747V3 reverse thrust is wrong

[ArjenVdv 190]

What I meant was I'll trust the people who work on these things, fly these things and have studied these things in detail. I'm impressed, well done on being an Aerospace "student", but until you are qualified in some form on a 747, I'll trust the people that are.

Not sure why the "student" part had to be written between quotes, but okay. No, I will never be a qualified 747 pilot, unfortunately. All I wanted to make clear, is that I am not a layman on the area of jet engines, neither am I an expert. I had hoped to be gaining a bit more credibility with that, but I guess words are just words. 

 

You say you trust the people that are qualifed on the 747, so do I. It seems people are thinking I don't trust the experts, I do. So we are on the same page. It is just that I wondered WHY there is such a big difference of reverse thrust relative to the real plane. Could it be that FSX has a limitation, and a trade-off had to be made to compensate for the limitation? Perhaps 95% of available reverse thrust would create much more stopping power than what is actually realistic? So, PMDG compensated to 58% to obtain the correct stopping power? Just speculation now...

[Flamin_Squirrel 71]

How about you wait until you can test yourself, instead of asking the team to spend their time making screen shots for something that may not be broken?

[Guest BeaverDriver]

And this is what I meant with "PMDG has become like a religion." This is what is wrong with the PMDG community. People are so much in heaven with their products that any critisism is completely unheard of. Such a mentality is very bad for product quality in general...

 

Yeah, agreed that can be a bad thing, and does happen with some developers who do not deserve that kind of respect. However, in the case of PMDG (and they aren't the only ones), it is deserved. The R&D they do is phenomenal, and you'll notice their beta testing takes months, not minutes. So I'm on board with the believers on this one. However, there is one overriding factor in all this - it's pretty hard to give an accurate critique of anything unless you actually have a finished copy :wink: . So let's let them do their jobs and then when we've actually got 40 or 50 hours on the machine, we can offer up some criticisms. My gut tells me there won't be anything this "up front" to criticize with these guys.

 

Glenn

[tcas_climb 45]

Well i agree with the whole PMDG religion. However, being a reasonable person, this product is still in beta, and many things are likely to change, so let us wait until the product is legally in our hands and then we can come at them with pitch forks and video evidence.

[mcbellette 145]

 

 

We have an entire team full of people who have a plastic trump card called a type rating.

 

Robert's got one for the 744, hasn't he?

[737freak 42]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

[tcas_climb 45]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

It's been an attitude adopted long ago. I have been around long enough to see something being pointed out as incorrect by the community only to have it shot down immediately and abruptly, until one day it was finally accepted as being incorrect. Oh well, as I said let's wait til beta is over to see what the end result is.

[Lukas_Mathijsen 41]

This is something -so- obvious I would find it hard to believe -all- of the beta testers, let alone dev crew would have missed it.

 

If you'd have found some obscure, "need to know it's there" type bug it would be different I think.

[Ben Cap 89]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

Comes from up top.... The arrogance of some of the devs on this forum is laughable. One tiny criticism turns into a flamewar.

 

Why can't Mr. Rogers simply try and lend a helping hand instead of always being on the defensive? Yes Mr. Rogers you know alot about planes and that is fine and dandy. It's unfortunate you use your presumed authority on an online forum to berate others. Foolish behaviour. And no, your products are not perfect like you all seem to think.

[DavidP 1,408]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

 

Quite frankly, you've missed the point in my opinion.

 

Pictures, videos appear to be put out there to show everyone what the product is looking like. Rather than sit back and enjoy what we are being shown, every Monday morning quarterback comes out trying to debunk something to do with the beta images they've seen, or to simply try and impress the community on how much they think they know about the aircraft in question. Hence I would expect Kyle's exasperation at this thread and the recent livery thread. They are not asking for bug reports from forum members.

 

I enjoy seeing what the devs are prepared to show us - I don't enjoy the armchair (or desktop) experts trying to impress by picking faults.

 

If the devs refused to show anything prior to release, then everyone will be whining as well - seems they can't win.

 

Just let them post the shots so we can enjoy them.

[Copper. 78]

The point is, OP has stated categorically that PMDG are wrong... With little evidence.

 

A few videos/pictures of the PMDG 744v3 using, potentially, idle reverse thrust, or just above it, isn't good enough to make that call.

 

Don't forget, the sim surface friction behaviour is different to real world. The braking performance might be so good in the sim such that you probably wouldn't need as much reverse thrust as you would in the real world.

[anubhavs 66]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

This. Spot on.

[ClearedtoLand 149]

Guys, it's Christmas, let's all take a break from hammering one another over our shared frailties as human beings and spend the next few days being grateful for all that is good and constructive in the world, while sparing a thought for those who are less fortunate than we are.

 

Merry Christmas to all of you, thanks in particular to the many of you who have helped me solve sim problems without even knowing it, may you all have a peaceful festive season surrounded by your nearest and dearest.

[fluffyflops 1,843]

A simple "Thank you for your feedback, we appreciate it. It has been noted internally to be looked into." could have avoided all of this, IMHO.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand the hostile attitude from this community...

Agreed... You have to remember alot of people in IT, or programming for example have big "people skills" shortfalls.

 

Ive found this in my airlines flight ops department also, where all the people who have had zero experience in dealing with people but have spent there their life's behind pcs running flight plans or dealing with bad slots, if you put them in a room or on the phone dealing with "people" they are ######ed.

 

It's the same in the FS community, put a bunch of "introverted geeks and spotters " onto a forumn and this is what happens.

 

Sad but true

[Flamin_Squirrel 71]

This. Spot on.

No, it's not spot on.

 

Yes, those who believe PMDG could release a product of this complexity completely bug free are clearly mad, and I (we?) don't want them discouraging people from identifying genuine errors.

 

But you can agree with that statement, without having to automatically defend people who insist they've found a bug; especially when they've never even used the product themselves. It'll waste development time investigating something that might not even be an issue.

 

'whiners' and 'fan-boys' both prevent constructive debate. Disagreeing with one does not make you the other.