I think the point is that although the 777 - has been produced very accurately by PMDG - it is a a fairly boring plane too fly.  Why..?

 

1. Limited on where you can take it to an extent - so some of the cool approaches and airports that the mediums like the NGX and (very soon I believe to be released A320 from FSLABS) can make the 777 can't - Approaches like Madeira, Gibraltar, SABA, LOWI etc are all out. Yes you can plan intricate long haul flights - but you can get as much fun simulating planning etc with the medium stuff.

 

2. The level of automation in this aircraft - renders the pilot almost useless for most of the time - less switches to flip, even engine start involves next to nothing compared to the NGX, no waiting for numbers etc

 

Ive done quite a bit of long haul hopping with it - and some medium hops - and quite competent at flying it now, don't get me wrong Im impressed with the detail and accuracy PMDG have put into the plane - but I can see why the OP is getting bored with it. 

 

I eagerly await the next SP for the NGX to fix some of its issues and add WX radar etc as its a far more fun plane to zip around the world - but equally I think the new 747 will become far more popular than the 777 when its released, as it will have the  long haul capabilities - but have far more manual input needed from the pilot.

 

My best advice to the OP is fly online - find a busy part of the world, with manned ATC and plenty of other traffic and using VATSIM plan some trips in and out of these airports, online flying brings the fun back into it, especially as you have more urgency to comply and meet the needs of ATC etc, getting streamed into heathrow and being acutely aware of needing to manage speed for spacing, and getting off the runway quickly due following traffic adds the interest back into flying the computer.

 

of course Kai Tak is still best approach to fly where a heavy can land.

 

For clarification FUN=involvement and learning, before I get accused of needing to shoot things.

I might add, if you are practising for your PPL in a 777, you may be sadly disappointed when you go to do your first flight on a real airplane and see for all intents and purposes the "default Cessna" in front of you. No FMS here. So to practise for your PPL, something like the Carenado Cessnas might be a better option.

 

did you read what I wrote?

 

FSX is the best way to practice your checkride

 

It's the best way to practice your PPL, IFR, GPS, etc.

 

Or if you are a pilot who has always dreamed of flying a big airplane like a 777 but wont get a chance for at least a few years, the 777X is the best way to fly real routes and get that experience and enjoyment.

I think the point is that although the 777 - has been produced very accurately by PMDG - it is a a fairly boring plane too fly.  Why..?

 

1. Limited on where you can take it to an extent - so some of the cool approaches and airports that the mediums like the NGX and (very soon I believe to be released A320 from FSLABS) can make the 777 can't - Approaches like Madeira, Gibraltar, SABA, LOWI etc are all out. Yes you can plan intricate long haul flights - but you can get as much fun simulating planning etc with the medium stuff.

 

2. The level of automation in this aircraft - renders the pilot almost useless for most of the time - less switches to flip, even engine start involves next to nothing compared to the NGX, no waiting for numbers etc

 

Ive done quite a bit of long haul hopping with it - and some medium hops - and quite competent at flying it now, don't get me wrong Im impressed with the detail and accuracy PMDG have put into the plane - but I can see why the OP is getting bored with it. 

 

I eagerly await the next SP for the NGX to fix some of its issues and add WX radar etc as its a far more fun plane to zip around the world - but equally I think the new 747 will become far more popular than the 777 when its released, as it will have the  long haul capabilities - but have far more manual input needed from the pilot.

 

My best advice to the OP is fly online - find a busy part of the world, with manned ATC and plenty of other traffic and using VATSIM plan some trips in and out of these airports, online flying brings the fun back into it, especially as you have more urgency to comply and meet the needs of ATC etc, getting streamed into heathrow and being acutely aware of needing to manage speed for spacing, and getting off the runway quickly due following traffic adds the interest back into flying the computer.

 

of course Kai Tak is still best approach to fly where a heavy can land.

 

For clarification FUN=involvement and learning, before I get accused of needing to shoot things.

 

Then use time compression or fly the 777 on shorter routes in Asia. Or fly a different plane completely. The point I was countering was the idea that you need to only do wacky things like landing on a grass airstrip, or do failures, otherwise there is not point to using fsx.

 

With the 777X I now understand all the systems and switches, know where everything is, and can sit in the cockpit and not be overwhelmed for a checkride. I am way ahead of all the pilots just hired who have only read the manual.

OK: I tried many suggestions here,  KDCA 19, Rio SBGL to SBRJ's short runway, KLGA Visual 31.  Actually they are pretty easy as the 777 stops in 3,000 ft it seems.  I'll see if I take off at Mt Everest base LUKLA's 1500 ft long runway.  I'll need some head wind and flaps 15.

 

I got my take off and landing on the same runway down to 2 mins and 5 secs.  I wonder if anyone can top  that.  I am working in the challenges listed in this post. I'll knock thm all off soon -maybe not100% successfully buy I'll let you know - off to Everest, 

If you want to be more involved, the 777 is too automated. Go pick up the great Majestic Q400, and learn how to fly it. I personally don't like the cockpit flow and placement, but it keeps you involved as a pilot. And it looks amazing.