Suggestion for the 777

[flyerboy 114]

I know 737 has the automatic air stair that comes out of the plane but to have a external type that moves to the door as an option. 

Buy this

 

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/products_gsx.html

[paulhand 15]

I guess real world airlines use GSX or AES

 

It's not PMDG's job to simulate what happens outside of the airplane.

 

:lol:

 

Eh...that's debatable...

 

Sure, it's subjective, but given that PMDG hasn't included what you're referring to since the J41, it would appear that they have a similar stance.

 

Subjective or not, reality is something you have to face.  GSX (and others) have ground simulations available.  PMDG clearly has determined that this is a better avenue for simulating ground operations, instead of burning their own time to include stuff like that.  I'd say that's pretty straightforward, and rather reasonable.

 

$40?  Sure, but it works with all of your aircraft essentially.

 

.... but PMDG has already chosen to give us a ground air and ground power cart, and chocks, so a simple set of stairs that can be switched on or off from the CDU like the other ground connections is hardly going to be a massive "load" on the developer.

 

Half as much again in cash terms to another developer (plus whatever FSX resources this takes), just to get a set of stairs, which is all the OP was suggesting, does seem a little like overkill when all the other ground connections have already been included in the package ... 

 

cheers

[cavaricooper 2,613]

"Half as much again in cash terms to another developer (plus whatever FSX resources this takes)"

 

I sometimes wonder if folks realize what they have been able to purchase for less than $100? Outside of spending millions for a Level D sim, your PC now is the absolute closest thing to a Boeing 777 possible. For less than the cost of dinner out on a Friday night it is possible to derive THOUSANDS of hours of educational entertainment. Wading through the documentation and failures will keep the average simmer busy for the better part of a year. Then he/she can navigate to far points of the globe immersed in a comprehensive simulation that is audio-visually penultimate. This could occupy the better part of a decade.

 

This is not meant to dismiss the OP.... But, that one line I read further down I simply could not pass on. Together with the NGX, PMDG continues to obliterate every preconception about the limitations of PC based simulation.... and we can experience all this for half-cents an hour......stunning!

[Seme 6]

I guess real world airlines use GSX or AES

 

It's not PMDG's job to simulate what happens outside of the airplane.

 

+1 for this! GSX and AES is the way to go. I have both and I absolutely love these addons to bring the extra realism to the apron.

 

"Half as much again in cash terms to another developer (plus whatever FSX resources this takes)"

 

I sometimes wonder if folks realize what they have been able to purchase for less than $100? Outside of spending millions for a Level D sim, your PC now is the absolute closest thing to a Boeing 777 possible. For less than the cost of dinner out on a Friday night it is possible to derive THOUSANDS of hours of educational entertainment. Wading through the documentation and failures will keep the average simmer busy for the better part of a year. Then he/she can navigate to far points of the globe immersed in a comprehensive simulation that is audio-visually penultimate. This could occupy the better part of a decade.

 

This is not meant to dismiss the OP.... But, that one line I read further down I simply could not pass on. Together with the NGX, PMDG continues to obliterate every preconception about the limitations of PC based simulation.... and we can experience all this for half-cents an hour......stunning!

Well said! I quess as a developer, you have to draw the line somewhere what to include and what not. I think the list could be endless if you try to implement every single wish from the public, and this is no offense.

 

Just my two cents

 

Cheers

Thomas

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

.... but PMDG has already chosen to give us a ground air and ground power cart, and chocks, so a simple set of stairs that can be switched on or off from the CDU like the other ground connections is hardly going to be a massive "load" on the developer.

 

....becaaauuuuuuuuuuuse:

 

Nobody has modeled this yet because it's so aircraft specific.

 

 

 

I think people are failing at seeing the point here in a really blindingly obvious way:

PMDG added ramp support equipment a while ago, but stopped because someone else was making a product that all aircraft could use.  This frees them up to do other things.

 

Yes, there are still ground equipment models, but think about it:

Can you really rely on another developer to model something that directly interacts with your aircraft?

No, not really.

 

"But the belt loaders, fuel trucks and jetbridge interact with your aircraft!!1!1!"

They appear to interact, but nothing is going on, really.  They're just visual effects that appear around the aircraft.  The GPU, ASC and ACC all actually interact with the aircraft.  Each one of those carts actually have an effect on the systems of the aircraft.  Relying on third parties to do that is potentially setting yourself up for disaster.

 

 

 

Not sure where ya'll's history lessons came from, but over time we developed this thing called specialization.  The Cliff's Notes version is that Bob, Harvey, Dick and Tom all used to hunt, cook, make weapons, and plant crops.  Eventually, each one of them realized that they each enjoyed one of those activities more than the rest, and began working only on that specialty.  Bob started hunting, and relied on the rest to do the other functions, as others began to do the same.

 

I'm sure woodworkers used to walk into their back yards and chop down the next choice tree for their next project.  Now they generally go to Home Depot.

 

That's what we have here:

Someone else is providing a service that can be capitalized upon to free up resources.

[paulhand 15]

I knew I shouldn't have entered this fray  :lol:

 

I still don't see why a set of steps is such a big deal ... what the OP wanted is a depiction of a set of steps that he could look at, nothing more. 

 

 

 

The GPU, ASC and ACC all actually interact with the aircraft.

 

The picture of the GPU in the external view doesn't interact with the plane, and there's is no reason that a GPU couldn't be modelled without having a depiction of it when looking at the external view. It's eye candy.

 

I think this request is much more akin to the "visual depiction only" (PMDG's words, not mine) of the test equipment on the testbed aircraft, which they thought some people would like to look at in external view. Some people (the OP and me for starters) would prefer a set of steps to get to their virtual 777 doors, without paying nearly 50% of the list price of the whole plane!

 

Cheers  :lol:  :lol:

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

I still don't see why a set of steps is such a big deal ... what the OP wanted is a depiction of a set of steps that he could look at, nothing more. 

 

I hate it when people reduce things to "well what's the big deal?" and "how much extra time could it take???"

 

If you don't think it's a big deal, go do it.  You'll quickly learn an appreciation for why they aren't doing things where they aren't necessary.

 

 

 

The picture of the GPU in the external view doesn't interact with the plane, and there's is no reason that a GPU couldn't be modelled without having a depiction of it when looking at the external view. It's eye candy.

 

True, but then you're going to get the people complaining that they can't see the GPU or other carts related to those features outside (and here's the important part, and I've repeated it enough times for this to have already hit home by now), because nobody else provides this visual modeling.

 

Is that specialization commentary sinking in yet?  Hopefully the bolded, italicized, underlined, red text helps drive the point home, because at this point, I'm not sure people are listening...

 

 

 

I think this request is much more akin to the "visual depiction only" (PMDG's words, not mine) of the test equipment on the testbed aircraft, which they thought some people would like to look at in external view. Some people (the OP and me for starters) would prefer a set of steps to get to their virtual 777 doors, without paying nearly 50% of the list price of the whole plane!

 

Again, the test package isn't done by someone else.  See above.

 

...and the price argument is moot.  It's not quite fair to stress that the price is 50% of the whole plane's price.  While it's true, it's not like the 777 is the only plane it will work on.

 

It's funny that so many are making that argument here that it's too expensive (as a percent cost of the one aircraft), yet I know some of them have to be using EZCA.  As a percent cost of one aircraft, that's a significant cost, too, but nobody is getting upset about that one.  Why?

[paulhand 15]

 

 

True, but then you're going to get the people complaining that they can't see the GPU or other carts related to those features outside (and here's the important part, and I've repeated it enough times for this to have already hit home by now), because nobody else provides this visual modeling.
 
Is that specialization commentary sinking in yet?  Hopefully the bolded, italicized, underlined, red text helps drive the point home, because at this point, I'm not sure people are listening...

 

There's no need to pile on the sarcasm just because a few people disagree with you...  and just because they don't agree doesn't mean they are either not listening or are wrong!

 

Anyway, the OP made his request for a small addition to the visual model. The folks at PMDG can decide if they think it adds value, if they don't, they won't do it and we'll all still buy their things anyway. Just like we would have done if they hadn't included a visual model of the flight test equipment (or the ability to add a satcom antenna to the NGX).

 

Anyway, enough of this, I now remember why I've been a member here for 10 years and don't often post.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

There's no need to pile on the sarcasm just because a few people disagree with you...  and just because they don't agree doesn't mean they are either not listening or are wrong!

 

Sorry - I just hate repeating myself.  The points made were in line with what I already explained, and part of it is that I've been repeating myself ad nauseum because people won't read the intro manual before coming here and claiming something is wrong.  Granted, that's a separate issue, and yes, I know I'm not required to respond to stuff, but still...

 

 

 

Anyway, the OP made his request for a small addition to the visual model. The folks at PMDG can decide if they think it adds value, if they don't, they won't do it and we'll all still buy their things anyway. Just like we would have done if they hadn't included a visual model of the flight test equipment (or the ability to add a satcom antenna to the NGX).

 

Again, you can't call it "small" until you've done it before.  Seriously.  Not only does the item need to be modeled, it needs to be animated (the show/hide and restrictions in its appearing are animations).

 

Also, clearly they've already made the decision that it doesn't add value as they've only included certain items/features that haven't been modeled by others.

 

 

 

Anyway, enough of this, I now remember why I've been a member here for 10 years and don't often post.

 

Sorry to contribute to that, but if you're going to offer a counterpoint to someone's argument, it's expected that you're going to draw their fire.  It's the nature of human discussion.  Granted, my heavy dose of sarcasm isn't often necessary, but that's no reason to not post frequently.  I hate to say it, but if you jump into a discussion and offer a counterpoint, you should know what you're getting into.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

(...)  I hate to say it, but if you jump into a discussion and offer a counterpoint, you should know what you're getting into.

 

 

... especially with Kyle!   :lol:

[scandinavian13 5,192]

... especially with Kyle!   :lol:

 

Ha!  I was going to say that, but given that he said he doesn't post often, I wasn't assuming he'd know I appreciate a good debate.

[asanal 32]

GSX

 

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/3074/fjde.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img716/5900/b9cg.jpg

[TOGA-saurus 330]

While we're at it I may as well request PMDG to lash after-burners onto the GE90's, because other planes have them  :blink:

[deejayone 0]

• Hello, I have a problem after a while my fmc is disconnected I do not understand why this is the 3rd time

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

• Hello, I have a problem after a while my fmc is disconnected I do not understand why this is the 3rd time

 

 

This has nothing to do with the topic in this thread.  Post your issue in a separate thread.

 

EDIT: Along with more information.  Based on what you've written, I don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.