PMDG 777-200ER for 2018?

[squerble 300]

@Coolieboy While I completely understand your frustration, you've got a few points wrong which is worsening your frustration. GFO didn't take 10 years to develop, it's just something that PMDG have wanted to do since 2008. It's been in development for a couple of years now as the principal project of Kyle ( @scandinavian13 ), and not the aircraft dev team. Randazzo also said the 748 was going into beta yesterday, to which he personally commented "Finally, it's only about a year behind schedule". Developing aircraft to the level of PMDG et al is fraught with endless little rabbit holes of bugs and system logic. Look at FSL, they announced the A320 at the 2012 FS Conference in Germany and said it'd be out later that year, yet it took until 2016 to actually finish it. 

So PMDG themselves have acknowledged that they're behind - it's annoying, sure, but it's just the way it is. PMDG will not release a bug-filled product just to meet a deadline, it's not their MO. Yes, it's frustrating - I really want to see the -200ER too, with all three engine types - but until PMDG can devote the resources, there's nothing we can do.

 

What I really want from PMDG right now is a detailed roadmap. Confirm the 748 is now in beta, properly announce the NG3 and all the details (announce it's a refresh to bring it up to 747 standard, including more airframe options, announce that it'll include the ER models, announce that it'll include the BBJ models, announce that the MAX will be an expansion, etc etc, whatever will be included), announce the next secret aircraft that Kyle has already (in my opinion, teased in a poor manner) mentioned if it's not the NG3, and announce if the 777 will get continued expansion.

[anden145 2,283]

30 minutes ago, squerble said:

What I really want from PMDG right now is a detailed roadmap. Confirm the 748 is now in beta, properly announce the NG3 and all the details (announce it's a refresh to bring it up to 747 standard, including more airframe options, announce that it'll include the ER models, announce that it'll include the BBJ models, announce that the MAX will be an expansion, etc etc, whatever will be included), announce the next secret aircraft that Kyle has already (in my opinion, teased in a poor manner) mentioned if it's not the NG3, and announce if the 777 will get continued expansion.

Wow! That's a lot of announcements...

[Captain Kevin 586]

4 hours ago, Coolieboy said:

Am I wrong in assuming the B744 has not one, not two but THREE engine types? Am I wrong in assuming the B748 is stretched and shares next to no commonality with the 744? They modeled all the different cargo variants of the B744, all the pax variants and all three engines (well more if you include the different thrust ratings for any one engine type depending on the airframe and it's intended use).

Okay, I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but I'm just going by what I've seen here. This was said back in 2014, mind you.

On 7/24/2014 at 9:57 AM, scandinavian13 said:

I really don't understand why people assume PMDG released the 200LR/F as some spiteful measure towards the sim community.  The 200LR/F and 300ER use the same single-engine type philosophy.  As such, it's really easy to develop for.  You only have to make one flight dynamics model.

Another one in 2014.

On 7/24/2014 at 11:34 AM, scandinavian13 said:

The 777 DEV schedule was the way it was in order to streamline development. The 200LR/F and 300ER all use a common engine.

And this back in 2013.

On 9/4/2013 at 3:57 PM, scandinavian13 said:

This is true, but only so far.  If you go back and find it, I think you'll see that they said initially they'd be doing the ones with common engine types to make things easier, and they'd evaluate other options after the initial release.

One other thing to take into consideration is that they must have had the data for all of the 747-400s and the 747-8 to be able to do what they did. Do they have the data for the -200ER? I don't know. If they don't, that's definitely going to stop them from being able to get far since they aren't really one for just sticking the engines on the wings and calling it done, they'd need to model the flight dynamics for it. But I don't work for PMDG, so I don't know any more of what's going on than you do. All I have to go by is whatever was posted here in the past.

[Coolieboy 24]

On 6/12/2018 at 12:59 PM, Captain Kevin said:

Okay, I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but I'm just going by what I've seen here. This was said back in 2014, mind you.

Another one in 2014.

And this back in 2013.

One other thing to take into consideration is that they must have had the data for all of the 747-400s and the 747-8 to be able to do what they did. Do they have the data for the -200ER? I don't know. If they don't, that's definitely going to stop them from being able to get far since they aren't really one for just sticking the engines on the wings and calling it done, they'd need to model the flight dynamics for it. But I don't work for PMDG, so I don't know any more of what's going on than you do. All I have to go by is whatever was posted here in the past.

You do realize I am fully aware of the above and was not disputing any of it right? I'm pretty sure if you re-read what I said, you would find that I am getting at. If not, I will elaborate;

 

1. how long it takes due to a lack of resources and manpower/Not meeting customer demand (demand in a business sense, not a rude one before you grab your pitchfork 😛)

2. the lack of communication/general outlook

3. the petty, passive-aggressive digs when asked normal questions any fan/customer asks in any industry

 

I have no problem with PMDG pricing. I have no problem with PMDG product quality. Releasing a product after most or all bugs have been addressed is standard so I'm not grateful for it since I am the one paying hard earning money on a "product" and expect customer satisfaction like every customer when I make a purchase. 

REGARDLESS of new flight dynamics and data, there is an unfinished product that has had it's resources pulled to work on other aircraft as well as a far less relevant product that no one asked for. I know the B772 has different wings and engines but the 748 is the same case. PLUS...the B748 was not modelled before. The V2 748 used the B744's flight dynamics

 

The DC6 was partly developed to understand X-Plane better. I get that. But how much money I wonder did the DC-6 bring in compared to the 747 or 777? The heavy hitters (787/777/747/737) is where the demand and money is, but I "THINK" that RSR just creates what THEY want to create instead of what THEIR CUSTOMERS/FANS want to buy. I'm sure there are 100's of super intelligent programmers who would kill to work for and with the PMDG team and compliment them and their work ethic perfectly, boosting productivity and efficiency tenfold. 

I also understand that it is not easy to recreate these models but that is their instinctive passion and desired profession. The business end from MY perspective is not as great and all it takes is for one new developer to slide into the spotlight with aircraft of PMDG level to throw a spanner into the works or even better, a new platform that already has PMDG level aircraft fresh out the box.

Either way, deep down, even the most die hard PMDG supporter (like me) knows he/she may not be alive to have their personal favorite heavy available to fly within an FS platform 😞 

[Gregory Caesar 0]

They need to get their priorities straight.

[JRBarrett 3,038]

On 6/13/2018 at 3:29 PM, Coolieboy said:

REGARDLESS of new flight dynamics and data, there is an unfinished product that has had it's resources pulled to work on other aircraft as well as a far less relevant product that no one asked for. I know the B772 has different wings and engines but the 748 is the same case. PLUS...the B748 was not modelled before. The V2 748 used the B744's flight dynamics

I don’t think it would be accurate to say that the 777 is “unfinished”. The 200ER, if and when it is finally produced, will most likely be a stand-alone product, separate and apart from the 200LR and 300ER, both of which are certainly “finished”.

Not everyone has the same interests. Though I own both the 200LR and 300ER, I rarely fly either. I much prefer the 747 (pax and freighter) for long haul and the 737 for short haul. I’m one PMDG customer who doesn’t give a flying fig if they EVER do a 777-200ER, but I know there are many who would like to see it. I’m looking forward to the -8, and especially would like to see a V3 of the NGX - the PMDG aircraft I fly most often by far.

Although probably few people “expected” the GFO development, it would not be accurate to flatly state that it is something that no one wants. YOU may have no interest in GFO, which is fine - but again, different simmers have different interests. GFO will be a first-day purchase for me.

RSR has stated categorically that GFO development is not stealing resources from any other ongoing project. 

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Quote

They need to get their priorities straight.

Please let the PMDG guys know what these priorities are ASAP. They have presumably been stumbling around blindly for the past ten years not knowing what to do, so having an armchair project manager here at AVSIM to help them focus will be a priceless asset

Edited August 18, 2018 by Christopher Low

[B777ER 2,484]

On 4/10/2018 at 1:03 PM, scandinavian13 said:

 

 

I think, for some (myself included), it's a realism thing. I look at flightaware for the aircraft I want to fly in the sim and just recreate those flights. So, if I'm flying the 77L, I look for 77L flights. It's a natural "swap" to put a 77L on a 772's flight, but it doesn't feel right to me, especially if the operator doesn't use that type. As an example, UAL flies a ton of 772s, but no 77Ls. I wouldn't swap a 77L into that flight, despite the existence of UAL 77L fictionals. Same with BAW.

In general, I keep it to non-fictional liveries, with the exception of the PMDG House liveried aircraft, and in those cases, I take those wherever I want.

I do realize that it's a bit odd to some, but it's a rule for myself that doesn't really affect anyone else, so I don't find it too egregious.

Just saw this. I think we all have our little quirks with how we operate our flight sims. I myself stay with whatever aircraft that particular airline has or did have, be it current or historical (because who doesn't want to fly an RR powered Cathay 744 into Kai Tak!)

[CaptainLars 21]

In my personal view, the -200ER is a past iteration of the -200LR. I wouldn't bother with it.

Since this seems to be the thread where we tell PMDG what to do next , I want a 777 update, where it gets some bugs sorted out (there are some), and the shiny new Ground Maps feature. I can't tell how many times I got lost at one of those airports... 

[rondon9898 84]

You won't get a ground map feature in the 777 as it isn't a feature on the real aircraft to my knowledge, unless PMDG are going to develop the EFB and put a ground map feature into that and retrofit the EFB to the 777.

 

[CaptainLars 21]

1 hour ago, rondon9898 said:

PMDG are going to develop the EFB and put a ground map feature into that and retrofit the EFB to the 777.

 

That's what they're going to do.

[Gregory Caesar 0]

On 8/18/2018 at 10:19 AM, Christopher Low said:

Please let the PMDG guys know what these priorities are ASAP. They have presumably been stumbling around blindly for the past ten years not knowing what to do, so having an armchair project manager here at AVSIM to help them focus will be a priceless asset

 I assume you’re referring to yourself?

Edited August 23, 2018 by Gregory Caesar

[rondon9898 84]

I’d love to know from PMDG how difficult in terms of modelling/flight dynamics programming it would be to create a -200ER from the existing material they have with the LR/-300ER. All the textures for the flight deck remain the same, for example - would it just be the flight dynamics and performance/engine modelling that need changing? 

Would love a -200ER, especially as I like to fly BA 777 flights and am just not happy flying ER flights in an LR.

[Pilot53 543]

I have been waiting for the -200ER or -200 since pmdg released the LR.  UAL does several domestic short/medium haul flights and it just feels silly using the LR for these flights, even with a huge derate.

[Ephedrin 418]

On 8/21/2018 at 6:18 PM, CaptainLars said:

I can't tell how many times I got lost at one of those airports...

Not sitting high enough? 😄