved. Understandable.

 

I think it was mentioned this may happen in the same general timeframe as the 747 or a bit later (my guess - maybe late 2015)

That a shame then, it was something I had almost expected to see in the 777 as a new feature, desirable as the 777 is looking and detailed in lots of aspects, its just looking from the videos I've seen so far as nothing new, over the NGX. I don't think I'm going to be as amazed when the NGX came out other than having a 777 to fly. The NGX gave us new things like the HGS etc.

 

I see a competitors 737 has the ability to do all the RTF etc legs(although I don't own it so not sure if it doing it all correctly)

 

I would have thought that the development of the 777 would have focussed on this, so that it could be rolled out onto the NGX, where now it will need a rewrite of both and potentially the 747 if that's not getting it either, which will be a big job

 

2015 or later could really start to see difficulties and having lots of patched navdata(think of Queenstown) in order to fly many sids and stars in Europe. Airports like EGLL, EGBB, EGNX, EGKK etc. will all have new sids by then based on these principles and some of the legs designed will make it difficult to fly without the supported systems

 

To me now, this ability is becoming not just a nice to have, but a major functional part in order for the sim to be realistic. It be like flying the default 737 vs the NGX now. Id personally quite happily not have had the 777 released now and instead had this reprogramming of the FMS done, and give us a realistic sim.

 

Accepting its easy to say here, compared to the work needed to make it happen, I do think that work should be the priority now in order to ensure we can continue to simulate the real world.

While the procedures may be in place, that doesn't mean every operator can fly that RNP Departure/Arrival/Approach.

 

For example, there a numerous airports in Australia which have RNP procedures. However, only Qantas and Jetstar (and I think maybe Virgin Australia, I know we have RNP-AR in NZ), are approved to fly them by CASA. When Emirates fly into Melbourne, they can't just fly the RNAV (RNP) - P RWY 34 even if its in their navigation database.

 

...and in any case, until PMDG decide to switch to ARINC429 format, there is a workaround for creating RTF fixes (even if the ND/CDU doesn't represent what the real aircraft would see). By creating co-located fixes off the centre fix with fixes every 10deg on the designated radius, the plane will still fly the same path. May not look great on the ND/CDU, but you won't hit any mountains and the approach would still look the same if overlayed on a chart.

In addition to RF legs, full support for all ARINC 424 leg types will mean proper DME arcs (rather than extra fixes every 10 degrees) and procedure turns.

That a shame then, it was something I had almost expected to see in the 777 as a new feature, desirable as the 777 is looking and detailed in lots of aspects, its just looking from the videos I've seen so far as nothing new, over the NGX. I don't think I'm going to be as amazed when the NGX came out other than having a 777 to fly. The NGX gave us new things like the HGS etc.

 

I see a competitors 737 has the ability to do all the RTF etc legs(although I don't own it so not sure if it doing it all correctly)

 

I would have thought that the development of the 777 would have focussed on this, so that it could be rolled out onto the NGX, where now it will need a rewrite of both and potentially the 747 if that's not getting it either, which will be a big job

 

2015 or later could really start to see difficulties and having lots of patched navdata(think of Queenstown) in order to fly many sids and stars in Europe. Airports like EGLL, EGBB, EGNX, EGKK etc. will all have new sids by then based on these principles and some of the legs designed will make it difficult to fly without the supported systems

 

To me now, this ability is becoming not just a nice to have, but a major functional part in order for the sim to be realistic. It be like flying the default 737 vs the NGX now. Id personally quite happily not have had the 777 released now and instead had this reprogramming of the FMS done, and give us a realistic sim.

 

Accepting its easy to say here, compared to the work needed to make it happen, I do think that work should be the priority now in order to ensure we can continue to simulate the real world.

 

I can say I am happy to just see the plane come out now "as-is" and whatever new features need to be added can be done at a later point. I definitely don't thing anything PMDG is holding out for an update down the road is a show-stopper.

 

 

I see a competitors 737 has the ability to do all the RTF etc legs(although I don't own it so not sure if it doing it all correctly)

 

I have yet to see a screenshot or a video of it actually doing it, so I'm not sure if anyone's really behind the curve here.

 

 

 

Accepting its easy to say here, compared to the work needed to make it happen, I do think that work should be the priority now in order to ensure we can continue to simulate the real world.

 

I see where you're going, but a significant number of operators out there are neither equipped, nor certified for these operations.  As such, we're essentially simulating the real world, in a somewhat unfortunate way.

 

The FAA is trying to drum up support for it to better utilize its capabilities, and a lot of the operators are resisting it for cost reasons:

FAA BEBS

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it.  I'd really like to see RTF legs and all of that as soon as possible.  I just don't see it as a travesty as much as some do (probably because they don't get to sit in the meetings I do to know how few are actually capable.)