Good evening all,

 

Don't suppose anyone knows if you can alter the Profile drag in the NGX settings? I would like to increase it a little. 

 

Many thanks.

 

~Shifty~ 

Full names required in the PMDG forums please.

 

Short answer: No.  Reason:  PMDG aircraft air model is for the most part based on work done outside the sim platform and those entries are both very important and meaningless to users.

 

EDIT:  Now I am wondering why in the world would you want to do that?  If you are having trouble with speed then best to ask help in that area because there are good techniques available.

Full names required in the PMDG forums please.

 

Short answer: No.  Reason:  PMDG aircraft air model is for the most part based on work done outside the sim platform and those entries are both very important and meaningless to users.

 

EDIT:  Now I am wondering why in the world would you want to do that?  If you are having trouble with speed then best to ask help in that area because there are good techniques available.

 

Ah ok, no problem, thanks for a reply anyway Dan. 

 

I personally think decelerating from about 250kts to UP speed doesn't react like the real aircraft. It was only a minor thing anyway, its close enough.  

 

Craig Wilson

 

737-300/800 First officer - Jet2.com

Ah ok, no problem, thanks for a reply anyway Dan. 

 

I personally think decelerating from about 250kts to UP speed doesn't react like the real aircraft. It was only a minor thing anyway, its close enough.  

 

Craig Wilson

 

737-300/800 First officer - Jet2.com

 

The real aircraft according to Pilots I have talked to , is pretty slippery and not quick to slow down. 

The real aircraft according to Pilots I have talked to , is pretty slippery and not quick to slow down. 

 

I agree with them, Bob, I just think it's overemphasised in the NGX. For example I use "Gates" in the Real world that work well for slowing down into certain airports, these don't seem to work in the NGX in the same wx conditions.  

 

Craig Wilson

 

737-300/800 First officer - Jet2.com

If you are a 737-800 first officer, your opinion has certain weight. Maybe this in an issue that could be corrected in the NGX v2.... please contribute with more information regarding NGX realism....

If you are a 737-800 first officer, your opinion has certain weight. Maybe this in an issue that could be corrected in the NGX v2.... please contribute with more information regarding NGX realism....

 

...but this somehow invalidates the weight of our entire beta and tech team (the latter requires actual experience on the airframe, and pretty significant experience at that).

 

Not sure I agree with that. Do keep in mind that this is all being done in the confines of Flight Sim.

I have toured the factory at CAE in Montreal,  where they manufacture $20 million + full motion simulators for among other manufacturers, Boeing customers. The data that is part of the functioning of their simulators, in the case of Boeing, is given to them by the Boeing company and is derived from many of the actual test flights that Boeing makes on their aircraft after their manufacture. How a $60 simulator program on a $700 PC is going to be exactly the same, would be a mystery to me. From what I have heard from real pilots. the PMDG products are pretty darn close. 

 

 

The data that is part of the functioning of their simulators, in the case of Boeing, is given to them by the Boeing company and is derived from many of the actual test flights that Boeing makes on their aircraft after their manufacture.

I'm sure you didn't mean that literally, but Boeing doesn't give CAE the the data. They sell them a licence to use it. In cost terms probably the largest single item supplied, one of main the reasons those sims cost that much. The flight tests used are actually those done during aircraft certification. The same also applies with sims for other aircraft manufacturers such as Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer.

I'm sure you didn't mean that literally, but Boeing doesn't give CAE the the data. They sell them a licence to use it. In cost terms probably the largest single item supplied, one of main the reasons those sims cost that much. The flight tests used are actually those done during aircraft certification. The same also applies with sims for other aircraft manufacturers such as Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer.

 

Correct, and I had a lengthy  discussion on this topic alone at CAE. I seem to remember that this data was purchased from Boeing at considerable expense. They even selected data from the most average of the aircraft data they had tested, since all aircraft are rigged a bit differently, they wanted something that was typical. 

Correct, and I had a lengthy  discussion on this topic alone at CAE. I seem to remember that this data was purchased from Boeing at considerable expense. They even selected data from the most average of the aircraft data they had tested, since all aircraft are rigged a bit differently, they wanted something that was typical. 

I'm not so sure about that. Different aircraft fly different certification tests. It wouldn't be possible to choose only test data from one average aircraft.

I'm not so sure about that. Different aircraft fly different certification tests. It wouldn't be possible to choose only test data from one average aircraft.

 

They were discussing  programming  the 767 ER 400 at the time. They took that data from several 767 400 ERs recorded during Boeing's  very extensive flight tests, compared them, and took what they felt was the best representation of an average 767 and that was the data programmed into  the sim's computers. I spent hours with one of the chief engineers of the company, this was not just a casual conversation that I had. He seemed to know what he was talking about. By the way, the sims cost so much, not just from the expense of the data, but the cost involved in  the entire construction of the simulator.  The hydraulic motion platform for the sim that I eventually got a chance to fly for several hours, cost over $2,000,000 and that was a decade ago ( approximately). Everything in the sim has to be exactly like in the real aircraft, the spring tension and  tactile feel, and sound of each and every switch in the cockpit, for instance has to be the same as the real aircraft. The upholstery on the seats, the tracks that the seats slide back and forth on, the rudder pressure, and control pressures, everything must be identical to the real aircraft. When the sim is finished at the factory, the entire unit has to be disassembled, and boxed up, and shipped to the customer. At the customer's site, it has to be totally reassembled, adjusted, and then it is test flown. It then  has to undergo a test flight by the Airline, and the FAA, before it is certified, the same acceptance procedure that an aircraft undergoes.  

They were discussing  programming  the 767 ER 400 at the time. They took that data from several 767 400 ERs recorded during Boeing's  very extensive flight tests, compared them, and took what they felt was the best representation of an average 767 and that was the data programmed into  the sim's computers. I spent hours with one of the chief engineers of the company, this was not just a casual conversation that I had. He seemed to know what he was talking about. By the way, the sims cost so much, not just from the expense of the data, but the cost involved in  the entire construction of the simulator.  The hydraulic motion platform for the sim that I eventually got a chance to fly for several hours, cost over $2,000,000 and that was a decade ago ( approximately). Everything in the sim has to be exactly like in the real aircraft, the spring tension and  tactile feel, and sound of each and every switch in the cockpit, for instance has to be the same as the real aircraft. The upholstery on the seats, the tracks that the seats slide back and forth on, the rudder pressure, and control pressures, everything must be identical to the real aircraft. When the sim is finished at the factory, the entire unit has to be disassembled, and boxed up, and shipped to the customer. At the customer's site, it has to be totally reassembled, adjusted, and then it is test flown. It then  has to undergo a test flight by the Airline, and the FAA, before it is certified, the same acceptance procedure that an aircraft undergoes.  

Bob,

 

I've been involved with designing and building training sims since 1977, so I know exactly what's involved. I've also implemented Boeing aerodynamic data packages on numerous occasions and we've never got to pick and choose what to use. I'm not saying what you were told didn't happen but it isn't the normal practice.

 

As for costs, I stand by what I said.

Bob,

 

I've been involved with designing and building training sims since 1977, so I know exactly what's involved. I've also implemented Boeing aerodynamic data packages on numerous occasions and we've never got to pick and choose what to use. I'm not saying what you were told didn't happen but it isn't the normal practice.

 

As for costs, I stand by what I said.

 

So you designed and built sims on a scale that CAE does, a world leader in this technology. . Why do I find that really hard to believe? 

Kevin and Bob,

 

From what I understand,  Boeing collects Test data from at least the first four aircraft that are in the Test flight program to get the performance data that is published to provide a more accurate picture of what expected performance should be for a production aircraft.   While there may not be large differences in the aircraft they aren't exactly the same obviously.  I don't think it's presented as multiple packages but an average of the test data that is released.