FS2004 B747-400 FMC Issue

[Ramjett 27]

Pretty sure I read somewhere that PMDG is no longer providing any type support for any of their Double Legacy (I say double because it seems all the "Legacy" aircraft are older FSX ones, at least in the B747-400 Legacy thread) FS2004 aircraft.  That's a shame, because issues and questions do pop up from time to time and there really is no where to get answers without search after search after search.  I purchased the FS2004 versions of the PMDG B737NG -600/-700 and the -800/-900 expansion pack, the B747-400 Queen of the Skies (now downgraded to Dowager Queen I guess), and the B1900D.  I still use all three, four if you count the expansion pack, quite frequently and get just as much pleasure from them as I did eight years ago when I bought them.  Luckily I have never had a issue with them and even a reinstall on a new system in 2014 went flawlessly, so there is that.  Still, it's sad to think that if I ever do, I am probably out of luck with getting any type of help from PMDG, but I hope not.  Won't know until and if such an issue arises.

I mention this because a VATSIM friend is having an issue with the FS2004 B747-400 and I have been trying to help him, unsuccessfully, because I cannot reproduce the problem on my Dowager QOTS.  Seems his FMC, which does have the latest (and same as me) AIRAC from Navigraph, keeps wanting to fly a previously flown route, no matter what route he manually places in the FMC.  The FMC accepts his manual route, but as soon as he advances throttles the FMC reverts to an old route and tries to fly to the first waypoint in the old route, not the current manually input route he just entered.  It is not a "saved" (or CO Route) route the FMC reverts to, just a previously manually entered route.  It's as if the previous route was never "completed", yet he assures me it was and even then, once he shuts his simulator down it should clear the FMC anyway.  Mine does.  I have had him look in the default FS9 Default Flight Plans folder and in the FS9/PMDG/Flightplans/ folder to see if the previous route is stored in either place.  It is not.

Really confused as to why this is happening to him and, sadly, there is no where to turn for help except here and from what I have seen in the Legacy threads, "Legacy" does not mean FS2004.  As I said, that is sad, because when you purchase a product you expect support for that product, certainly not warranteed support, but support nonetheless.  I can still go to the Ford Dealership and get parts for my 1971 Ford 4WD pickup.  Yes, they are more expensive than at a parts store, but they will help me and some parts must be obtained there.

Anyway, I don't expect any answers, but I somehow feel better knowing at least I tried to help a fellow VATSIMMER and Dowager QOTS owner.

Randy Tyndall

Win7 pro 64-bit, FS2004, FSX, Living Life and Loving It

 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2017 by Ramjett
Corrected Spelling

[scandinavian13 5,192]

3 hours ago, Ramjett said:

I can still go to the Ford Dealership and get parts for my 1971 Ford 4WD pickup.  Yes, they are more expensive than at a parts store, but they will help me and some parts must be obtained there.

That's a bit of a misleading comparison. Your comparison is more akin to our keeping the legacy activation routine running for the FS9-era products, so that people can still use the products they paid for. Additionally, the services you reference are directly paid. Our support is not.

You're not going to find many tech companies providing support for 10+ year old software.

3 hours ago, Ramjett said:

I mention this because a VATSIM friend is having an issue with the FS2004 B747-400 and I have been trying to help him, unsuccessfully, because I cannot reproduce the problem on my Dowager QOTS.

Usually, this would be an indication that it isn't the code, as the code on your machine is the same code as on his machine. There's some other external variable that he has introduced.

[Ramjett 27]

36 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:

That's a bit of a misleading comparison...

 

You are right and I can see that it would be taken that way, but it was the only comparison I could think of at the time, Kyle.  For that I apologize.  I'm also rather surprised that no one has joined in and reminded me that I was not actually purchasing a virtual aircraft or software, only a "license" to use PMDG's software, which they retain ownership of, but I am aware of that and I have used my "license" faithfully for eight years.  The software has performed flawlessly for me, with few exceptions, and those exceptions were always within my system that i recall, not the PMDG software.

I have never been disappointed with the products, but beyond those three (four counting the -800/-900 FS2004 expansion) I have never purchased another PMDG product, although I am extremely interested in the DC-6B for FSX, because of the "FS2004 is done" decision.  I understand marketing and going where the market leads and at the time it led to FSX.  Now it leads to P3D (which is sort of still FSX) and xPlane and maybe DTG, perhaps not.

Ending support for a product faithfully purchased, however, tends to cause me concern.  I still see many of the same names within PMDG that I remember back when FS2004 was "the bomb" and PMDG the aircraft to have (as it still is), so the knowledge base hasn't been lost, just the interest within PMDG.  My interest, on the other hand, hasn't waned.  This is probably not a better comparison than my Ford one, but what if Robert's interest, fascination, love of the DC-6 hadn't materialized into the PMDG DC-6 Cloudmaster? 

As I said, probably another bad comparison for which I will apologize in advance, but I guess my point is just because something is old (like FS2004 and the PMDG products for it) it doesn't mean the interest is not there.  And with that interest, even though, perhaps especially because, it is an aged platform, issues will potentially arise and those of us diehard PMDG fans from ages ago will have nothing to expect from the company we once thought would never leave us behind.

The one "issue" I can recall posting here about was for the FS2004 PMDG B737NG -800 expansion.  In the base -700 there was a provision (and instructions provided) for placing a chart on the clipboard in the 3D cockpit.  That same chart texture and set of instructions was in the -800 expansion, yet the chart would never show for me.  I posted here asking if the chart could be displayed.  Lots of views, but not one single response, not even from anyone within PMDG.  I accepted that.  It was a legacy product (or should I say double legacy) and support was non-existent.  Still it was a simple question that could be answered "yes, it can be displayed" or "no it can't".  Hopefully, if the answer was "yes..." then someone would tell me how.

Same with my friend's issue.  I agree since I could not reproduce the problem, the issue lay within his system, not the product or the AIRAC.  I don't know "code".  He doesn't know "code".  Many, if not all, of the staff at PMDG does know code and might have an idea what my friend has done that is making the same code "read" correctly on my system and incorrectly on his.  Not that the code is wrong, it plainly isn't, since they are identical I presume.  There are thousands of different system configurations if not more...that might be an exaggeration...I don't know "systems" well either.  There are many different operating systems.  To expect PMDG to stay abreast of all these is a ridiculous expectation, even I know that.

But to be ignored, as I was in my post, is disheartening and even worse is the dreaded, "Sorry, support for legacy products is not provided" as another developer always replies, usually with a caveat to buy their FSX product instead and receive full support.  I wonder with P3Dv4 and xPlane11 if or when that, too, will go away.

I've grown long-winded, but I hope I have remained respectful throughout this discourse.  I no longer support that "other" developer who told me to buy their FSX product to get support and while I no longer 'support" PMDG financially I have never said a disparaging word about them, other than that I dislike their "end of support" decision.  I continue in many different forums (or is it forii?) to acknowledge PMDG as the premier developer, I just choose not to purchase for fear of being abandoned.  That fear of abandonment, with P3Dv4 and xPlane11 on the cutting edge, is the only thing keeping me from the PMDG DC-6 for FSX.

I'll shut up now, but thanks for listening and thanks for responding, Kyle.

Randy Tyndall

[himmelhorse 1,276]

Randy,

Please do not lose sight of the fact that quite a few developers and now abandoning FSX and all before. SAD but true.

Unfortunately, since the recent advent of electricty the world has gone mad. Just imagine what Mr Trump would do if he had access to bows and arrows LOL.

This is and has been an unwanted decision by PMDG but lets look at, if possible, the numbers of consumers who, too, have left FS9 behind and "moved on". Please note that I am not one of them and still use FA9 on a daily basis when the afore mentioned electricity supply allows me to here in Indonesia.

So, please continue to use the aged, ancient, outdated FS9 and enjoy all whilst you can. Unfortunately, comments about lack of support and lack of new products for this platform are neither helpful nor likely to garner any change nor, in fact, any support on a large scale basis.

Going one step further, other than a full uninstall and re-install, including deletion of your relevant (if not all) flight sim files in "documents or where  he may have have placed them, I cannot think of where his problem may lie.

Good luck and let us know if a resolution is found

Regards

Tony Chilcott

 

[DavidP 1,408]

Should support still be available for MS-DOS??

[Captain Kevin 586]

48 minutes ago, Ramjett said:

The one "issue" I can recall posting here about was for the FS2004 PMDG B737NG -800 expansion.  In the base -700 there was a provision (and instructions provided) for placing a chart on the clipboard in the 3D cockpit.  That same chart texture and set of instructions was in the -800 expansion, yet the chart would never show for me.  I posted here asking if the chart could be displayed.  Lots of views, but not one single response, not even from anyone within PMDG.  I accepted that.  It was a legacy product (or should I say double legacy) and support was non-existent.  Still it was a simple question that could be answered "yes, it can be displayed" or "no it can't".  Hopefully, if the answer was "yes..." then someone would tell me how.

A couple points I need to address here. The first point is that PMDG staff may or may not see posts on the forums, so you may be better off submitting a support ticket to ensure that they see it. That said, the views to a thread mean nothing. You don't know who looked at the thread. Perhaps nobody at PMDG actually saw it. Perhaps somebody read through it just for the sake of reading it and didn't have an answer to your solution. I know I read a lot of threads on here, but I won't respond unless I think I can help solve an issue or if I'm trying to address another point that somebody else pointed out. Perhaps people read through the thread multiple times. You wouldn't know.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

55 minutes ago, Ramjett said:

You are right and I can see that it would be taken that way, but it was the only comparison I could think of at the time, Kyle.  For that I apologize.

No need to apologize. I didn't take it to be intentionally misleading. A fan of metaphor, myself, I'm sure I've made similar comparisons in the past, unintentionally. I appreciate that you can look back on it, and see both sides.

56 minutes ago, Ramjett said:

Many, if not all, of the staff at PMDG does know code and might have an idea what my friend has done that is making the same code "read" correctly on my system and incorrectly on his.  Not that the code is wrong, it plainly isn't, since they are identical I presume.  There are thousands of different system configurations if not more...that might be an exaggeration...I don't know "systems" well either.  There are many different operating systems.  To expect PMDG to stay abreast of all these is a ridiculous expectation, even I know that.

This is the issue, though. Over the years, not only are there different configs, Windows gets updated, drivers get updated, hardware gets updated, and so on. Eventually, the progress will render the old code incompatible. Unless you freeze your system in time, it will eventually shun the old code, and, unless the developer is perpetually updating the product, it's going to hit a wall.

There's a tradeoff here:
Do you as a company charge people a subscription so that the continual development to keep a product up to date is covered? ...or do you charge a one-time fee so that the development is covered, but you acknowledge that at some point, it will become unsupportable? If you update your code continually, you will end up causing issues for the people who do not ever update their computers, as the code will start using OS and code elements that the older systems don't have. If you don't update your code, the newer systems will end up leaving them in the dust, where the old code is unsupported by the OS and code libraries.

Same thing with planes, honestly...
NDBs are pretty simple to maintain, so some are still around, but as they die off, they won't be replaced (here in the States, anyway). They were a simple way to get an instrument approach to a smaller field with less traffic, and most planes back in the day had some way to pick them up. GPS is a thing now, and they're even simpler for small fields as they don't require any particular maintenance from their side. NDBs are old tech. Eventually, you'll have to drop them because progress exists. With progress comes a forced relegation of the older technologies.

No matter who you are, and what you do, you're going to need to drop support for things when they get old because the systems they're being run on - be they computers, airspace systems, aircraft, cars, or boats - become obsolete. To argue that things should have support indefinitely isn't exactly reasonable. I can understand that it's frustrating to be forced to stop using something, but it's a fact of life. Seriously - I spend time around a DC-3 quite a lot. I love the plane, but there's a realization that, eventually, all the parts for the plane are going to run out, and it'll have to go into a museum. There's no part support for it. It's all unofficial stuff now. Heck, our landing lights are LEDs, and we have a stockpile of brakes because they don't make them anymore. There's really no such thing as Douglas OEM. We can't call them up anymore and say "hey, this and that is going on...any ideas?" It's all community support. Same as what's going on here.

Again, I understand that it's frustrating, but everything comes to this point, eventually. FS9 is an insanely outdated program. It released nearly 15 years ago (FSX is also rather outdated, but it's the last in the line of simulators of its kind, so it's seen abnormally drawn out support). At this time, Windows XP was the main OS people were running. Mainstream support of that OS ended 8 years ago. We continued support of our legacy stuff many years after that (up through about last year or so - which was about 2 years longer than even the extended support of Win XP by MS). I'd say that's pretty reasonable. It's unfortunate for people still running the old stuff, but it's life. I have an old Atari upstairs. When it dies, it's gone. Unfortunate, but reality.

[Ramjett 27]

43 minutes ago, DavidP said:

Should support still be available for MS-DOS??

Depends on what you mean by support, David?  In the form of downloads and updates?  No.  I understand that Microsoft moved on the same way PMDG did.  But I'll bet I can still go to the Microsoft Help Desk and type in a question about an old MS-DOS command and get a response.  yes, I'll be told MS-DOS is a dinosaur, but I think there are enough Old-hands there that will reply, "oh yeah, type in this.  And besides, I miss MS-DOS believe it or not.  I had an MS-DOS based game called "The President is Missing".  I loved that game and wish I could play it again.

And yes, Kevin, I'm aware that not everyone comes to AVSIM and reads every post.

Thanks again for your reply, Kyle.  Yeah, I know, I'm a dinosaur just like FS9 and like FSX is rapidly approaching.  But as I pointed out in the VATSIM Forums a while ago.  On the day I was born I started dying.  I'm just not dead yet.  On the day it was released FS2004 was dying.  P3Dv4...is dying.  xPlane11...is dying.  it just hurts to see the coffin lid closed.  And I hope you understand that by "support" I'm not asking for what I've seen a lot of "asks" for in these forums.  I don't want my B737NG Double Legacy or B747-400 Dowager Queen to work in P3Dv4 or even FSX. 

The support I'm referring to would be being able to go to PMDG and asking, "I used to be able to arm the speedbrake in my B737NG by left clicking the handle (that's right in the manual by the way, no shift+/) but now it won't arm by left clicking.  I am using win6gazillion I87 with a binford 85jigavolt flux capacitor, etc, etc.  Any ideas?"  But I can't even do that can I?  I cannot open a ticket on the double legacy or the dowager queen at PMDG.  I can only come here and hope and pray someone besides Kevin will see the post and offer some advice.  Same thing with the pilot's chart on the clipboard of the NG-800.  I would have asked at PMDG instead of here if I could have...but I couldn't.

Randy