Probably "my" C&D-Startup or "Taxi"-Startup, which I used during writing, messed something up with the Aircraft-INI? I have no idea.

 

I got it now:

It was really due to my "Taxi"-Startup configuration, that includes the info "Show WXR=1", which means "EFIS panel WXR button pushed on". As WXR is not (yet) modelled the letters "WXR" don't appear on the T7X ND but at the same time ND-range-arcs are activated.

As I did not push the WXR button "myself" I got the impression that the TFC button only toggles the TCAS-range-ring and not the ND-range-arcs.

 

BTW: All this fits exactly to what is written on page 1210 in the PMDG-777-FCOMv2.pdf. It says that ND-range-arcs are an option which can be toggled by the TFC and/or WXR buttons on the EFIS control panels.

 

Thanks PMDG! Everything makes sense. B) 

 

Greetings,

Claus

The thing is David, you are inviting this response by being so hard-headed and confrontational about this yourself. Ryan has explained at length how he gathers the information for the .ini files. If a respected airline source provides him details for an airline why should he question that? Yet you somehow seem to expect PMDG to have everything 100% accurate when they have no way of checking. If you know something is wrong it's extremely easy for you to fix it for yourself. You don't need PMDG to fix it for you.

 

PMDG have provided you with a product which includes a powerful and flexible way to control all the various operator options they implemented. Yet you seem to be complaining about this and expecting PMDG to admit it's just a gimmick for getting a few details wrong (in your opinion). If the AF livery download every had US units then it was a mistake in the ini file and not a problem with the options feature itself.

 

You call me hard headed and confrontational when I have received abuse and insults since I started this topic? All I said was the config was wrong based on my observations and wondered if it was a marketing gimic. And this is the type of response I get. Personal attacks on me and my past posting history. Claims of the problem "is with me" claims that I don't know what I'm talking about, that I am an idiot for using a picture off airliners.net.

 

But yes, I can clearly see why you would blame "me" for the insults. Just like a battered wife blames herself, the internet is great at blaming the victim.

You realize that you have had everyone try to contribute and say the exact same thing. Having the developer for the airplane give you the solution on a golden platter should be enough for you to listen to what people are saying. People are trying hard to help you, but you are telling them that they have no clue what they are saying and are wrong. Just try what they are saying. You may be surprised.

 

The people who are insulting me aren't trying hard to help me, people are trying hard to find new ways to insult me. Are you not reading the same topic as me? Because I can quote many posts insulting me for daring to bring up such a claim that the accurate config is not accurate. I have responded to every person trying to give me tips. The only people I supposedly "insult" are the ones who are sitting here insulting me. Do you really want me to post the off topic insults and jokes made at my expense?

 

The developer did not give me a solution, they said the problem was on my end. It appears that in the past weeks while I have not run the PMDG manager, they have updated the accurate config to be more realistic and I missed the fixes. But keep up the insulting me. I find it especially amusing how it was me who claims people have no clue what they are saying, not the other way around.

 

Like the people lecturing me that Air France does have range arcs, angle of attack, and especially funny is the claim that they have no smoking/no electronic signs.

 

What is with the internet and the bandwagon victim blaming?

Hi Folks!

Most people here seem to talk past each other, although everybody might be right at the same time (to a certain degree).

 

I freshly re-downloaded the PMDG AF T7F F-GUOC. This resulted in two different PMDG Aircfraft INIs:

 

Thank you for the info. So PMDG was wrong for many months this incorrect ini was part of the package. I never received any livery update prompt but I know now. One more question about that ini. Does it have enabled the no smoking/no electronic signs?

 

Is it too late now for me to point out a new problem? Since the NGX PMDG have modeled the registration plate wrong in the virtual cockpit.

Calm down or you'll have an aneursysm

Calm down or you'll have an aneursysm

 

 

In order to prevent that aneursysm - can't someone just mark Ryan's post 'best answer' and close this thread? 

 

David, pls. open a separate thread for your "NGX PMDG have modeled the registration plate wrong in the virtual cockpit." issue (in strict compliance with the 'one issue per topic' rule ).    

You call me hard headed and confrontational when I have received abuse and insults since I started this topic? All I said was the config was wrong based on my observations and wondered if it was a marketing gimic. And this is the type of response I get. Personal attacks on me and my past posting history. Claims of the problem "is with me" claims that I don't know what I'm talking about, that I am an idiot for using a picture off airliners.net.

 

But yes, I can clearly see why you would blame "me" for the insults. Just like a battered wife blames herself, the internet is great at blaming the victim.

You aren't a victim of anything. I blamed you for your over reaction to a problem which is easy for the user to fix. I didn't comment on your use of photographs (which are reasonable data to use).

 

Whether your observations were right or wrong your reaction to what you noticed is the problem here. You could simply have reported the discrepancy without blaming PMDG for misrepresenting things.

 

The people who are insulting me aren't trying hard to help me, people are trying hard to find new ways to insult me. Are you not reading the same topic as me? Because I can quote many posts insulting me for daring to bring up such a claim that the accurate config is not accurate. I have responded to every person trying to give me tips. The only people I supposedly "insult" are the ones who are sitting here insulting me. Do you really want me to post the off topic insults and jokes made at my expense?

 

The developer did not give me a solution, they said the problem was on my end. It appears that in the past weeks while I have not run the PMDG manager, they have updated the accurate config to be more realistic and I missed the fixes. But keep up the insulting me. I find it especially amusing how it was me who claims people have no clue what they are saying, not the other way around.

 

Like the people lecturing me that Air France does have range arcs, angle of attack, and especially funny is the claim that they have no smoking/no electronic signs.

 

What is with the internet and the bandwagon victim blaming?

Ryan took a lot of time to explain how the data for the ini files is gathered. He didn't blame you for the problem but suggested reasons why some of the things you reported (such as all European freighters using US units) might be to do with your installation as the ini files in the liveries concerned are correctly metric, as other users have confirmed.

 

I repeat you aren't a victim, you are making yourself out to be a victim. People are trying to help you in their own way. But you have to be willing to be helped. If you bristle at every critical comment it will affect how people reply to you. Even though you now know you can resolve the problem yourself, it seems what you really want is a PMDG apology. I don't think they need apologise to you for anything.

 

Thank you for the info. So PMDG was wrong for many months this incorrect ini was part of the package. I never received any livery update prompt but I know now. One more question about that ini. Does it have enabled the no smoking/no electronic signs?

Did you really expect an email notification every time a livery is updated? Never heard of that happening, though PMDG used to flag updated liveries in their download library. However, your downloaded 777 liveries are clearly flagged as updated if you run the Operations Center. That's up to you to do. Ryan can't do it for you.

 

Is it too late now for me to point out a new problem? Since the NGX PMDG have modeled the registration plate wrong in the virtual cockpit.

Not too late but this is the wrong forum. Start a new thread in the NGX forum. Maybe with a little less attitude.

In order to prevent that aneursysm - can't someone just mark Ryan's post 'best answer' and close this thread?

Only the OP can do that I think, so I don't see that happening just yet.

 

 

Now taking bets on what new insult I will receive because people for some reason can't admit I'm right. It's been over a week. Celebrating 8 days this afternoon of childish insults, and hard headed arrogance.

 

Why hello Freud!

 

I think someone needs to have a look at the concept of Freudian Projection...

Why hello Freud!

 

I think someone needs to have a look at the concept of Freudian Projection...

 

Why is that projection? It isn't a childish insult. I'm waiting for the new round of insults, maybe a bit more personal next time? I'm sure some people can think of a few things. PMDG were wrong in their settings for many months but quietly fixed it without making it an update prompt in the livery installer. I responded to the person who found that a new ini is installed and thanked them. And the people I am talking about are the people like you who didn't know TCAS OFF means you have enabled TFC and the range arcs would display. Or the people who thought freighters come with passenger no smoking signs. Because as you first said "something is wrong with me"

 

And I was right after all, a childish insult from someone trying hard to sound intelligent. I realize now why so many people hate the avsim forums. Come for a discussion, leave after being insulted from all angles by all types of people who want to pick on you rather than discuss the topic, and at the end they post how mean and insult I am. Amazing.

 

 

Because as you first said "something is wrong with me"

 

I revise that to Freudian Projection with a victim mentality...

 

The following are summaries of the posts in discussion with you:

• My very first post had no other language in it other than telling you to ensure it had the accurate config icon.
• The second post questioned your sources and (surprise!!!) actually questioned PMDG's setup of the file.  It also questioned your use of 'gimmick' and pointed to potential user error.
• The third post questioned your source again, and (surprise again!!!) actually supported one of your points.  You might be able to stretch my "blunt" comment into an insult, but you'd have to try pretty hard...
• The fourth one questioned your method, pointed to the manuals, and pointed to the support portal to advise PMDG of the error.
• The fifth one highlighted potential reasons for why you were getting the responses you were getting.  None of those points were insults.  They might not be unbiased, but none of them were insults
• The sixth one (Freudian Projection) might arguably be a shot, but it was more simply to point out that a little look inward would explain a lot of why you get the reaction you do (in support of my earlier points, which have apparently gone unnoticed).

So where - exactly - did I tell you something is wrong with you?  Directly quote that post.

 

 

 

PMDG were wrong in their settings for many months but quietly fixed it without making it an update prompt in the livery installer.

 

Did you even look at the date on that file? 2013-09-02.  That was released after the prior 2013-08-29.  That's 29, 30, 31, 01 and 02.  Five days, and those five days were five months ago...

 

So, no, your glorious, accompanied by trumpets from the sky revelation did not give them the insight to change the file secretly to try and avoid admitting that you were right and they were wrong.

 

I, like Kevin and many of the others, am still wondering what the point is here.  It really seems like you're just trying to get your ego stroked for spotting an error.

 

So!

 

Let's all congratulate David here on his amazing discovery in the error of the config because we all couldn't simply change it ourselves.  Without that revelation, we would be flying erroneously on an inaccurate config that none of us could have ever fixed by clicking two buttons in the MENU pages.  Thanks be to him for saving us from this terrible, and unfortunate ordeal!

Come for a discussion, leave after being insulted from all angles by all types of people who want to pick on you rather than discuss the topic, and at the end they post how mean and insult I am. Amazing.

David, I suggest you re-read your opening post and re-examine whether you really came for a discussion or to point fingers and place blame. It certainly doesn't read like an invitation to an open discussion.

 

Claus's post above shows that from the outset the Air France livery ini file had metric units. If you got US units then it was a problem on your side, not PMDG's.

You call me hard headed and confrontational when I have received abuse and insults since I started this topic? All I said was the config was wrong based on my observations and wondered if it was a marketing gimic. And this is the type of response I get. Personal attacks on me and my past posting history. Claims of the problem "is with me" claims that I don't know what I'm talking about, that I am an idiot for using a picture off airliners.net.

 

But yes, I can clearly see why you would blame "me" for the insults. Just like a battered wife blames herself, the internet is great at blaming the victim.

 

 

The people who are insulting me aren't trying hard to help me, people are trying hard to find new ways to insult me. Are you not reading the same topic as me? Because I can quote many posts insulting me for daring to bring up such a claim that the accurate config is not accurate. I have responded to every person trying to give me tips. The only people I supposedly "insult" are the ones who are sitting here insulting me. Do you really want me to post the off topic insults and jokes made at my expense?

 

The developer did not give me a solution, they said the problem was on my end. It appears that in the past weeks while I have not run the PMDG manager, they have updated the accurate config to be more realistic and I missed the fixes. But keep up the insulting me. I find it especially amusing how it was me who claims people have no clue what they are saying, not the other way around.

Obviously, you were under the impression that I wasn't helping, so I'm curious as to where I insulted you. In my first post, when you said nobody had a response, I told you that Ryan actually did post a response. Your response to me was that that wasn't a response, in which I then responded by stating that it didn't address the specific issue, however, it was a general response as to how they get their information. The third post was in response to your post where you stated that people can't admit you're right. My fourth post, after two other people had responded, was stating that I'm lost as to what you're trying to accomplish here since you were complaining at the time that eight days later, still no "real response." Like I said, if I had been in this position, I would have gotten it figured it out, on my own, mind you, within eight minutes. Meanwhile, you seem bent on getting PMDG to correct something and wait for them to fix something that you could have done yourself. You were given instructions on how to solve the problem by multiple people, yet it seems like you didn't even make an attempt to do anything anybody had suggested.

 

And now you're claiming PMDG quietly fixed the issue to avoid admitting you were right when this was something they apparently fixed five days after the initial file was uploaded, the fix having been uploaded in SEPTEMBER. Yet you said you hadn't run the PMDG operations center in weeks, so that pretty much WAS a problem on your end. So I'm still lost as to what it is you're trying to accomplish here.

 

 

Did you even look at the date on that file? 2013-09-02.  That was released after the prior 2013-08-29.  That's 29, 30, 31, 01 and 02.  Five days, and those five days were five months ago...
 
So, no, your glorious, accompanied by trumpets from the sky revelation did not give them the insight to change the file secretly to try and avoid admitting that you were right and they were wrong.

And the first shots of this entire discussion are fired. In the 68th post 

Came here for "risk of closure" stayed for the popcorn! 

 

Not sure why this has carried on so long, Ryan answered on page 1, he even was nice about it.  

 

 

Apologies, Yori. I stand corrected and your advice was absolutely right, probably the key to the OP's problems.

 

No worries my friend. 

 

First i thought it was a bug. but when i started testing i pretty much came to this conclusion.

David,

 

You're done here. I gave you a perfectly good response and you just continued the attacks and the other assorted BS. Have fun posting your garbage somewhere else.

 

=======

 

For the record just so everyone knows - it is not even possible for us to change the options within an ini without the OC telling you about it via the update function. That's not how it's programmed at all and in fact I have changed a bunch of them via the update process since release as new info was given to me by airline employees. The Air France 777F config has not changed since release - it came directly from a tech-team advisor who flies the airplane for them. If he got something wrong then so be it. This ridiculous notion that we're engaging in some conspiracy to make this one guy look like an idiot on the forum is absurd and I'm not going to stand for it. We have a gigantic thread full of admitted errors and bugs in the product itself and another thread cataloging changes and updates to the liveries and inis. We have nothing to hide here.