Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rsrandazzo

[25APR18] New Product Reveal at FlightSim Expo'18 - Las Vegas 09JUN18

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, HighFlier said:

It sounded to me like you were trying to downplay what GFO offered, my mistake and my apologies.

 

I’m more than aware. I follow the checklists to a tee. But at what point in the checklist do I stop for the aircraft to be considered in a turnaround state? If I follow everything in the secure procedure and electrical power down procedure, I’ve put the aircraft back in cold and dark.

Dont do the electrical power down procedure. When you di the securing check, your "securing" the airplane. That's when you give the airplane to another crew. 


FAA: ATP-ME

Matt kubanda

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, HighFlier said:

I’m more than aware. I follow the checklists to a tee. But at what point in the checklist do I stop for the aircraft to be considered in a turnaround state? If I follow everything in the secure procedure and electrical power down procedure, I’ve put the aircraft back in cold and dark.

What aircraft? What company? Are just a couple questions you will have to answer to yourself, then the internet/research is your friend. 💻📚

If for example your talking about the NGX, then look to the FCOM (NP 21.82) for a good idea what is required. Eventually, when you know the aircraft well, it will be 2nd nature what is required at each step. Since you know checklists then you'll be fine. If you fly for a specific virtual airline, somebody there can help you with specific policies if there are any.

GFO will inspire us to do everything by the book, and in order to do so, we are going to have to "hit the books". 👨‍🎓

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

Good shout Pracines, we'll have the children of the magenta line up in arms about this.

It's time they got the message. PMDG has delivered that message.

"You want to fly the line? - here's realism for you!"

I say Go.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder how many who say "Not for me" will in the end purchase it, once it all the features have been documented, and video streams start rollong out ?

And why some of you thought it was going to be a 787 or an A380 is beyond me.

 

Julian Evans.

  • Like 3

System: MSFS2020-Premium Deluxe, ASUS Maximus XI Hero,  Intel i7-8086K o/c to 5.0GHz, Corsair AIO H115i Pro, Lian Li PC-O11D XL,MSI RTX 3080 SUPRIM 12Gb, Samsung 970 EVO M.2 SSD, 1Tb Samsung 860 EVO SSD, 32Gb Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3200Mhz RAM, Corsair R1000X Gold PSU,Win 11 ,LG 43UD79 43" 4K IPS Panel., Airbus TCA Full Kit, Stream Deck XL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Last time I checked, I cant warp the airplane I fly to any airport I want in the real world. PMDG is aiming for realism....

...

Besides, you can fly the route you proposed....just find an airplane parked at YSSY and fly the airplane to RPLL.

 

You can't turn on time acceleration in the real world either, but it's supported in GFO (RSR mentioned it in the FSExpo presentation).

Nor can you restart or delete a flight in the real world, but it's supported in GFO (again RSR mentioned it in the FSExpo presentation).

 

You can't fly the route you want if there is no plane parked at the departure airport when you want to fly.

I bet I will never be able to fly a 737 out of Kalibo (RPVK). Why? Because RPVK is probably rarely (or never) visited by any PMDG users, so there will never be a 737 just waiting there for me to jump in.

I bet I will never be able to fly a 747 out of Sydney (YSSY). Why? Because YSSY being more popular it will be a fight to check-out a 747 before anyone else does.

GFO seems to be US/Euro centric. I guess customers wishing to fly out of Europe or the US will have less problem finding aircraft waiting, but for the rest of the world I have my doubts.

 

Anyway, what stops me from collecting an aircraft from say KLAX and "slewing" it to YSSY, then checking it back in so I can immediately check it out and do my real flight, from YSSY to RPLL?

If customers can "game the system" by slewing or using time acceleration then customers should also be able to "game the system" by moving the aircraft to the desired departure airport in GFO itself.

Why turn off your customers by making things difficult?

Instead of making customers "game the system" make "warping" to departure airport a GFO feature.

 

Edited by MatthewS

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Bob_Z said:

Gosh, Kyle.  I didn't know you were the only person ever to work on a long-term project and then have to face criticism at the end of it.  Many, many of us have spent much longer lives than yours working on projects and, yes, getting critical comments when finished.  And, in some cases, having the project dropped.

 

 

you mean like in real life ....

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Bob_Z said:

Gosh, Kyle.  I didn't know you were the only person ever to work on a long-term project and then have to face criticism at the end of it.  Many, many of us have spent much longer lives than yours working on projects and, yes, getting critical comments when finished.  And, in some cases, having the project dropped.

This isn't my point, and you know that. Perhaps I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt on the latter, because that's more than I've gotten so far (got a PM calling me arrogant for some reason, among other things - some dude literally wrote a thread about how awful RSR is, and called him some pretty awful names, while saying he hopes where we live gets attacked).

Again, much like the commentary about the product, people are misrepresenting my commentary here to make it what it's not in order to fuel a fire that never needed to exist. Criticism is fine. Being inflammatory is not. My issue, as you can see in the commentary from me that you quoted, is clearly aimed at the "I can't believe you all spent resources on this and didn't give us a plane!" As you can see in my text: we didn't. I did it on my own for a number of years, and I'm not part of an aircraft team, so the idea that's floating around that we somehow delayed, or didn't work on, an aircraft is false...so, people can put those fires out.

The latter part, again, isn't about the criticism, it's about the criticism being aimed at a misrepresentation of what the product is. Criticize the thing all you want, but do it from a position of knowledge, and facts:

  • "I hate this because it's not an airplane." 100% valid and fair. Seems odd to me, since nobody here knows what's in line behind the 748 and the NG3 we've alluded to, but, sure...someone wants to hate this because it's not what they wanted? Fine.
  • "I hate this because you delayed giving us an airplane to do it." Neither valid, nor fair. I get that people's views are limited here, but the benefit of the doubt goes a long way (particularly when the presentation showed a lot of progress on the 748, and side-by-side development). Moreover, the comment RSR made about it being a concept that goes back a decade clearly kinda ruins that argument. If we were delaying planes to do this, we wouldn't have released the NGX, 777, or 747.
  • "I'd never use this. I don't see what the big deal is." Sorry to hear that, but that's perfectly fine as feedback. Seriously. I can't say "you're wrong" - it's how you feel.
  • "I'll never get to fly a 747 plane out of YSSY because they'll all be gone!" or "I need feature X in a simulation" before they have a full understanding. While I can understand the fears of the unknown, and we clearly haven't had time to give all of the information, I think it would be a bit more responsible (and fair) to perhaps ask instead of assuming.

Critical commentary is just fine - just make sure it is your own opinion, and/or is rooted in fact. I will not apologize for standing firm on stomping out any falsehoods that get tossed in, and then slide under "it's just criticism." It's not. It's one thing to not like something. It's something else to not like something on a blind assumption about what it does, or does not do - especially in the cases where we did actually address things in the presentation.

Same goes for my posts. I clearly did not say my situation was unique, or this idea is above criticism, but it was made out to be that way just to toss some fuel on the fire. Nope. Not gonna [have] it. Wouldn't be prudent.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:
  • "I'll never get to fly a 747 plane out of YSSY because they'll all be gone!" or "I need feature X in a simulation" before they have a full understanding. While I can understand the fears of the unknown, and we clearly haven't had time to give all of the information, I think it would be a bit more responsible (and fair) to perhaps ask instead of assuming.

Kyle, I'm just offering some feedback on how I would ideally like GFO to work. Of course you are correct that we don't know all the details just yet, so we can only comment on what we know so far. But IMHO better to comment now than to say nothing...

Trust me, I really like the GFO concept but I'm time poor and really love flying my favorite routes.

Edited by MatthewS
spelling

Matthew S

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

Kyle, I'm just offering some feedback on how I would ideally like GFO to work. Of course you are correct that we don't know all the details just yet, so we can only comment on what we know so far. But IMHO better to comment now than to say nothing...

Trust me, I really like the GFO concept but I'm time poor and really love flying my favorite routes.

You'll be fine.

If anything, you'll save time with this new system, should you choose to jump in. All the same, I don't think undermining one of the core features of the product is in the best interest of anyone using it. I get that you're offering feedback, but I found it a bit premature, as people have only been given a quick taste of what it's all about. We'll have more out soonish. We all just got back (and some of us still have more flights to get home).

...and the whole slew workaround? Yep. Nope. Thought of that, too.
The concept behind all of this is quite simple. All of the background work to keep people from griefing each other, and cheating the system? That was the tougher part.


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post

For myself, I would never want to make use of a slew feature in GFO, even if such a thing were possible.

I would want to load the aircraft exactly “where is” and “as is”, warts and all.

  • Upvote 1

Jim Barrett

Licensed Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic, Avionics, Electrical & Air Data Systems Specialist. Qualified on: Falcon 900, CRJ-200, Dornier 328-100, Hawker 850XP and 1000, Lear 35, 45, 55 and 60, Gulfstream IV and 550, Embraer 135, Beech Premiere and 400A, MD-80.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

For myself, I would never want to make use of a slew feature in GFO, even if such a thing were possible.

I would want to load the aircraft exactly “where is” and “as is”, warts and all.

To be honest, and I'm obviously biased, but the first time I set the early, early, early alpha up to test it, I got goosebumps. I flew a plane, landed, parked, shut down, closed the sim, and then the next time I loaded it up, I loaded up in the same exact spot with all of the switches in the same spots without ever having to save a panel state, or the flight, or anything. When some of the rest of the team got a hold of it, and I started using the planes they'd used, it brought excitement to it because it felt lived in.

  • Upvote 1

Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:

To be honest, and I'm obviously biased, but the first time I set the early, early, early alpha up to test it, I got goosebumps. I flew a plane, landed, parked, shut down, closed the sim, and then the next time I loaded it up, I loaded up in the same exact spot with all of the switches in the same spots without ever having to save a panel state, or the flight, or anything. When some of the rest of the team got a hold of it, and I started using the planes they'd used, it brought excitement to it because it felt lived in.

And even better when you load a plane left by a different pilot. When you load your own previous flight, you know what to expect. Loading an aircraft flown in by someone else, all bets are off!

I work for a corporate operator, and though our flight crews are pretty good about shutting down everything per SOP, sometimes things get overlooked. My own pet peeves doing post-flight inspections in the hangar are finding the  transponder or TCAS not in STBY, or the galley power switch left on.

  • Upvote 1

Jim Barrett

Licensed Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic, Avionics, Electrical & Air Data Systems Specialist. Qualified on: Falcon 900, CRJ-200, Dornier 328-100, Hawker 850XP and 1000, Lear 35, 45, 55 and 60, Gulfstream IV and 550, Embraer 135, Beech Premiere and 400A, MD-80.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I figured there were a lot of details missing given the time constraint at the presentation, so I'm holding off on commenting about the software until I get more information.


Captain Kevin

nGsKmfi.jpg

Air Kevin 124 heavy, wind calm, runway 4 left, cleared for take-off.

Live streams of my flights here.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

while saying he hopes where we live gets attacked

 

This is totally out of line, and getting out of hand. Some people should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for the way they are acting.

I said before, based on the information available at the time, that I didn't think this is for me. After reading more of what Kyle is saying I am becoming quite intrigued. I'm looking forward to hearing more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, scandinavian13 said:

(...) as people have only been given a quick taste of what it's all about. We'll have more out soonish. (...)

This is exactly what I am thinking all the time.
It seems like that PMDG still works on that product full steam and it isn't done yet (I remember something like "hundreds of features are added every week" (or was it every day?)) and so what we saw in the presentation is just a alpha version of this product, I would guess. Or maybe better said a WiP.
And for that reason I don't even want to draw too many conclusion from what I have seen, since I know from my own experience, that things that are in development can give a completely wrong impression of a product compared with the final product.
So, for that reason, I will wait until PMDG gives us a more detailed look at their product. I'm definitely interested (as I mentioned already earlier)


Christian Storcks

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...