Would random failures on provide more realism?

[aceridgey 330]

Hi guys,

 

Been flying the 777 and still no failures or anything..

 

I have it on X4 and I think my let down may be the fact i fly different liveries.

 

Would it be more realistic to fly with random failures on? 

 

IRL I work for an airline with a lot of old aircraft and we have tech issues everyday (as most airlines) I am wanting to see them a little more often.

 

 

Alex

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Alex-

 

One flaw in the way we approach time building on the individual tail numbers is that it becomes a very rare event that you might see something break, especially if you fly more than a single livery.

 

There is a reason why we chose this approach, and it will come into play in the relatively near future- but in the mean time downloading and installing a new livery is essentially like picking up a brand new 777 at Boeing:  You really aren't going to see much...  Something now or then- but not with any regularity.

 

Even using the acceleration feature- you would have a hard time keeping up with the service life time accumulation of an actual airframe.

 

I would try using random if you are looking to simulate things that are a bit older.  You might want to tinker with it a bit when not flying a long/serious/VA flight so that you don't get overwhelmed with flashing lights and horns, buzzers, sirens and callouts. 

[Michael Moe 495]

Just a side Question.

 

When we update with SP´s does this counter also reset ?

 

Michael

[aceridgey 330]

Alex-

 

One flaw in the way we approach time building on the individual tail numbers is that it becomes a very rare event that you might see something break, especially if you fly more than a single livery.

 

There is a reason why we chose this approach, and it will come into play in the relatively near future- but in the mean time downloading and installing a new livery is essentially like picking up a brand new 777 at Boeing:  You really aren't going to see much...  Something now or then- but not with any regularity.

 

Even using the acceleration feature- you would have a hard time keeping up with the service life time accumulation of an actual airframe.

 

I would try using random if you are looking to simulate things that are a bit older.  You might want to tinker with it a bit when not flying a long/serious/VA flight so that you don't get overwhelmed with flashing lights and horns, buzzers, sirens and callouts. 

 

Thanks for the response Robert, appreciated greatly.

 

I think I may turn on random failures and bump up the service rate to 8x + 

 

 

 

There is a reason why we chose this approach, and it will come into play in the relatively near future

 

I'm really intrigued, prepared to expand on this point?

 

Alex

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Alex-

 

Yes, I'd be happy to expand on that point.

 

One of the [Message Garbled] should be very [Message Garbled] and the additional inclusion of [Message Garbled] excited about it.

 

Gonna be cool, huh?

 

 

Michael-

 

In theory- not the counter does not reset.  The time is stored in a unique file that gets created on your machine when you run a new livery...  We intentionally do not overwrite it.  These files are located within the PMDG/PMDG 777X/Aircraft directory...

[aceridgey 330]

 

 

Alex-
 
Yes, I'd be happy to expand on that point.
 
One of the [Message Garbled] should be very [Message Garbled] and the additional inclusion of [Message Garbled] excited about it.
 
Gonna be cool, huh?

 

'Station calling, readability strength one, broken. Could you repeat your message again?'

 

(Ok, ok, understood. Will wait for your ''unbroken'' message soon)