Best explanation I have read, Alan, to debunk this 'wrong geometry' complaint that originally flourished when the 737NGX was released.

6 minutes ago, vc10man said:

Best explanation I have read, Alan, to debunk this 'wrong geometry' complaint that originally flourished when the 737NGX was released.

The geometry is wrong as Alan confirms, we all know the reasons but it still does not make the geometry correct, I cannot see where you get the idea that he "debunks" the complaint, rather he confirms it.

 

glynn jones

 

Yup, I do indeed confirm it is 'wrong', but also point out that it was deliberately done 'wrong' for reasons which were very sensible, in order to make it usable more in the manner that a real 737 pilot would. That is to say, a 737 pilot in the real world (or indeed the pilot of any other aeroplane for that matter) does not need to hold down Control+Shift+Return/Delete or whatever whilst they are busy on final approach in order to be able to see the runway properly. This was particularly important in the PMDG 737 NG, since it employs an actual working collimated HGS display, which is in fact probably the most impressive feature of the PMDG add-on. There certainly would have been more complaints about matters if PMDG had not done that thing right and it's one of the reasons why it costs more than the iFly 737, which doesn't have a collimated display. Not that I don't like the iFly one too, but from a technical standpoint, the PMDG's HGS is the one which works like the real thing, and that in part, is due to them making a pragmatic design decision with regard to the cockpit's geometry.

56 minutes ago, Glynn said:

The geometry is wrong as Alan confirms, we all know the reasons but it still does not make the geometry correct, I cannot see where you get the idea that he "debunks" the complaint, rather he confirms it.

 

glynn jones

 

PMDG have acknowledged all along that the geometry was deliberately made that way because of the HUGS. There's no secret to this.

Truly looking forward to an NGX compatible with P3Dv4.

This means one item less on the list before I'll update to P3Dv4.

"Real" geometry or having functioning HUGS? I'd go with the HUGS every day. I understand that we all have different tastes, but having PMDG release the plane with a working HUGS is more important to me, then a geometry fix that may delay the release. If I was really upset about PMDG not including a feature that I felt was really important, then I just wouldn't buy versus complaining in every 737 thread about a geometry fix.

 

Maybe it's an unintended compliment to PMDG that people expect perfect geometry and fully functioning systems for >$200...

2 hours ago, Glynn said:

where you get the idea that he "debunks"

Okay, maybe my choice of terminology was not correct, but what Alan did go some way to elucidate was that---if my memory serves me correct, I do recall reading quite a few 'moans' about the cockpit geometry when the 737NGX was released---it was not deliberately made wrong. Alan, IMHO, has gone aways to explain why it was not feasible to replicate this 'geometry' , in a sim on a PC monitor.

Splitting hairs really!

Why do people care so much about "geometry"?  Are they real life 737 pilots that are that offended that a couple things aren't replicated perfectly?  Alan's response makes perfect sense from a logical and technical standpoint.  PMDG has a well-deserved reputation for making quality and accurate models, why even question them in the first place? I just don't get what the big deal is

13 minutes ago, blaird22 said:

Why do people care so much about "geometry"?  Are they real life 737 pilots that are that offended that a couple things aren't replicated perfectly?  Alan's response makes perfect sense from a logical and technical standpoint.  PMDG has a well-deserved reputation for making quality and accurate models, why even question them in the first place? I just don't get what the big deal is

+++!

I think the people that dont care about the geometry dont realize just how far off it is.  The 737 has a cramped flight deck with small windows, the ngx in uts current state just doesnt feel like a 737.  They should have at least made an option to have the correct vc without the hgs.  To ruin the flightdeck of a pmdg airliner for an option that not all airliners use is silly imo.   Also since its been several years since release what makes you think they havent figured out a way to make the hgs work with the correct cockpit geo by now?  Maybe p3d will make this easier.

22 minutes ago, blaird22 said:

Why do people care so much about "geometry"?  Are they real life 737 pilots that are that offended that a couple things aren't replicated perfectly?  Alan's response makes perfect sense from a logical and technical standpoint.  PMDG has a well-deserved reputation for making quality and accurate models, why even question them in the first place? I just don't get what the big deal is

Because the vc is staring you right in the face the entire time you are flying.  It is the most important visual aspect of a simulation.

It's geometrically wrong, grammar is wrong and the entire airplane is wrong......

 

David

3 hours ago, vc10man said:

it was not deliberately made wrong

Of course it was deliberately made wrong, it was made wrong to accommodate the collimated Hud. nothing wrong with that, they did what was needed.

We all know this, we have all see it with our own eyes, PMDG acknowledge it.

glynn jones

 

4 hours ago, Pilot53 said:

Because the vc is staring you right in the face the entire time you are flying.  It is the most important visual aspect of a simulation.

I would just as soon you remove the product and not be bothered by it, and just "let it go."

 

On 7. 7. 2017 at 11:49 AM, JMoyam said:

some first shoots on P3D v4 for the most popular addon in the entire sim world guys i hope you like it

2

Thanks for the great shots, may I ask you if you use PTA or Reshade? If yes, then what preset?

Cheers