What's next PMDG? B787 maybe?

[997R8V10 10]

Maybe Later PMDG will decide to make the 777x because Emirates just ordered 150!!! But that will not happen for another 10 years. I think that PMDG is taking a break from BIG JUMBOS and will probably just update old products. A 787 is a far fetched idea because in real life it didn't sell as well as the newer airplanes Boeing is making. The 737 max will probably also be made but only after 2020. PMDG most likely will not make airplanes that are not popular because it will reduce sales.

[4116705510 4]

Maybe Later PMDG will decide to make the 777x because Emirates just ordered 150!!! But that will not happen for another 10 years. I think that PMDG is taking a break from BIG JUMBOS and will probably just update old products. A 787 is a far fetched idea because in real life it didn't sell as well as the newer airplanes Boeing is making. The 737 max will probably also be made but only after 2020. PMDG most likely will not make airplanes that are not popular because it will reduce sales.

 

Well, the 787 has been flying for nearly five years, in service for three. It has reached 1,057 orders as of today, so it is by no means 'didn't sell as well as the newer airplnes Boeing is making', especially seeing as though they are the newer planes Boeing is making.  The main issue is that even when 747 v2 development is complete, say a year from now (as previous cycles would support),  is that although the 787 will have been in service for four years, flying for six, and would likely have enough data to satisfy what PMDG needs, the stretch variant (and second most popular, with 435 orders), the 787-9, will have been in service for only a year, and the longest, the 787-10, still a year away from first flight.  

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

And what about Embraer?.It Isn't an option?. 

 

With the FSimLabs Airbus, the B787 being developed by Quality Wings, and the NGX, T7 we would probably have all corners covered, except by Embraer which is gaining popularity around the world. Level-D should update his B767 like PMDG is planning to do with his B747.

I agree that Embraer would be amazing. I would pay good money for a PMDG quality Embraer E-series.

[Ponk 51]

DC6 would be amazing!

[cosnowboarder_777 11]

I would pay good money for an Embraer E series as well. I believe they have said though, they have no interest in doing that though. If they do the 777ER and the 737 BBJ and ER variants, that will keep them busy for the foreseeable future along with the 747.

[KriVa 307]

 

 

A 787 is a far fetched idea because in real life it didn't sell as well as the newer airplanes Boeing is making. The 737 max will probably also be made but only after 2020. PMDG most likely will not make airplanes that are not popular because it will reduce sales.

In what part of the world exactly would you consider the 787 to be "not popular"? Just take a look at the deliveries. I'd say the 787 is selling well, VERY well.

[BGA001 1]

I would upload a pic but for some reason I can't.  I saw a BA 787 in Austin, TX on the 8th.  Did not expect to see that there, let alone a BA one.

[whoispankaj 51]

I think they will do the 787 for the simple reason that RSR will not have to worry about releasing a product with bugs in it.....they way the 787 is going they will just be considered an accurate simulation of the real thing! :rolleyes:

And then too we will have people coming up with why are there no battery problems with the 787 simulation..This is not realistic

[Fallap 4]

Why always the same threads.

 

717 is already confirmed not happening. PMDG has outright stated that they will not be doing a 717.

 

What's next?

PMDG 777-200LR hotfix, then service pack.

PMDG 777-300ER

PMDG 747-400v2 (and maybe 747-8 properly simulated with cockpit, engine, flight dynamics differences to the -400)

Maybe a 777-200ER (I hope so) not yet confirmed or denied.

737NGX Service Pack 2

PMDG DC-6

 

then a "secret" that will be "Different to the kinds of products we expect from PMDG".

 

Confirmed they don't do military aircraft (They can't get classified data and don't want to do a product based on a "best guess")

 

We already know they have some kind of agreement with Boeing.

We already know they have decided a long time ago not to do a 757.

 

I think the 787 is a logical choice, but they havn't confirmed anything on that front, just to say they don't have enough operational data yet. Whether "Yet" means "we will by the time the 777-300ER and 747v2 are released" or something else is not clear. 

 

What is more clear is the kind of timeframe we are looking at. I'd say there's a good 2 to 3 years work in the DC6, 777-300ER and 747v2 releases. Which should, on average mean about 72 more threads about 717's and 787's from fanbois that don't read the forum regularly enough to be bored of asking about projects that have been confirmed not happening yet, averaging slightly under 1 ever 2 weeks.

 

Personally I reccon we might have a 787 from PMDG in the ~5 year timeframe, not sure which simulator it will be for (FSX will be really old and 32 bit is starting to be a problem already with VAS limited OOM's.)

 

PMDG 717 won't happen. Ever. PMDG learned enough about low sales yields from uncommon airliners with the MD11. The 717 is basically a tiny 2 engined MD11 as far as the cockpit goes anyway (or to put it another way, an MD80/DC9 with an MD11 cockpit).

PMDG also once stated that weather radars were never going to be implemented in PMDG aircraft.

PMDG also once stated that they would NEVER do the 777

But I'll most likely agree with you, my point is (I guess) that miracles still happends

 

I guess the reason for the absence of a PMDG 767/757 is due to Level D. Would still love to see those two being brought to PMDG standards.

 

[hopskip 253]

PMDG also once stated that weather radars were never going to be implemented in PMDG aircraft.

PMDG also once stated that they would NEVER do the 777

But I'll most likely agree with you, my point is (I guess) that miracles still happends

 

I guess the reason for the absence of a PMDG 767/757 is due to Level D. Would still love to see those two being brought to PMDG standards.

 

PMDG got off to a bad start if they never intended to do a 777

http://www.avsim.com/pages/0901/pmdg_fly_777/pmdg_fly_777.html

 

It was their first product.

 

Also they said they wouldn't do an "Unrealistic" Radar due to limitations with weather in FSX.

Now they have that, so... we have a Radar that isn't unrealistic.

[kevinh 409]

PMDG got off to a bad start if they never intended to do a 777

http://www.avsim.com/pages/0901/pmdg_fly_777/pmdg_fly_777.html

 

It was their first product.

 

Also they said they wouldn't do an "Unrealistic" Radar due to limitations with weather in FSX.

Now they have that, so... we have a Radar that isn't unrealistic.

The "not doing a 777" related to FSX. They certainly resisted the idea for a long time (this was around the time they were planning to release the whole Airbus family).

 

As for the WXR, it's always been possible to make a realistic one in FSX. The limitations in FSX remain (though Aerosoft claim to have found a way to find the data).

[hopskip 253]

The "not doing a 777" related to FSX. They certainly resisted the idea for a long time (this was around the time they were planning to release the whole Airbus family).

 

As for the WXR, it's always been possible to make a realistic one in FSX. The limitations in FSX remain (though Aerosoft claim to have found a way to find the data).

Is that why the only product that can do a realistic radar (and not a best guess based on cloud positions) is the PMDG 777 and ONLY when using Active Sky Next.

 

The Default FSX weather's depiction of rain is of a 10nm "cylinder shaped" rain area centred on the player aircraft, which has only 7 or 8 states "No rain, Patchy light, widespread light, Light under CB only, Heavy under CB only, Heavy under CB and light everywhere else, or Heavy everywhere in a sector." Obviously Snow, Sleet, Rain and Freezing rain are also options (with their own graphic representations too!)

 

All of the default weather selections can be set via the FSX weather dialogue box, or via it's live weather updates weather system.

 

It is ONLY through the addition of addons that this can be significantly changed.

 

So far, ASN is the only weather program that is capable of exactly matching a specific location and shape of rain to the experience of where rain is experienced. Other systems break rain down into areas, which are roughly the same grid that the default FSX live weather updates are set to.

 

ASN actually uses a similar grid, but has it's own "weather plot" and it will force the rain to start and stop depending on where the players aircraft is. Instead of "Grid 74102 = patchy heavy rain", ASN will decide When there should be rain, depending on where it has decided there should be rain, regardless of where you are in a grid, much like how it will adjust visibility settings down when you are passing through cloud. 

 

Flying just above a cloud? visibility will be 10, 30, 50 miles... but as soon as you descend into the cloud, the visibility ramps down to just a quarter mile or so. It will then pop in and out as you enter and leave clouds. The actual visibility setting is being tweaked several times a second to make the cloud 'appear' volumetric, even though FSX is only capable of displaying 2d cloud sprites that rotate to face you, ActiveSky Next is continuously adjusting visibility, so that when you are in cloud, you are in cloud for a long time, instead of jumping between 2 states of "in cloud" and "not in cloud" depending on your proximity to one of the cloud sprites.

 

Using ActiveSky Next, PMDG is now simulating "Radar returns from Rain" instead of a best guess based on cloud positions and the % of rain in the FSX weather grids. This is why people keep reporting there's no radar returns when they are flying over cloud in the 777-300ER & 777-200LR SP1/b.

 

Because the PMDG 777 Radar doesn't show you where clouds are (Just like the real one).

It shows you where RAIN is. (and hail/sleet/snow etc).

 

People keep flying through Clear Air Turbulence (thanks ActiveSky, now looking at sigwx charts is really useful!) and complaining that the weather radar in WX+T mode doesn't show where the turbulence is.

 

... which is correct behaviour of a weather radar. It can't detect clear air turbulence, because it needs water in the air to see turbulence. (It sees the droplets moving in certain ways)

 

While I love the Majestic Software Dash-8, Their weather radar does NOT show where rain is. (It VERY OFTEN shows lots of rain where nothing but cloud exists, and it SOMETIMES shows no rain where there IS rain.)

It does however do terrain masking, which the PMDG 777-300ER radar does NOT YET do.

 

This information is freely available in the documentation of all of the products mentioned (with the exception of FSX default).

 

So instead of saying that "Aerosoft might maybe be able to do this one day"

 

we can say "ActiveSky Next DOES do this NOW"

[kevinh 409]

Is that why the only product that can do a realistic radar (and not a best guess based on cloud positions) is the PMDG 777 and ONLY when using Active Sky Next.

 

My understanding is the iFly 737 uses the same ASN outputs in a similar way (and was first to do so).

 

 

It is ONLY through the addition of addons that this can be significantly changed.

 

I didn't say that it wasn't. But it's still always been possible for some addon developer to come along and fill in those gaps. I was saying such things here in WXR debates (before they got cut short, as they all did). ASN is now doing exactly the kind of thing I said could be done but was told wasn't possible (because PMDG said so).

 

And yes, I did know the importance of the difference between cloud and rain with respect to WXR, thanks all the same. That's a long post to counter a point I didn't actually make.

 

 

So instead of saying that "Aerosoft might maybe be able to do this one day"

 

 

 

we can say "ActiveSky Next DOES do this NOW"

 

I'm not speaking on behalf of Aerosoft, just mentioning what they say they have done in the same field. It's the opposite approach to how it has been done by ASN, but if it works then why knock it for not being the first solution to be released? We'll see how good it is (or not) in due course.

[max2770 74]

I'd gladly pay $90 for a great PMDG-made 787.  Tomorrow.

[Superdelphinus 718]

Is that why the only product that can do a realistic radar (and not a best guess based on cloud positions) is the PMDG 777 and ONLY when using Active Sky Next.

 

The Default FSX weather's depiction of rain is of a 10nm "cylinder shaped" rain area centred on the player aircraft, which has only 7 or 8 states "No rain, Patchy light, widespread light, Light under CB only, Heavy under CB only, Heavy under CB and light everywhere else, or Heavy everywhere in a sector." Obviously Snow, Sleet, Rain and Freezing rain are also options (with their own graphic representations too!)

 

All of the default weather selections can be set via the FSX weather dialogue box, or via it's live weather updates weather system.

 

It is ONLY through the addition of addons that this can be significantly changed.

 

So far, ASN is the only weather program that is capable of exactly matching a specific location and shape of rain to the experience of where rain is experienced. Other systems break rain down into areas, which are roughly the same grid that the default FSX live weather updates are set to.

 

ASN actually uses a similar grid, but has it's own "weather plot" and it will force the rain to start and stop depending on where the players aircraft is. Instead of "Grid 74102 = patchy heavy rain", ASN will decide When there should be rain, depending on where it has decided there should be rain, regardless of where you are in a grid, much like how it will adjust visibility settings down when you are passing through cloud. 

 

Flying just above a cloud? visibility will be 10, 30, 50 miles... but as soon as you descend into the cloud, the visibility ramps down to just a quarter mile or so. It will then pop in and out as you enter and leave clouds. The actual visibility setting is being tweaked several times a second to make the cloud 'appear' volumetric, even though FSX is only capable of displaying 2d cloud sprites that rotate to face you, ActiveSky Next is continuously adjusting visibility, so that when you are in cloud, you are in cloud for a long time, instead of jumping between 2 states of "in cloud" and "not in cloud" depending on your proximity to one of the cloud sprites.

 

Using ActiveSky Next, PMDG is now simulating "Radar returns from Rain" instead of a best guess based on cloud positions and the % of rain in the FSX weather grids. This is why people keep reporting there's no radar returns when they are flying over cloud in the 777-300ER & 777-200LR SP1/b.

 

Because the PMDG 777 Radar doesn't show you where clouds are (Just like the real one).

It shows you where RAIN is. (and hail/sleet/snow etc).

 

People keep flying through Clear Air Turbulence (thanks ActiveSky, now looking at sigwx charts is really useful!) and complaining that the weather radar in WX+T mode doesn't show where the turbulence is.

 

... which is correct behaviour of a weather radar. It can't detect clear air turbulence, because it needs water in the air to see turbulence. (It sees the droplets moving in certain ways)

 

While I love the Majestic Software Dash-8, Their weather radar does NOT show where rain is. (It VERY OFTEN shows lots of rain where nothing but cloud exists, and it SOMETIMES shows no rain where there IS rain.)

It does however do terrain masking, which the PMDG 777-300ER radar does NOT YET do.

 

This information is freely available in the documentation of all of the products mentioned (with the exception of FSX default).

 

So instead of saying that "Aerosoft might maybe be able to do this one day"

 

we can say "ActiveSky Next DOES do this NOW"

Really interesting post, thanks