Sign in to follow this  
kevinh

Engine Starting Question

Recommended Posts

OK, please don't get me wrong in this post, I write this with the best intentions!!

 

Maybe the feeling gets amplified, after being totally immersed with all the beautiful aspects of the DC6, and then the arcade 'click here to start' option feels worse than ever. Also the 'start' is the first impression people get from this product, but this alone does not support bad reviews.

 

However, that said I agree that the starting is totally not in line with this (and other) magnificent PMDG products, and hence the reason why people are asking questions about it.

 

PMDG's response to those questions in this forum sound like:

 

It's too complicated for you flight-sim people, and that's why we keep it simple. So you can manage.

 

This is not who we are. this is not what PMDG is about, this is a very insulting waiver and it is not the truth.

 

We are long time flight simmers, most of us have studied in the field of aviation and/or have a pilot licence. We are not arcade computergame players. We are the simulator community and we are PMDG customers. Most of all we take our hobby serious. a bad insult like that, creates bad reviews. not good!

 

I am speculating here, but could it be that the realistic start was in development but either not finished or buggy, and hence removed for the release version?

I am thinking this based on a video of one of the beta testers and I quote:

 

"I'm not going through the full start up, we will cover the intricacies of this aircraft in a complete series on this aircraft, it is that complex and awesome"

 

Really?

 

"I don't like the start procedure of the DC-6. I wish that it was set up like ____." Fill in the blank without the snark. I can't guarantee that anything will happen, but at least people will know what you all are looking for.

 

"Easy start ON"

As it is now.

 

"Easy start OFF" 

As real as it gets, period. I know PMDG can handle this fine, and so can we. Make it in line with the rest of the product!

 

Maybe you are too busy now, perhaps with the 747? fine! take your time! I won't mind waiting another few months for a patch! In the mean time we can enjoy the DC6 as it is now and be grateful for it, but please don't tell us this mickey mouse click to start is final.

 

Thanks for reading and your understanding.

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

 

 


This is not who we are. this is not what PMDG is about, this is a very insulting waiver and it is not the truth.

 

No. What's not the truth is your misrepresentation of what I've said. I have literally said - this entire time - that it is a multi-person operation, which cannot be realistically simulated 100% in the simulator. As such, we went with a simplified example.

 

 

 


I am speculating here, but could it be that the realistic start was in development but either not finished or buggy, and hence removed for the release version?

 

You're speculating. The start sequence has been like this since the beginning because, as I noted above, it requires multiple people and you are single person.

 

 

 

There's no need to add drama into situations where it doesn't belong, so don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


We are long time flight simmers, most of us have studied in the field of aviation and/or have a pilot licence. We are not arcade computergame players. We are the simulator community and we are PMDG customers. Most of all we take our hobby serious. a bad insult like that, creates bad reviews. not good!

 

I think reducing the flight simulator community to aviation professionals is not very realistic. Maybe that's true for you and your peers, or maybe even for the majority of PMDG customers (but even this I doubt), but the flight simulation community as a whole is very colorful, and I feel insulted that you exclude me from this community with your statement.  :mad:

 

 

Well.

 

Actually I do not feel insulted. But I could not resist to write it that way, because I don't think that PMDG's statement was meant as an insult.

 

Besides, all this "oh we are so serious with our hobby" stuff which you can read again and again by some people on nearly all flight simulation websites (and which I discussed at the European Flight Sim Conference 2016 in Berlin this March) is not good for the community as a whole. I suspect there wouldn't be many PMDG products if there weren't also a lot of users who are happy with even the simplest Carenado aircraft. Because the market would be too small if there were only aviation professionals and "pure" PMDG enthusiasts out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are all missing the point. maybe I didn't write it down perfectly but please let me try and explain again.

 

I know PMDG did not MEAN to insult us, but it can be interpreted like that.

 

There is a difference between a multi-crew operation and the ability of a flightsim operator to handle 4 switches at the same time. I still think this is a very weak excuse for simplifying the start up to this level. but I am afraid I have to live with it. Me and many others will see this as a huge disappointment and not what we expected from PMDG. As Robert said himself. PMDG'ed is already synonymy for making it absurdly realistic. this start sequence simply does not fit that description.

 

Also I never meant to insult who ever you are Mario Donick, I fail to see how I could have possibly insulted you in all this. please explain or even beter, never mind if you don't.

 

Lastly, I really love the DC6 product you have created, every bit of it, except the start up.. so no drama...

 

Peace?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Also I never meant to insult who ever you are Mario Donick, I fail to see how I could have possibly insulted you in all this. please explain or even beter, never mind if you don't.

 

As I said, you did not really insult me. But as much as you felt insulted by PMDG because they said a real engine start would be too difficult in the simulation, I could have felt insulted by your post, because I see myself as part of the flight simulation community, even though I'm neither an aviation professional nor (at least until yesterday) a PMDG customer. In your definition of the flight simulation community, I would not be part of this community, and this could be interpreted as insult.

 

Anyway, never mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"most of us" means I don't exclude anyone

 

"Easy start ON" As it is now. = Don't worry I've got you covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


"most of us" means I don't exclude anyone

 

But it makes the others seem irrelevant for the community and the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have literally said - this entire time - that it is a multi-person operation, which cannot be realistically simulated 100% in the simulator. As such, we went with a simplified example.

...and that is the entire problem. There is no need to simplify the start procedure at all.

 

Rob Smith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and that is the entire problem. There is no need to simplify the start procedure at all.

Rob Smith.

If we made it 100% realistic, I can guarantee that you, as a single person, would not be able to start it using the proper procedure. How are you imagining that you could? I'm genuinely curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we made it 100% realistic, I can guarantee that you, as a single person, would not be able to start it using the proper procedure. How are you imagining that you could? I'm genuinely curious.

 

I can't agree with that. All A2A aircrafts have fully realistic starting procedures and I never had a problem to start them. 
 
The key is simply that the starter switch stays in the pressed position.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that I don't think A2As radials are 100% accurate on startup. I think they may be 90% but as stated before, we do have limitations within the sims that have to be worked out. I will say that the 90% realistic start of A2A would be sufficient to probably 99% of simmers. Let me preface this by saying I'm not comparing A2A and PMDG. They both have a great place in the swimming community and both do excellent work.

 

Without knowing jack about sim coding, I can respect needing to "simplify" things due to the limitations of the sim, as well as only having one person with a finite amount of mouse buttons doing the job of three aviators, six hands and six eyes. If I may add my suggestion that I think has been said in different ways on here already:

 

Make the simplified aspects hidden somewhere else. i.e. Making the switches independent and able to be held down with a right click of the mouse. Maybe making just the starter switch connected to the "brake" of the prop so when it is depressed, it simulataniously releases the prop and cranks the engine. I would also be ok with the AFE doing the starts "realistically" as if you did have a full crew and let the animations reflect a genuine start as you would encounter on the real aircraft...such as counting blades and individual switch movement.

 

Again, I completely respect the limitations of any given simulator, but if at all possible, try and hide the "cheats" elsewhere in the coding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All A2A aircrafts have fully realistic starting procedures and I never had a problem to start them.

 

Put simply, they do not. They've used side steps as well, but they do make you click more things. Clicking more things does not mean more realistic.

 

This is the crux of the issue in this entire thread:

People are making assertions about a start sequence that they have no clue about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remind me again why we "fly" our computers?

 

Safe to say we are not going to agree here.

 

Rob Smith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put simply, they do not. They've used side steps as well, but they do make you click more things. Clicking more things does not mean more realistic.

Could you please explain that a bit more? You can start the A2A T-6 with the procedures from the real manual without any shortcomings or issues. For me that is as realistic as it can get in a flight simulator.

 

People are making assertions about a start sequence that they have no clue about.

Isn't that kind of derogatory? Yes, most of us a have never started a real radial engine. But we are all aviation enthusiast and very interested in aircrafts and the procedures to operate them. For me, studying the real manuals and applying what I have learned in the simulator is a big part of the fun. And to be honest: Starting a radial engine is no black magic. It's a pretty straightforward process. And it can be simulated very well in a flight simulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like there's a difference in terms here. When I'm saying "realistically," I mean that if a button needs to be clicked and held, then you're clicking and holding that button for the duration of the start. This being the case for both the start and the safety, that kinda rules it out from the start, unless you have hardware that you can assign to all of those things (not quite a reasonable request with 4 buttons alone for an engine start, much less the 4 more toggles for the mags, and yet another 4 toggles for the mixtures).

 

That being said, there are a number of companies that use some sort of method of giving the user a concession. To me, as soon as this is done, it's no longer 100% realistic. As Ken noted, above, it's 90-99%, which in most people's eyes (mine included) is good enough. While I personally wouldn't call that fully realistic, I can see how I'm parsing words here to an extreme degree (to the level of pedantry - yes, I even take shots at myself).

 

 

 

It all boils down to this:

When this was discussed this a year ago, it was obvious it could be done, but it was going to be really tough for users to get right (this generates quite a bit of support traffic, even when things are correctly difficult), and it was going to require some dev time to really work it through correctly. As a result, it got put on hold for a future update.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the clarification, Kyle! Now I understand what you meant  :smile:

 

In that regard, I'm very happy with 90% to 99% as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this