I think jet jockeys have enough choice, from pmdg and others.

 

Don't buy the Katana 4x if you think the DC6 is a slow prop!

I would prefer a good DC-10 or a classic 747 vs a slow, lumbering prop.

 

I would prefer the Boeing 727 series.  :wink:

...and then the thread takes an irritating dive into a quasi-request thread.

 

 

 

...because there aren't a million of those...

 

 

but not as many bugs on it`s release day!

 

You want to go into more detail?  For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777.  You might be able to argue that the NGX had them, but the majority still found it flyable.

 

As far as programming goes, I'd call that a successful release.  The first release of a program is never going to be bug free, and with this system depth, bug free is an even more impossible goal.

ANOTHER PAID COMMERCIAL BY THE FOLKS AT PMDG......

 

Well I do not think that majority like it when they fly with the CAUTION lit and unable to extinguish no matter how many times your press it. It seems to have crashed a few times on me when I fly it using ORBX sceneries. (Ya right. It`s the scenery`s fault and not PMDG)  Also when the flight is saved as a default is crashes the whole sim. We are instructed not to save the B777X as a default flight as it is just now the PMDG software is loaded. Funny thing is that I do not have this problem with the NGX. It can be saved as a default flight and loaded in for flight without any problems.

 

Regards,
DL

...and then the thread takes an irritating dive into a quasi-request thread.

 

 

 

...because there aren't a million of those...

 

 

 

You want to go into more detail?  For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777.  You might be able to argue that the NGX had them, but the majority still found it flyable.

 

As far as programming goes, I'd call that a successful release.  The first release of a program is never going to be bug free, and with this system depth, bug free is an even more impossible goal.

Sir if I may?

 

I think you are mistaken :-)

 

 

 

This is why I won't buy it. It isn't something that can be flown by a single pilot.

ANOTHER PAID COMMERCIAL BY THE FOLKS AT PMDG......

 

Well I do not think that majority like it when they fly with the CAUTION lit and unable to extinguish no matter how many times your press it. It seems to have crashed a few times on me when I fly it using ORBX sceneries. (Ya right. It`s the scenery`s fault and not PMDG) Also when the flight is saved as a default is crashes the whole sim. We are instructed not to save the B777X as a default flight as it is just now the PMDG software is loaded. Funny thing is that I do not have this problem with the NGX. It can be saved as a default flight and loaded in for flight without any problems.

 

Regards,

DL

Just make your own cold and dark saves, the caution error stems from the default cd panel state so make your own or use the more realistic turn panel state.

Bahahahahahaha...you want to throw down?  I'll throw down.  Let's do this.

 

 

 

ANOTHER PAID COMMERCIAL BY THE FOLKS AT PMDG......

 

Since joining the forum 6 years, 11 months and 26 days ago (specifically to participate in the PMDG subforum), I have taken exactly $0.00 from PMDG for anything.  Nice try though.

 

 

 

Well I do not think that majority like it when they fly with the CAUTION lit and unable to extinguish no matter how many times your press it.

 

"Don't like" and "showstopper" are completely different concepts.  You're correct that the majority of people probably don't like having the CAUTION lit, unable to extinguish, but that's primarily limited to those using the Cold and Dark state.  Avoiding use of that avoids the issue.  This is public knowledge here in the forum.  Either way, again, it doesn't prevent you from using the aircraft (which would be the definition of "showstopper").  You can't tell me that it's a requirement that people use the C&D state, and that not being able to use it is a showstopper.

 

 

 

It seems to have crashed a few times on me when I fly it using ORBX sceneries. (Ya right. It`s the scenery`s fault and not PMDG)

 

...and this is the reason I'm such a ragemonster on the forums all the time.  Educate yourself before posting next time.

 

NEWS FLASH!

 

It's BOTH of their faults if you really want to argue a point there.  Your argument is essentially thus:

I have $32,000.  Before I "purchased" the 777LR/F, my expensive scenery didn't put me over my $32,000 limit.  Now that I have the equally expensive 777LR/F, however, I'm over the limit.  Because of this, it's the 777's fault.

 

FSX has limited memory, being a 32 bit program.  You're right that the 777 is a heavy hitter, but so is ORBX scenery.  If you have both, you're pushing the limits of the program, particularly when you're maxing sliders out.  You have to stay within the confines of the program.  Microsoft made that sandbox, not PMDG, or ORBX.  If you want to run all of your heavy hitting add ons, you're going to have to make concessions somewhere.  There's only so much PMDG can do to help this, and the same goes for ORBX.

 

 

 

Also when the flight is saved as a default is crashes the whole sim. We are instructed not to save the B777X as a default flight as it is just now the PMDG software is loaded. Funny thing is that I do not have this problem with the NGX. It can be saved as a default flight and loaded in for flight without any problems.

 

Well golly...I wonder why they instruct you to not set the 777 as the default flight?  I would guess that it has something to do with the fact that it causes problems with the sim.  Oh, right, yup, that's the reason!  Must be something PMDG caused, though...right?

 

Wrong.

 

Any complex aircraft can cause this issue.  Just because you got lucky and didn't see it with the NGX doesn't mean that it's a problem with the 777.  It was something that was discussed as far back as the original 744 for FS9.  Additionally, Flight1 (which sells a grand total of 0 PMDG aircraft) also recommends this practice and has a recommended Safe Startup for Complex Aircraft flight for people to use as their default flight.

 

 

 

So, no, not a paid advertisement, or even remotely supported word from PMDG.  What it is, instead, is me combatting people posting ignorant, meritless trash.

 

For future reference, I was only asking for additional detail because your post implied that the 777 was unreasonably buggy.  I wanted to see what facts you had that I might not have already seen.  After asking for additional detail, I responded with facts, and my own opinion on why I thought it was reasonably successful.  You then asserted that I got paid for what I said, which is utterly false and a shot at me, personally.

 

Come with facts, and a little more of an educated opinion next time, please.  Until then, you're welcome to continue to take personal shots at me.  It really helps to support your sound and mature arguments.

Anything can be said online. But isn`t it mysterious. Every time there is an negative comment on the PMDG product, a "hero" like yourself comes in to rebut otherwise. Isn`t it right to admit that yes there is such a bug with the product and they(PMDG) are working on a patch? Unless they are so afraid that it will affect their sales that they have people to sniff around on the forums to rebut any and everything that is negative on their products. Well I do believe that PMDG are now working on a patch for the B777 even though you do not like to admit to it for them. The rate it is going they will not be able to honor what they said before either. The B747 v2 will be released a very short time (1 or 2 months) after the release of the B777. You must have something to rebut that as well. An honest mistake? A typo.....

Bahahahahahaha...you want to throw down?  I'll throw down.  Let's do this.

 

 

 

 

Since joining the forum 6 years, 11 months and 26 days ago (specifically to participate in the PMDG subforum), I have taken exactly $0.00 from PMDG for anything.  Nice try though.

 

 

 

 

"Don't like" and "showstopper" are completely different concepts.  You're correct that the majority of people probably don't like having the CAUTION lit, unable to extinguish, but that's primarily limited to those using the Cold and Dark state.  Avoiding use of that avoids the issue.  This is public knowledge here in the forum.  Either way, again, it doesn't prevent you from using the aircraft (which would be the definition of "showstopper").  You can't tell me that it's a requirement that people use the C&D state, and that not being able to use it is a showstopper.

 

 

 

 

...and this is the reason I'm such a ragemonster on the forums all the time.  Educate yourself before posting next time.

 

NEWS FLASH!

 

It's BOTH of their faults if you really want to argue a point there.  Your argument is essentially thus:

I have $32,000.  Before I "purchased" the 777LR/F, my expensive scenery didn't put me over my $32,000 limit.  Now that I have the equally expensive 777LR/F, however, I'm over the limit.  Because of this, it's the 777's fault.

 

FSX has limited memory, being a 32 bit program.  You're right that the 777 is a heavy hitter, but so is ORBX scenery.  If you have both, you're pushing the limits of the program, particularly when you're maxing sliders out.  You have to stay within the confines of the program.  Microsoft made that sandbox, not PMDG, or ORBX.  If you want to run all of your heavy hitting add ons, you're going to have to make concessions somewhere.  There's only so much PMDG can do to help this, and the same goes for ORBX.

 

 

 

 

Well golly...I wonder why they instruct you to not set the 777 as the default flight?  I would guess that it has something to do with the fact that it causes problems with the sim.  Oh, right, yup, that's the reason!  Must be something PMDG caused, though...right?

 

Wrong.

 

Any complex aircraft can cause this issue.  Just because you got lucky and didn't see it with the NGX doesn't mean that it's a problem with the 777.  It was something that was discussed as far back as the original 744 for FS9.  Additionally, Flight1 (which sells a grand total of 0 PMDG aircraft) also recommends this practice and has a recommended Safe Startup for Complex Aircraft flight for people to use as their default flight.

 

 

 

So, no, not a paid advertisement, or even remotely supported word from PMDG.  What it is, instead, is me combatting people posting ignorant, meritless trash.

 

For future reference, I was only asking for additional detail because your post implied that the 777 was unreasonably buggy.  I wanted to see what facts you had that I might not have already seen.  After asking for additional detail, I responded with facts, and my own opinion on why I thought it was reasonably successful.  You then asserted that I got paid for what I said, which is utterly false and a shot at me, personally.

 

Come with facts, and a little more of an educated opinion next time, please.  Until then, you're welcome to continue to take personal shots at me.  It really helps to support your sound and mature arguments.

Anything can be said online. But isn`t it mysterious. Every time there is an negative comment on the PMDG product, a "hero" like yourself comes in to rebut otherwise.

 

Not true.  Any time someone mentions something that's an acknowledged bug, I point them to the bug thread.  If I was truly a "hero" of the type you're referring to (what I can only imagine is actually more of an ignorantly blind follower), I would be brushing everything under the rug.  To the contrary, while I play devil's advocate in troubleshooting, that doesn't mean that after troubleshooting I won't forward them onto the support portal, encouraging them to report what I see might be a bug (there are several examples of this - search my name and "support.precisionmanuals.com").

 

 

 

Isn`t it right to admit that yes there is such a bug with the product and they(PMDG) are working on a patch?

 

Yes.  There are bugs, and they're working on them.  I never said there weren't.  You're welcome to go find the post that I apparently said that, though.  Let me know when you find it, and good luck on your journey!

 

 

 

 

Unless they are so afraid that it will affect their sales that they have people to sniff around on the forums to rebut any and everything that is negative on their products.

 

The world isn't black and white, so don't reduce it to that much.  Your initial post used the phrase "I hope that it will include as many systems as PMDG but not as many bugs on it`s release day!"  This inferred that the 777 was very buggy, which really isn't true.  It's not perfect - which I acknowledged in my initial post (which you seem to be ignoring) - but it's certainly not as buggy as many initial releases for FSX, particularly at this level of detail.

 

Furthermore, again, my job is not to sniff around the forum to rebut every negative thing about PMDG (another baseless personal shot - nice try champ).  Most of my posts are to either explain something for someone, or help troubleshoot and issue.  You're welcome to continue your petulant personal attacks on me in an effort to cheapen my opinion however.

 

...when you're done here, I'm sure a political campaign could use your help!  Election day in my state is on Tuesday.  I'm sure you could get a couple deals for last minute attack ads for one of the candidates.

 

 

 

Well I do believe that PMDG are now working on a patch for the B777 even though you do not like to admit to it for them.

 

Again, when did I say they weren't?  Could you quote that post for me?

 

Saying:

"For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777."

 

...is not saying:

"For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777."

 

That's right...I didn't say it anywhere, and if you look at my other posts, several of them note an upcoming SP.  So, again, nice shot at putting words in my mouth, but you're gonna have to try harder than that.

 

 

 

The rate it is going they will not be able to honor what they said before either. The B747 v2 will be released a very short time (1 or 2 months) after the release of the B777. You must have something to rebut that as well. An honest mistake? A typo.....

 

I have no info on it, so I can't address the question.  You'll note I tend to choose my battles carefully.  When I don't know, I tend to stay out of it (though that's not always the case).  When I do know, and someone is making baseless, particularly negative assertions, I tend to step in and tell them off.

 

...and 'grats!  You made yourself a target by taking a shot at me.

 

Earlier, I simply asked you to elaborate on your earlier statement because I thought it inferred that the 777 was pretty buggy.  I expected your observations, mostly because I could forward on some of the issues if they weren't issues that anyone had seen before.  Instead, you inferred I was some hired fan to take shots at anyone who says anything negative, which you continue to assert for some reason.

 

For what it's worth, I do the same thing for Windows and Apple.  I have friends on both sides of that fence who like to talk trash about the other side.  I sit there and correct their false statements any time I hear them.  Does that mean I'm a Windows or an Apple fan, spokeperson, or hired gun?  Nope.  I just don't like uneducated opinions.  You showed up with one.  I shot it down.  Instead of getting miffed at me, you might want to step back for a moment and look inwardly.

 

As far as their statement on their timeline, that's all on them.  The general consensus, though, is that any statements like that are generic goals, and not set in stone.  That's something they have to answer for themselves.  I didn't say it, so I'm not going to bat for them.

 

 

 

Would you like to continue?

...and then the thread takes an irritating dive into a quasi-request thread.

 

 

which then, subsequently and unmistakingly,as ever, takes an even more irritating dive into a discussion about the 777 and other weapons of mass jet transportation.

 

Can't you leave us proplovers in peace for one time !! What are you guys doing here anyway !!?? Doesn't matter what the thread is about ? Just ramble on about the 777 and NGX as if nothing else matters ?? I bet if you guys stumbled into a thread somewhere about Brussels Sprouts you'd manage to sneak the 777 in there before one could say monounsaturated omega9 fatty acid ! 

 

You guys should be taken by the scruff of the neck and be forced to look and listen to the start-up of the 4 P&W Double Wasp radials of a DC-6. And if there's any shred of respect available in your minds for aviation history and particularly the venerable and most gracious propliners that paved the way to culminate eventually into your beloved NGX and 777, you'd be anticipating the arrival of the PMDG DC-6 as much as we do.

 

I really feel sorry for you guys. Clearly you don't know what you're missing. Maybe the release of the PMDG DC-6 will come to your rescue. I really hope so.

 

Oh, and i do love the NGX and 777 very much too.

 

Cheers,

A proplover

You guys should be taken by the scruff of the neck and be forced to look and listen to the start-up of the 4 P&W Double Wasp radials of a DC-6. And if there's any shred of respect available in your minds for aviation history and particularly the venerable and most gracious propliners that paved the way to culminate eventually into your beloved NGX and 777, you'd be anticipating the arrival of the PMDG DC-6 as much as we do.

 

I really feel sorry for you guys. Clearly you don't know what you're missing. Maybe the release of the PMDG DC-6 will come to your rescue. I really hope so.

 

Cheers,

A proplover

Some of us love certain props more than others, I'll gladly fly a high performance P51D while I'll gladly pass on the slowsky. (I have a few hours in the A2A B377 and while its a fantastic addon it made me realize that prop airliners went away for a very good reason). However it would be neat to fly the grandaddy of all jetliners: the comet.

Yawn!! After that long explanation so any information on 

 

1) Upcoming B777 patch for the bugs

2) DC-6 which was what this original thread was on

3) B744 v2

 

Just three basic items that many on the forum are also wondering about? None right?

 

 

Not true.  Any time someone mentions something that's an acknowledged bug, I point them to the bug thread.  If I was truly a "hero" of the type you're referring to (what I can only imagine is actually more of an ignorantly blind follower), I would be brushing everything under the rug.  To the contrary, while I play devil's advocate in troubleshooting, that doesn't mean that after troubleshooting I won't forward them onto the support portal, encouraging them to report what I see might be a bug (there are several examples of this - search my name and "support.precisionmanuals.com").

 

 

 

 

Yes.  There are bugs, and they're working on them.  I never said there weren't.  You're welcome to go find the post that I apparently said that, though.  Let me know when you find it, and good luck on your journey!

 

 

 

 

 

The world isn't black and white, so don't reduce it to that much.  Your initial post used the phrase "I hope that it will include as many systems as PMDG but not as many bugs on it`s release day!"  This inferred that the 777 was very buggy, which really isn't true.  It's not perfect - which I acknowledged in my initial post (which you seem to be ignoring) - but it's certainly not as buggy as many initial releases for FSX, particularly at this level of detail.

 

Furthermore, again, my job is not to sniff around the forum to rebut every negative thing about PMDG (another baseless personal shot - nice try champ).  Most of my posts are to either explain something for someone, or help troubleshoot and issue.  You're welcome to continue your petulant personal attacks on me in an effort to cheapen my opinion however.

 

...when you're done here, I'm sure a political campaign could use your help!  Election day in my state is on Tuesday.  I'm sure you could get a couple deals for last minute attack ads for one of the candidates.

 

 

 

 

Again, when did I say they weren't?  Could you quote that post for me?

 

Saying:

"For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777."

 

...is not saying:

"For what it's worth there really aren't any amazingly show-stopping bugs in the 777."

 

That's right...I didn't say it anywhere, and if you look at my other posts, several of them note an upcoming SP.  So, again, nice shot at putting words in my mouth, but you're gonna have to try harder than that.

 

 

 

 

I have no info on it, so I can't address the question.  You'll note I tend to choose my battles carefully.  When I don't know, I tend to stay out of it (though that's not always the case).  When I do know, and someone is making baseless, particularly negative assertions, I tend to step in and tell them off.

 

...and 'grats!  You made yourself a target by taking a shot at me.

 

Earlier, I simply asked you to elaborate on your earlier statement because I thought it inferred that the 777 was pretty buggy.  I expected your observations, mostly because I could forward on some of the issues if they weren't issues that anyone had seen before.  Instead, you inferred I was some hired fan to take shots at anyone who says anything negative, which you continue to assert for some reason.

 

For what it's worth, I do the same thing for Windows and Apple.  I have friends on both sides of that fence who like to talk trash about the other side.  I sit there and correct their false statements any time I hear them.  Does that mean I'm a Windows or an Apple fan, spokeperson, or hired gun?  Nope.  I just don't like uneducated opinions.  You showed up with one.  I shot it down.  Instead of getting miffed at me, you might want to step back for a moment and look inwardly.

 

As far as their statement on their timeline, that's all on them.  The general consensus, though, is that any statements like that are generic goals, and not set in stone.  That's something they have to answer for themselves.  I didn't say it, so I'm not going to bat for them.

 

 

 

Would you like to continue?

If the DC-6 seems 'slow' just look at it as how long you sit in your computer chair per average flight.  Say you have time for a 4 hour trip.  Doesn't matter if it is a 737 or a 377.  You probably would plan your route for the which ever airplane for the given time available.  You are going to log 4hours of flight time no matter which plane you choose.   Guess it depends if how far you travel in that time is important to you. :wink:

 

If you fly a vintage warbird as realistically as you fly your airliner, a P-51 isn't that much faster than a DC-6...if you fly it at recommended cruise power settings.  Especially those cruise settings for a restored airplane with a 70 year old engine that you don't want to have fail in flight. B)

 

Cheers

TJ

All of a sudden it seems more fun to fire up FSX than reading forum threads.

 

Sorry all, just stating the obvious ...

 

 

You guys should be taken by the scruff of the neck and be forced to look and listen to the start-up of the 4 P&W Double Wasp radials of a DC-6. And if there's any shred of respect available in your minds for aviation history and particularly the venerable and most gracious propliners that paved the way to culminate eventually into your beloved NGX and 777, you'd be anticipating the arrival of the PMDG DC-6 as much as we do.

 

Was that aimed at me, or were you just quoting me to tag onto what I was saying?

 

If you think I'm not a prop lover, I submit the following:

The JS41 is the second-most flown plane in my fleet (even with the shorter legs, giving less flight time / sim hour):

http://www.vataware.com/pilot.cfm?cid=910155

 

I spent three entire days flying around in this, partially aimlessly:

 

 

 

 

I can't wait for the DC-6, honestly.  My commentary was an attempt to stop the thread drift into "well, I'd RATHER have..."

 

Yeah, and I'd rather have an americano over a mocha, but I'm not going to post it here...