itay5344

Next product of PMDG

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, davecessna said:

I worked for one of the companies you mentioned and was present during the litigation process.

That makes no sense. Aircraft manufacturers absolutely need and require Level-D simulators to be produced so that flight crews can be trained to fly the company's aircraft. Most manufacturers are not capable of producing such simulators in-house, and rely on third-party training vendors to create the sims. This is definitely the case with Gulfstream. They do not manufacture Level-D simulators. What would be the point of suing a training vendor?

A desktop CBT is one thing, but creating a full Level-D sim can ONLY be done with the active cooperation and engineering support of the aircraft manufacturer, as many of the flight deck components of the sim have to come from the aircraft maker itself.

If there was an issue, it certainly cannot have been Flight Safety, as they have had a close working relationship with Gulfstream for decades for both pilot and maintenance training.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I still have money on a PMDG detailed Wright Flyer...

#BackToBasics

Share this post


Link to post

An update to the 1900C/D expanding it to study level how about it PMDG??? - David Lee

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, icemarkom said:

From a purely aesthetical point of view, 757 in a landing configuration looks like a gigantic bird of prey ready to grab its victim. I mean, just look at it! Isn't it the most awesome sight?

 

Icelandair_Boeing_757-256_Wedelstaedt.jp

 

As a private pilot, when I hear about a 757 in my vicinity, I immediately "panic". The wake turbulence they make is in its own category (literally).

The most Awesome sight? not really! Thats just my opinion

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I personally dont know how they are going to keep adding new aircraft to their portfolio.  Even when they announce something based on previous experience it will be at least 2 more years away.  The NGX is getting old and could use an update, we still want the 777-200/ER, and the 747-8 is still a long ways away.  If they started working on a new 737 and 777-200, 777-200ER right now it would likely be a few years until we see both of those.  By then it will be time to upgrade the LR and 747 and DC6 LOL.  I could see them adding maybe one more major release and then continuing to update their old releases, or porting some products to xplane.  

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Pilot53 said:

I personally dont know how they are going to keep adding new aircraft to their portfolio.  Even when they announce something based on previous experience it will be at least 2 more years away.  The NGX is getting old and could use an update, we still want the 777-200/ER, and the 747-8 is still a long ways away.  If they started working on a new 737 and 777-200, 777-200ER right now it would likely be a few years until we see both of those.  By then it will be time to upgrade the LR and 747 and DC6 LOL.  I could see them adding maybe one more major release and then continuing to update their old releases, or porting some products to xplane.  

maybe a silly question:  but what's the differece FOR US SIM PILOTS between the 777-200LR and a -200ER? The tank configuration? I find it understandable why there will be a 747-8... but even the 777-300 is (flight deck wise) the same aircraft.. So why do "we" still want e 777-200ER?? Forgive me if I miss something obvious...

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Ephedrin said:

maybe a silly question:  but what's the differece FOR US SIM PILOTS between the 777-200LR and a -200ER? The tank configuration? I find it understandable why there will be a 747-8... but even the 777-300 is (flight deck wise) the same aircraft.. So why do "we" still want e 777-200ER?? Forgive me if I miss something obvious...

It sounds and looks different depending on the engines fitted, its more realistic to operate since it is widely used, it fly's much different due to the fact that the thrust per engine can be as low as 77k vs 110k for the LR and it doesnt have the raked tips which do make a difference.  Not major stuff but i would like to see it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Pilot53 said:

It sounds and looks different depending on the engines fitted, its more realistic to operate since it is widely used, it fly's much different due to the fact that the thrust per engine can be as low as 77k vs 110k for the LR and it doesnt have the raked tips which do make a difference.  Not major stuff but i would like to see it.

Thanks for the clarification =)

Share this post


Link to post

IMHO: Given PMDG's good business relationship with Boeing, I would love to see in this order the 787 series, 737v3 to include the MAX, and 777v2 for the -8 and -9.  This would take us into the middle of the next decade, and the team wouldn't be starting from scratch, given some of the systems commonality in among these airframes.

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps Orbx can do a LEGO airport. If that happens, PMDG can develop some companion LEGO aircraft. I can just imagine taxiing off into the plastic grass with all of those raised bumps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

That makes no sense. Aircraft manufacturers absolutely need and require Level-D simulators to be produced so that flight crews can be trained to fly the company's aircraft. Most manufacturers are not capable of producing such simulators in-house, and rely on third-party training vendors to create the sims. This is definitely the case with Gulfstream. They do not manufacture Level-D simulators. What would be the point of suing a training vendor?

A desktop CBT is one thing, but creating a full Level-D sim can ONLY be done with the active cooperation and engineering support of the aircraft manufacturer, as many of the flight deck components of the sim have to come from the aircraft maker itself.

If there was an issue, it certainly cannot have been Flight Safety, as they have had a close working relationship with Gulfstream for decades for both pilot and maintenance training.

I don't see the value in continuing this debate further, but Gulfstream was unwilling to disclose information to aid in simulation. The company in question did data gathering on an aircraft in field with the permission of the owner in order to create the simulation. This is where the lawsuit came in. Level-D certification only comes after the device is ready for training, not prior to its inception, regardless of aircraft manufacturers' involvement.

It is astronomically expensive to source parts from the OEM, most simulation companies design and manufacture (or source) high fidelity replicas. Furthermore, most sim parts see much more use than their real world counterparts and are over built compared to them. Sometimes hardware/software/flight data must be obtained from the OEM but this is minimized to the fullest extent to increase margins.

You'd be surprised when you say most manufacturers are unable to create simulators; they have the technology, the issue is the margins selling devices is tiny. Personally, I am hoping VR develops into a viable training technology.

That being said, I would love to see a collaboration of LevelD and PMDG on that 757 they are finishing up, even if it means a further delay. Even if the aircraft is nearing end of life, there is nothing in market that fulfills its mission. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, davecessna said:

I don't see the value in continuing this debate further, but Gulfstream was unwilling to disclose information to aid in simulation. The company in question did data gathering on an aircraft in field with the permission of the owner in order to create the simulation. This is where the lawsuit came in. Level-D certification only comes after the device is ready for training, not prior to its inception, regardless of aircraft manufacturers' involvement.

Well, whatever company ran into the issue, it definitely was not Flight Safety. They are so closely interlinked with Gulfstream they are almost a division of the company.

Interestingly, one company which does not play nice with simulation vendors is Honeywell. CAE used to be my employer's maintenance training provider of choice for Dassault Falcon aircraft equipped with the EASy version of the Primus Epic cockpit. For whatever reason, within the last year or so, CAE was unable to renew their license with Honeywell permitting them to simulate or provide information on the Honeywell systems on that aircraft - which made the overall training pretty much useless. I assume money was the issue.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I dislike the 757... there's something in the dimensions which is wrong. Maybe also why I don't like the A380. I like the 767 much better... In my personal view, I think the 747-400 is the most beautiful passenger aircraft ever build - apart from the Concorde, perhaps... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'd actually like to see a 727. Is there anything sexier than Krueger flaps?

But most of you here are too young to remember what a 727 is let alone flown on one!  DB Cooper made that bird famous and they even installed a DB Cooper "switch" - more of a flap actually - after that incident!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, AirCanada235 said:

But most of you here are too young to remember what a 727 is let alone flown on one

Hey Dave, there are plenty of old fogies on this forum who fondly remember the original 3-holer and have many fond flights in her.  In fact, my last one was on United flight and I distinctly remember the landing as I thought we'd not survive it.  Long story short, he got way too slow on final and we slammed into the runway so hard I was quite sure if I survived the impact I would look out and see the struts popping through the wings (a testament to how well she was built that I didn't see that when I looked back at the wings).  

As I watching the approach out the window, and after of many years of pax-seat butt time in airliners, it was obvious to me we were moving way slower over the ground than we usually did at that point in the approach. And when I saw the shadow of the plane rushing up to the aircraft at a very alarming rate I knew we were in trouble. The final confirmation of the botched landing was the roar of the JT8's at full power and the higher than normal AOA I felt sitting pretty far forward in the cabin just before impact.  

We hit so hard some of the O2 masks dropped down, and the pax who had just inhaled when we hit could only let out hi-pitched chirps it was so sudden.  All the others just let out a huge gasp in unison.  The next 2 touchdowns were smoother.:biggrin:  Anyway short story gone long again, we survived (obviously, hehe).  

The 727 is one of my favorites as well, and I love both the Krueger and Fowlers on her and the 747-400.  A joy to watch the great animation on PMDG's Queen.  

What would I like to see from PMDG next? A 787 designed from the start for P3d V4.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Alex Kulak said:

As a ramper here in Phoenix, I have noticed the older the plane the more of a pain it is to work. Now for someone like me who compares real life to sim. I will only flynthem planes that are really easy and fun to work on the ramp. Example the 777 and the 737. I've worked the Airbus series up to a 330 and have worked 76s, 744s, and 76s and to this day I have been laying back on saying this but I think it's time with this post. The one thing I will truly love to see pmdg make is a very very good 73 something way better than the NGX. A better feel to it, newer coding, new features, just practically start from scratch, go out and FLY the real thing, ramp the real thing, get every little spec from the majority of the airlines that have them. And make the plane blow the NGX away. I would pay for something like that. Then again pmdg could probably make something highly more realistic than gsx  strictly for their planes too. That's another idea.

I'm curious about what you mean... How could the NGX get better? Do you have examples? And why isn't the GSX realistic enough? Thanks!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, AirCanada235 said:

I'd actually like to see a 727. Is there anything sexier than Krueger flaps?

But most of you here are too young to remember what a 727 is let alone flown on one!  DB Cooper made that bird famous and they even installed a DB Cooper "switch" - more of a flap actually - after that incident!

Yes, the 727 is pure speed, hands on, adrenaline and knowledge... No computers to aid you... You know or you crash...

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, teopereira said:

Yes, the 727 is pure speed, hands on, adrenaline and knowledge... No computers to aid you... You know or you crash...

I am located near Watkins Glen, NY which has hosted a NASCAR race every August for the past 30 years. My home airport KELM is always full of race-related aircraft in the days leading up to the event. 

Individual drivers often arrive on a variety of biz jets - Lears, Citations etc, while the mechanics and pit crews usually come on larger aircraft. For many years, Jack Roush (famous race team owner, and also famous for crashing his personal airplanes on more than one occasion), owned two 727-200s which were used to transport crews. They would would arrive on Thursday, and depart on Sunday after the conclusion of the race.

I always enjoyed watching them land and (especially) take off. Unfortunately, he sold the 72s a few years ago. Most of teams now fly on a variety of regional jets - mostly CRJs and ERJs. Efficient and reliable but boring compared to the mighty 722!

Although there are still 727s flying, their day is long past. Still - it is such a beloved and iconic airliner that I have to think that it would be a popular and profitable product if PMDG were ever to create one for the FSX/P3D platform.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

After the 777-200ER / A  of course, I would like to see a 787.

 

Alex

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, AirCanada235 said:

I'd actually like to see a 727. Is there anything sexier than Krueger flaps?

But most of you here are too young to remember what a 727 is let alone flown on one!  DB Cooper made that bird famous and they even installed a DB Cooper "switch" - more of a flap actually - after that incident!

I'm old enough to remember to push forward to soften the touchdown....

:)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

The speculation and the arguing over someone else speculation is always entertaining when the latest "whats next for PMDG" comes up.

Share this post


Link to post

My thoughts:

 

1- NGX V3  W / BBJ 7,8,9 -Max Updates and full interior cabin, may be introducing a full business cabin and some variants?  Wow, dreaming is fantastic :-)   -   A new aircraft on top of 64 bits capabilities.

2- 777 V3 -  Updated, full cabin and reworked interios/systems + All Engine Variants

3- 757/767 - Market is hungry for those to be updated...  Very old products around... and that will complete the boeing variety.

4- Why dont you try Business Jets?   - A Gulftream may be?

 

Happy flying!

 

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Raphael_Chacon said:

My thoughts:

 

1- NGX V3  W / BBJ 7,8,9 -Max Updates and full interior cabin, may be introducing a full business cabin and some variants?  Wow, dreaming is fantastic :-)   -   A new aircraft on top of 64 bits capabilities.

2- 777 V3 -  Updated, full cabin and reworked interios/systems + All Engine Variants

3- 757/767 - Market is hungry for those to be updated...  Very old products around... and that will complete the boeing variety.

4- Why dont you try Business Jets?   - A Gulftream may be?

 

Happy flying!

 

Why are you so interested in a full interior cabin??

Now that we have 64-bit, I understand that it's possible, but isn't the power better spend elsewhere? Just because we have more memory available, doesn't mean we should turn the whole simulator into a slide-show.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Raphael_Chacon said:

My thoughts:

 

1- NGX V3  W / BBJ 7,8,9 -Max Updates and full interior cabin, may be introducing a full business cabin and some variants?  Wow, dreaming is fantastic :-)   -   A new aircraft on top of 64 bits capabilities.

Doubt we're going to see Max updates for the NGX any time soon, the aircraft is too new and not enough data exists.

21 minutes ago, Raphael_Chacon said:

2- 777 V3 -  Updated, full cabin and reworked interios/systems + All Engine Variants

Not sure why the systems need to be reworked on the 777, they're spot on as it is? By all engine variants I assume you mean the 777-200/ER with RR, PW & GE engines, in which case I agree I'm desperate for it!

21 minutes ago, Raphael_Chacon said:

3- 757/767 - Market is hungry for those to be updated...  Very old products around... and that will complete the boeing variety.

4- Why dont you try Business Jets?   - A Gulftream may be?

 

Happy flying!

 

Full cabins in the 747 and 777 are going to kill performance and in this level of sim are not needed, most users aren't going to be looking at the cabin. For comparisons sake, have a look at the performance of the "other" 777 for FSX and see how it runs like a slideshow.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, PMDG777 said:

Doubt we're going to see Max updates for the NGX any time soon, the aircraft is too new and not enough data exists.

Not sure why the systems need to be reworked on the 777, they're spot on as it is? By all engine variants I assume you mean the 777-200/ER with RR, PW & GE engines, in which case I agree I'm desperate for it!

Full cabins in the 747 and 777 are going to kill performance and in this level of sim are not needed, most users aren't going to be looking at the cabin. For comparisons sake, have a look at the performance of the "other" 777 for FSX and see how it runs like a slideshow.

+1

Share this post


Link to post

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