Airbus anyone?

[FLEX1978 373]

Jakub,

 

I think you are missing the point here, nobody doubts that PMDG have no immediate plans to create any sort of airbus addon, what grates everyone here is posts claiming that they would not be able to get the required data, Boeing has put some block on them developing an Airbus or that the two major airline manufactures actually give a crap about desktop sims for entertainment purposes and the affect it could have on business if PMDG decided to model from both EADS & Boeing.

 

This is a dead horse, but why do people have to make up stories as to why PMDG have not created a bus? Is it so hard to except that they simply have chosen not to do one?

 

Anyway, here are some post from team over the years..

 

 

 

rsrandazzo', on 15 Nov 2010 - 07:34 AM, said:

Gents-Ryan pointed out to me that the original poster in this thread invited me to answer "honestly."Is there some supposition out there that would cause anyone to believe I would have some reason to answer dishonestly? This type of post is something that I've taken to calling a "pay attention to me, I'm self important." Such posts traditionally get ignored because the user is generally pushing some half whit agenda point that really needn't be addressed because the truth is self evident to anyone who has spent more than an hour in this forum. I recognize that there are a few self important or self righteous folks who might be offended by this- but the reality is that we make decisions based on a very clear agenda- and that agenda is part of PMDG's business model- and unless you join the team- you really shouldn't expect to have input. I've seen some truly idiotic comments in this forum about how we might be "afraid" or some other general claptrap... There is no airplane, no system and no simulation that this team couldn't accomplish if we decide to... If anyone tells you otherwise- I would suspect their motives.Now- I've been decidedly grumpy answering a few of these "pay attention to me" type posts- so let me end with something a bit more positive:1) Give at least ten seconds of thought to the fact that we have a strategic partner in Boeing... That might help you make some guesses about our development agenda.2) We have a number of things underway at PMDG that we do not discuss publicly. When something comes over the horizon for you- we'll fill you in...Now I'm off to finish trouble-shooting the high stage bleed failure logic on the NGX...

 

 

 

Posted 19 April 2005 - 04:16 PM

Gents-Given that it is rather likely that my own career progression will have me flying a narrow body bus in the future- and the fact that a sizeable portion of our team is located in the EU- it would seem natural that we have some desire to do an Airbus....We are working on some wonderful things for PMDG's future, but they do not involve any cooperation from EADS/Airbus....PMDG is currently exploring some opportunities that we think are very well suited to our capabilities and skills- and will bring great products to the community.I do not see any plans for a PMDG airbus in the near to medium term future.

 

 

Posted 04 November 2006 - 11:24 PM

>Hmmm, this is what I thought - couldn't see why it would be>nose-down in cruise. Just didn't seem right. I hope the PMDG>airbus is much better and more realistic!What speed or Mach number did you fly at? Normal for the A32x family is around .78 cruise.Yes PMDG's Airbus will be much much closer to the real one, the same level of realism the MD-11 will be, or even more.Regards,Markus

 

Posted 12 August 2007 - 07:20 AM

The A320 is a long ways down the pipeline guys. MD-11 and the new NG are first.

 

Guys - I think this thread has run its course honestly and I'm gonna shut it down. We're well aware of what's been said here.Never say never on this, but our focus for now is on the NGX and 777.

 

Ryan Maziarz

[viper1740 25]

One thing that I continue to wonder about aircraft requests is: how much time does FSX have? With planes taking years to complete and MS not caring if updates break FSX or not can we really expect FSX to last 4 more years (which roughly equates to two complex addons)?

If a new sim does come out in the next 5 years, is it more profitable to port your already completed aircraft while learning the new sim or start from scratch on a new sim on a new aircraft type?

FSX is old but still has a stronger market than XP-10. It'll eventually change as more scenery is available. Just be patient. When?...only one can guess.

[Werner747 107]

Could somebody point me where did he say so? So far I've seen only people referring to him saying that, yet nobody has been able to offer a link to the original source of information. 

 

Personally I think it's all rubbish and PMDG doesn't have any particular special access to Boeing stuff, not any more than they could get with Airbus at least.

 

I think it's obvious why PMDG isn't making an Airbus and that's the extra effort making one would take. After making the 747, 737 and now 777 PMDG is of course quite used to the way Boeing way of things, how the systems work etc. Making a modern Airbus with complicated fly by wire stuff and everything would require quite a bit of extra effort, probably not worth it compared to making something less complicated or something they are familiar with.

 

 

Regards

 

Joona L 

Oh dear, so the 77L has hydraulic systems then?   Oh no, here I was thinking that the 77L has FBW systems, much like the ones you find on the Airbus, apart from the A/P logic though :LMAO:

 

I'm shocked at the fact that PMDG refuses to spend at that extra time and effort!   What have they been doing then leading up to the NGX and the 777?   Mmmm... :LMAO:

 

Please, like some of the posts here say it, first do the research before making "statements" like those.

 

Kind regards.

[Flexman 30]

FSX is old but still has a stronger market than XP-10. It'll eventually change as more scenery is available. Just be patient. When?...only one can guess.

IMHO X-Plane doesn't stand a chance against P3D. It has been around for ages and nobody cares. Flight Dynamics aren't important in a system's simulation like FSX, in which flight dinamics are already good enough for what we do with it. The whole community is waiting for Prepar3d v2 which is probably gonna be a 64bit version of FSX with all the Microsoft middle ages code fixed.

[xplanery 250]

Oh dear, so the 77L has hydraulic systems then?   Oh no, here I was thinking that the 77L has FBW systems, much like the ones you find on the Airbus, apart from the A/P logic though

Based on what I've seen so far with the PMDG 777 it doesn't seem to have as advanced protection and flight envelope system as Airbus has.

 

Anyway what I was simply saying is that surely making an Airbus would require a lot more additional research and studying to really understand the Airbus way of making things compared to making another Boeing, even if those too have big differences between them.

 

 

 

 

I refuse to feed the trolls. Use the search function if you desire. I won't do your homework for you. If you want a bus, go with a company that has one. If PMDG hasn't announced one, you're not getting one. If Boeings are PMDG's choice then accept the fact that that's what they do. There are many people out there that have their preferance. But please don't blame PMDG because they chose that route.

 

 

I'm not blaming PMDG for anything, I never said they should have made an Airbus.

 

 I was simply telling the reasons what I believe is the actual reason for PMDG not making an Airbus. I don't believe it has that to do with lack of access to technical data like you claim, FSLabs doesn't seem to have a problem having access to adequate data so I don't think PMDG would have that problem either. PMDG just picked the aircraft models which made the best sense to them and offered us wide range of super realistic Boeings and I'm very glad they did so. 

 

Also I don't know when that post you refer to was made or in what thread it belongs to, thus my chances of finding it using search function are rather slim.

 

Regards

 

Joona L

[viper1740 25]

IMHO X-Plane doesn't stand a chance against P3D. It has been around for ages and nobody cares. Flight Dynamics aren't important in a system's simulation like FSX, in which flight dinamics are already good enough for what we do with it. The whole community is waiting for Prepar3d v2 which is probably gonna be a 64bit version of FSX with all the Microsoft middle ages code fixed.

I can agree with you on this, however 64-bit version Prepar3d is first I've ever heard off. This would be great news since I'm used to the shortcuts and what not, from FSX. XP10 is not really the greatest platform IMHO.

I don't believe it has that to do with lack of access to technical data like you claim, FSLabs doesn't seem to have a problem having access to adequate data so I don't think PMDG would have that problem either. PMDG just picked the aircraft models which made the best sense to them and offered us wide range of super realistic Boeings and I'm very glad they did so.  

Regards

 

Joona L

Have you ever considered the fact they may be using "ficticious" or "estimated" data to simulate such environment?

[Werner747 107]

 

 

Based on what I've seen so far with the PMDG 777 it doesn't seem to have as advanced protection and flight envelope system as Airbus has.

 

The protection system is very advanced, I have experimented with it.   To give you one example:  on take off after a short turn around I got an EICAS message telling me that the auto throttle system was not engaged.   I had a look at the MCP, my switches were both armed, what???   What is this aircraft talking about???

 

So, I engaged my LNAV & VNAV and off I go into the blue yonder.   I kept getting the EICAS message, but hey, the aircraft is operating normally, so what the heck right?   At around FL200 I took a close look at the airspeed indicator, as this aircraft was not climbing as fast as I had become accustomed to, and that is when I realised that the airspeed was just a knot or two inside the overspeed!   Yes, the auto thrust system was disengaged, but because of the over speed protection, I didn't even realise it, because the aircraft prevent it from over speeding anyhow!   This is obviously just one example.

 

You have to be careful to say that the Airbus is more advanced - it simply has a different autopilot logic to the Boeing aircraft.   Honest opinion?   Couldn't care less about an Airbus, the pilot is largely reduced to a systems monitor whereas the Boeing philosophy has ALWAYS been that the pilot controls the aircraft not the computers.   The same level of protection is available to the pilot, the philosophy behind the software that drives it just works differently.

 

Kind regards.

[xplanery 250]

Have you ever considered the fact they may be using "ficticious" or "estimated" data to simulate such environment?

 

So far everything indicates they are planning to do things properly and deliver us a PMDG level product, thus I would expect them to use the same level of data. Do we know what exact data PMDG uses anyway?

 

 

  Couldn't care less about an Airbus, the pilot is largely reduced to a systems monitor whereas the Boeing philosophy has ALWAYS been that the pilot controls the aircraft not the computers.   The same level of protection is available to the pilot, the philosophy behind the software that drives it just works differently.

 

Well as far as I know if you pull back the yoke on a Boeing 777 with autothrottle disengaged and keep doing that long enough you will eventually stall and fall from the skies while on an Airbus the system would prevent that from happening (as long as it has access to all the data needed for flight envelope protection). 

Of course no pilot would do stuff like that but still.

 

Both modern Airbuses and Boeings are flown with autopilot on just as much, I don't think pilot is any more at the controls of a modern Boeing 777 than on A330. Airbus just gives protection systems more authority than Boeing does and in my opinion that's a good thing based on accidents like Asiana SFO crash where pilots somehow managed to crash a perfectly fine B777 on the ground in good weather. 

 

 

 

 

Regards

 

Joona L

[FLEX1978 373]

I think you will find on both modern types the pilot controls the computers & the computers control the aircraft, the only differance is the hard limits designed into those computers in Normal law. As far as neing reduced to a systems monitor, I take it you have no experience with either Boeing or Airbus, that exactly what they are trained to do on both types, along with a multitude of other requirement.

 

So as usual this is heading to 5yr old territory.... definitely time to leave you guys to it.

[viper1740 25]

So far everything indicates they are planning to do things properly and deliver us a PMDG level product, thus I would expect them to use same kind of data. Do we know what exact data PMDG uses anyway?

 

 

Regards

 

Joona L

As long as it's certified by Boeing, and RSR has stated so it's good enough for me.

[FLEX1978 373]

So far everything indicates they are planning to do things properly and deliver us a PMDG level product, thus I would expect them to use same kind of data. Do we know what exact data PMDG uses anyway?

 

 

Regards

 

Joona L

What Jakub doesn't seem to understand is if PMDG was using the same data as LVL-D simulators and they somehow managed to get it to work on a crude platform like FSX we would be paying a fair bit more than $90 "For entertainment purposes only"

As long as it's certified by Boeing, and RSR has stated so it's good enough for me.

Sorry cough* do you mind pointing me to the post where RSR has stated the flight model is certified by Boeing? I am aware of the 5% on the website, but certified by Boeing for what?

[viper1740 25]

What Jakub doesn't seem to understand is if PMDG was using the same data as LVL-D simulators and they somehow managed to get it to work on a crude platform like FSX we would be paying a fair bit more than $90 "For entertainment purposes only"

Sorry cough* do you mind pointing me to the post where RSR has stated the flight model is certified by Boeing? I am aware of the 5% on the website, but certified by Boeing for what?

http://www.precisionmanuals.com/pages/product/777LRF.html

 

Look for the logo mate. Then read the manuals

[FLEX1978 373]

http://www.precisionmanuals.com/pages/product/777LRF.html

Look for the logo mate. Then read the manuals

Let me try that again, where exactly does it say the flight model is certified by Boeing? You do understand the differance between licensed and certified?

[viper1740 25]

It's close enough for me

[xplanery 250]

Look for the logo mate. Then read the manuals

 

 

You know, funny thing is that even Abacus 787 has that logo, thus it alone really tells nothing about realism.  :lol: I guess it just means the developer has paid some license fee to Boeing or something. 

 

But sure PMDG 777 is awesome, can't wait till they get also 200ER and 300ER out.