Is it worth $90?

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

My only complaint as usual is no WX. IMO no excuses on such an expensive and complete addon. They say it can't be modeled 100% realistic but so what? Many things cannot yet PMDG found a way around it or created their own system. If they really wanted to, they could setup a program that reads the weather file created by addons like activesky, just like they do for terrain. The terrain system reads from a database file. Anyway, it's a thing that bugs me because you can't properly fly without weather radar, especially the long distance routes over dangerous terrain that long haul aircraft fly.

 

The only problem with that "solution" is that none of those add-on programs can accurately depict weather, either...

 

I've discussed this at length several times before, so in order to not have to re-type the whole thing, here it is for your reading pleasure.  When you can get around these issues, you should have a marketable weather radar on your hands:

 

Okay, here goes:

 

This is a problem in the real world as it is in the sim. A lot of the weather digests are just as backwards as the weather injection in Flight Sim. You'd imagine that the National Weather Service would have some sort of way to determine what the weather is at nearly any point in the United States, but they don't.

 

Here's what we have:

-Localized radar, but contrary to popular belief, there are gaps in coverage, and each radar has somewhat of a squelch feature. Ever see a blue cone around the radar site? Since there's no precip, the sensitivity has been dialed up to pick up lighter precip, which means the radar will pick up moisture closer to it, giving you the blue circle.

-METARs, but there are several gaps in coverage. For what radius is a METAR valid? What if there are two right next to each other with vastly different data? Does the change gradually occur, or is there a front 50/50 between them?

-Wind aloft reports (not going to help in generating a radar picture)

-PIREPs (not really going to help in generating a radar picture)

 

Here's an example of the radar "squelch":

 

The circles are over southern Ohio, all over Indiana, and in SE VA. Those circles don't necessarily mean precip, rather, that local station's sensitivity has been increased in order to see showery precip should it occur. So, using this method to infer precip in the sim isn't necessarily going to give you accurate precip, even when porting real Doppler into the sim.

(If the sensitivity thing interests you, research vcp)

 

So, while that method may be clever to generate a radar picture and then force trigger the rain effect in the sim, it's not as accurate as you'd like it to be, as it's a composite. The radar return from the NWS is a composite of the altitudes (again, see vcp here), whereas the returns on your sim radar would be at whatever angle you adjusted the radar to, based on your altitude. In other words, the NWS radar is multiple slices. Your sim radar would be a single slice.

 

Even in the real world, when we look at radar, we're only checking for precip and strength of precip. In order to come to understand real world conditions across the NAS, we all turn to digests of METARs, which is what the weather programs all do.

 

Here's the trick, though:

United's weather model is different from Delta's, which is different from Southwest's, which is different from the FAA's (they all built/contracted different programs - the FAA is trying to remedy this with a "common weather picture" initiative in NextGen). Just like your REX is different from my AS2012, which is slightly different from someone else's ASE. Granted, when you're simulating a weather radar in a sim, the weather in your sim is the only one that matters, but the issues remain.

 

Aside from radar, METARs are the only near-real-time data we have for various weather programs to digest into some semblance of a weather picture, but they are not a complete weather picture. They are occasionally incorrect (on my flight last weekend, the JYO METAR showed lightning distant and there was no chance*). Additionally, how do you determine weather en route with drastic changes? When I flew on my birthday two years ago, my original destination was reporting a ceiling of 400' and 3/4SM vis. The airport I went into instead was severe clear, and it is only 6.9nm away. They're both located in a plain, but SHD is closer to the Luray Valley, which was "spilling" valley clouds out over it (the airports are KVBW and KSHD, and you can see how the terrain affects them here).

 

Most weather programs mitigate this by interpolation for smoothing, but with such drastic changes some of them have difficulties. So, even with "real" weather injection through METARs (what we use currently), it's hard to generate an accurate picture. It's also nearly impossible to give any sort of upper air precip picture through digesting METAR data (remember, METAR data comes from ground stations, primarily reporting conditions on the ground, with limited other features like cloud altitudes). Granted, I'm not sure what other information these weather programs are ingesting, but there isn't much else out there.

 

*If you're bored, there are more videos here along with the narrative of the flight

Also, if you generally hate my guts, you can also see me getting punished by crosswinds in those videos :wink:

[miguelpp 25]

Absolutely, YES.

 

 

Best.

 

Miquel Egea.

[NBurgess 49]

NOT WORTH $90. 

 

They overhyped their value. The reason why it's so expensive is because they have too many people producing too little products. 

 

Just think about it. If I have 10 guys who can only produce 10 chairs a year, I would need to figure out how to over charge. 

 

For $90, they don't even offer a 2D panel. The weather radar doesn't work. It doesn't sync with FSX flight plan, doesn't come with the 300ER, 200ER, etc. DUDE, the competition from a few years already done this 100 times better for much cheaper. 

 

I AM SUPER DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS OVERHYPED PIECE OF CRAP!! The PMDG guys are just patting their own backs. 

 

Are you sure this is the right hobby for you  ?

[Boomer 1,619]

 

 

The only problem with that "solution" is that none of those add-on programs can accurately depict weather, either...

 

Yes, I realize that but what is wrong with a reasonable facsimile of weather depiction in the 777 that mirrors say what ASE/REX do?

[Daveo 36]

In 2½ hours last night I blew 90 bucks on 3 pizza's and some drinks.

 

I said to myself I could have bought the T7 instead.

 

So I did.

[Boomer 1,619]

NOT WORTH $90. 

For $90, they don't even offer a 2D panel.

 

2d panels are (or should be) dead.  Time for the "2d panel mafia" to move on IMHO.  ;-)

[phantom701 7]

Are you sure this is the right hobby for you  ?

 

You are right, it probably isn't. I will go back to flying real airplanes. My Cirrus is about $200/hour. At least I'm not disappointed with an overhyped 777.

 

I have no problem paying. Most rich people like Warren Buffet know what value means which is why they are rich. They won't waste money on things that have low value. 

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

They overhyped their value. The reason why it's so expensive is because they have too many people producing too little products. 

 

This makes no sense.  Software is infinitely scalable.  Chairs are not.

 

 

 

For $90, they don't even offer a 2D panel. The weather radar doesn't work. It doesn't sync with FSX flight plan, doesn't come with the 300ER, 200ER, etc. DUDE, the competition from a few years already done this 100 times better for much cheaper. 

 

Get over the 2D and weather "radar" issue.  It's well known that they weren't going to include either.

 

No add-ons that are serious add-ons directly sync the FS flight plan like the default planes do because the FSX planner is a load of trash.

 

 

 

I AM SUPER DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS OVERHYPED PIECE OF CRAP!! The PMDG guys are just patting their own backs. 

 

All you need to do is step back and re-learn the correct way to do things and you'll be fine.  You only have yourself to blame if you sit there stubbornly and expect the default FSX way of life to be the true way.

 

 

Yes, I realize that but what is wrong with a reasonable facsimile of weather depiction in the 777 that mirrors say what ASE/REX do?

 

Weather radar is meant to be a tactical decision aid.  If I can't use it for that, then it has no purpose.  If there's a red cell with tops at 10,000 and I'm at 40,000, it's of no consequence.  Fly over it.  With the way the weather programs present this information to you, you just see red, regardless of tilt, and even if it does change with tilt, it's making inferences as blind shots in the dark.  Before people jump on the "well just use RW NOAA feeds," as I mentioned before, the NOAA feeds are composites of multiple altitudes (in an angular sense).

 

Until I can fly through an echo and be guaranteed rain around me, then there's no sense in wasting time.

[Skysurfer7 34]

Look at it this way, if you fly 90 hours that's $1/h....so yes definitely worth it :biggrin:

 

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

(...), the competition from a few years already done this 100 times better for much cheaper. 

 

I AM SUPER DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS OVERHYPED PIECE OF CRAP!! The PMDG guys are just patting their own backs. 

 

 

I own a couple of B777s from different developers for different MSFS versions and to say that the PMDG T7 for FSX is NOT by far(!) the best T7 around is ... wow ... just wow ...

[Boomer 1,619]

 

 

the FSX planner is a load of trash.

 

LOL, dead on there.

[sidh 29]

Probably there are rich who can say  that they would pay double the amount.easy for them to say.

 

Well, PMDG is a global product, users are not only from Western countries but others as well. 90 $ is a lot here..Either you pay your bills or buy a 90$ product. So what's important? You buy a 90$ product and get your house electricity disconnected for not paying bill. what's important 90$ or the bill?

 

Well luckily am a pilot flying so I would go for it but think of those who willingly cannot pay. I have friends who use FSX cannot even think of paying 90$ here. It will be simply refused . It is different with different countries , look for there local currency with dollars . I am sure you will be surprised what is 90$ as per there local currency.

 

Look out of your comfort zone . Life is not the same everywhere. and Same goes for dollars.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,961]

I'm not surprised all the early responders have said it's worth it. They're the ones who would probably pay even more because they really want it. But for those who are in the 'might do' camp that price is certainly a shock.

 

FSLabs ConcordeX is 60USD. The PMDG777 is 50% more expensive. Is it a more complicated aircraft? No.

 

I was shocked to see such a high price. I would have guessed around 60-70USD. In July 2003 I paid 25UKP (around 35-40USD) for the FS9 PMDG737. For prices to more than double in 10 years for a twin-engine Boeing is not good.

 

Has anyone's salary doubled for the same job in 10 years? Not many I bet. There's inflation and there's flight sim inflation.

[Fabo 213]

 

 

I own a couple of B777s from different developers for different MSFS versions and to say that the PMDG T7 for FSX is NOT by far(!) the best T7 around is ... wow ... just wow ...

 

Well yeah, according to this guys requirements, surely the default 777 from FS2004 is just as good a match?

 

I mean, it does not have weather radar either, but it does follow default GPS route... plus its free. basically.

 

never mind the systems, how good it actually looks or nothin...

[Christopher Low 5,354]

Just a word of advice.....

 

You don't have to fly the 777 on ultra long haul flights for 15 hours. You can fly it from Heathrow to Gatwick if you want, or San Francisco to San Jose. That's the beauty of a flight simulator. You can do what the hell you like!