I-fly 747-8 just released.

[Chock 17,769]

Yup, that is true, I meant the additional ND display rather than an actual EFB, although I tend to call anything with that sort of capability in the cockpit an EFB anyway; that's what you get for posting after a long work shift lol. Realistically, I think most people who'd buy a simulated 747 are likely to have Aivlasoft's EFB or something similar which is akin to what most airline pilots I know have to hand, in that they invariably get some sort of tablet type affair which does that. But yeah, the additional display in the iFly 747-8 does do detailed checklists and all that sort of malarkey.

Since I knew iFly were supposedly bringing this update out before the end of 2018 and Just Flight are also supposed to have their 747-100/200 out in a matter of days, it was/is my intention to do a video looking at both of those, comparing the very oldest 747 with the very newest one, as I think that'd be interesting. Thus I've been reading up a lot on the various models of 747s in preparation for that and it does turn up many fun facts when you do that. Did you know for example that Boeing at one point marketed the 747SR as the 'Super Airbus'? Or that they seriously considered making a Tri-jet version of the 747 with an engine mounted in the tail to compete with the similarly configured L-1011/DC-10? The main reason they didn't build a triple, is that they figured by the time they could build a workable prototype it'd be obsolete; the Airbus A300 was already ushering in the ETOPS era and they knew that big twins were the way to go, thus they concentrated on development which led to the 757,767, 777 and 787.

But back with the 747, the prototype 747-100 was first test flown in January 1969, which is soon to be exactly 50 years ago (probably why JF are releasing theirs near the half-centenary of that milestone). It went into service toward the end of that year with Pan Am, so it is really interesting to compare aeroplanes which have been in production over such a long period of time to see how some of the technology has changed and also how some of it remains remarkably unchanged. Which is why I'm gonna do that vid.

Anyway, back more directly on topic, I think it is fair to say that if you want an 'as real as it gets' 747-8 at any cost, then PMDG would be the way to go, since they have certainly gone for it a bit more with their rendition of that aeroplane. If nothing else, the price of entry is a bit of a clue toward that, since, as with the iFly, it is also dependent on having their 400 variant, but in the case of PMDG, a payware expansion, which makes it really rather pricey indeed. Although all flight simmers know that, as for example with the FSL A320, you do have to get your hand in your pocket for those really seriously over the top simulations of modern airliners, and it's down to you if you want to pay for that. If on the other hand, you have the iFly 747-400, the addition of what is a pretty reasonable stab at the 747-8 as what is effectively a free bonus, is certainly welcome, since its developers were under no obligation to do that, other than the fact that they said they would.

So for me, as should be for everyone else, it's rather pointless to get partisan about the differences of one add-on versus another, they all tend to have their various merits and pitfalls, be it price, features or whatever. In the end, it's up to you to decide what you want and what you are prepared to pay for. I have a stupid big American car; I could drive a cheaper smaller car if I wanted to, but it's my preference to drive that thing because I like it, and there is no justification other than that which I need.

[anden145 2,285]

3 hours ago, thibodba57 said:

@Anders Bermann

You can say a company Sub-par (which means Below Average in case you really didn't know what it meant). And then say "I'm not comparing things. Dont be critical of what I'm saying". 

It's rude to the iFly team and highly niave.  The iFly producst are actually above the standard.  You have full systems modelling, failures can be simulated, the ECL is functional, TSS makes the sound pack etc,. I mean what is the standard for you?  Do we need to go around look at all these developers and tell them they are Sub Par?  

You're kidding, right?!

I have every right to express, that I find iFly products to be sub-par - and yes! I did know what it meant! It's within my personal frame of mind, to openly articulate these feelings - as I perfectly said and made clear - it was MY OWN PERSONAL view and feeling! 

I have NO idea, why you think it's necessary to lecture me what I can and cannot think... *SIGH* Maybe AVSIM has become some kind of authoritative entity, where thought-control and cencorship is being practiced by the common user?! Worth thinking about.

I won't be a party to discuss this. As I said, I'm within my own right to express my own and personal belief about a product. Please note, that I have not personally bashed or insulted anyone! I don't know how you can think, that I have insulted the iFly team?! I'm at a loss for words, to be honest.

Please stop the lecturing and condescending attitude.

I'll leave this discussion with this... If this is the new standard, then I'll just refrain from commenting... 

Sorry for the rant, people. 

Merry Christmas to all.

[David Vega 348]

Hope this remains about the iFly B747 latest offering.  Ideally, I would like to know how does it function compared to its real-world counterpart.  Since we don't have too many real-world B747 pilots in the forum, would like read about how what it offers functions compared to what they advertise and how well it does function.  Suggest moving other discussions (comparing it to other simulations of the same aircraft by other vendors) to other threads less this one is mod-closed.  

[Chock 17,769]

12 minutes ago, tooting said:

******* it was a joke, calm down 

I am perfectly calm, but nope, it wasn't a joke. What you are doing now is backpedalling, attempting to claim it was a joke, having seen that my response to your comment received quite a few upvotes and likes from other forum members. That much is obvious. When you're in a hole, it is time to stop digging.

I am not upset by it, I just wish that people would think about stuff before posting it on occasion. Not everyone is as thick skinned. So I will wish you a Happy Christmas. 🙂

Edited December 26, 2018 by Chock

[Daniel Baker 20]

My experiences, in case they help anyone:

I purchased the iFly 747 simply because I couldn't justify the PMDG expense on an aircraft (747-400) that is disappearing from service.  The kicker being that the 747-8i would be included for free, while the PMDG would be a costly upgrade (IMHO).  Just to be clear, I own both the PMDG  777-200LR and -300ER, love them and use them frequently - I consider them expensive but I was okay with paying for them.  I prefer complex airliners that make me feel as if I'm flying a close approximation of the real thing, and I prefer to fly real world routes that are active.

I feel that iFly offers 80-90% of the features of the PMDG planes, for less than 50% of the price.  The systems are all very good, but it overall lacks the polish of the PMDG offering (ie; sound, interface, views, extras, etc.)  There may be some operational performance difference (ie; derates #s, fuel flow, etc.) and I'm not smart enough to know who's more accurate, but my feeling is that PMDG is probably more accurate - although I have absolutely nothing to back that up.

I just finished my first flight from EDDF - SAEZ and it went flawlessly.  The FPS for me in the virtual cockpit were 60FPS at every phase.  Derate, LNAV, VNAV, autopilot all worked perfectly.  The simulation feels big and real, and very immersive.

The major missing feature (for me) is the EFB.  But I do not feel like this is something owed to me, simply because iFly offered this upgrade for free, and this in the knowledge that sales of their 747 were very, very low (despite its bargain price).  To me, this is tremendously generous of the iFly team - I think they'd be more than justified in charging an upgrade fee, even without the EFB.  It was also a holiday timed release, a gesture that felt like a "gift" to the community (it certainly was a delightful surprise to me).

Hope that helps someone.

Cheers,

Daniel

p.s. would love if anyone could point me in the direction of a derate calculator that works for the 747-8i

[thibodba57 462]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Baker said:

p.s. would love if anyone could point me in the direction of a derate calculator that works for the 747-8i

I worked out a Utopia profile for it awhile back and Jannie said he'd make a sticky post in the forum for it.  I honestly think I'm gonna spend a couple more hours redoing it though.

As to sounds, while PMDG has some stellar -400 sounds, the -8 at takeoff thrust makes my teeth feel like it's rattling. They missed the mark bad.  The iFly has a more true sound at takeoff thrust from my experience.  

[Lenny777 299]

Where's the link to this 800?

 

EDIT: Nevermind. I found it.

 

Edited December 26, 2018 by Lenny777

[Lenny777 299]

Anyone have a template for the 800 variant for PFPX?

 

 

EDIT: Found the link

http://airlinerperformance.net/aircraft-types/

Edited December 26, 2018 by Lenny777

[Daniel Baker 20]

2 hours ago, thibodba57 said:

I worked out a Utopia profile for it awhile back and Jannie said he'd make a sticky post in the forum for it.  I honestly think I'm gonna spend a couple more hours redoing it though.

Would it be possible to share what you have? Would love to test it as is - I'm also happy to make edits and share. 

 

Cheers

Daniel

[LH340fan 54]

any video about it yet?

[virtualstuff 754]

On 12/25/2018 at 10:08 PM, GSalden said:

Better change your philosophy. It will save you a lot of money in your life...

You are saying that if iFly would sell their plane for twice the price of the PMDG version it it would be way better as it was more expensive.

In the past I have compared the iFly 737 cockpit builders Edition with the PMDG 737 and while the PMDG has a more fancy looking GUI, more failures and a nicer looking compassie, the iFly was feeling more real..

Btw : the iFly cockpit builders Edition was 599 euro so in your terms at least 6x as good as the PMDG...

Lol Gerard, a lot of RW guys are involved with the Ifly and indeed it's much closer to the real deal as some do think...

Actually funny to read some coments based on a lack of knowledge 😉

Edited December 26, 2018 by awf

[jon b 2,041]

Okay, I managed to get a couple of test flights in today with both the ifly and PMDG 747-400s. There seems to be much interest in the authenticity of the ifly 747 and naturally people are interested in how it compares with the PMDG version. Equally people have pointed out that this is a thread about the ify aircraft and shouldn't be a comparison thread with the PMDG, which is a fair comment. Inevitably though the two products are being compared as the PMDG version is seen as the gold standard and the ifly as somehow a cheap " sub par" version. If you will allow me I'd like to share the findings of my very brief tests flights today,you may find them interesting and indeed to some surprising even. I shall try and compare the two products to the real aircraft rather than each other though inevitably there may be comparison between the two, I hope you can forgive that and I will try and do so objectively.

Firstly, I'll reluctantly talk about myself very briefly only so you can put my observations into context. I've only just bought the ifly 747, just last night in fact, my interest was sparked solely from reading this very thread so I have very little experience with the product and have only really done 2 flights  and a bit of playing around on the ground with it. I own the PMDG QOTS2 747 on P3D which I have more experience with but not a great deal more to be honest. I was previously a tester/ technical advisor for PMDG on their first two 747-400 products for FS2004 and FSX back in the mid 2000s, and I even get a mention in the Aerowinx PS1 manual from the 1990's for those who can remember that far back! For the day job I'm a current 747-400 captain with around 16,000 hours on type and have been flying her for the last 22 years.

To get this out of the way at the beginning, both of these products are fantastic, neither in any way can be considered a bad product in any way and both are way above the mainstream simulator products in my opinion. The question here is just about choice and also for those wanting to start flying a virtual 747-400 do I need to buy the PMDG product to gain an authentic recreation of the 747? The simple answer in my view is no , you don't the ifly 747 does a cracking job of simulating the big jet. While it also has to be said the PMDG is more refined in it's flight model and graphics without a doubt,and the amount of research and access to real aircraft and level D sims is apparent, as is the fact it's put together by a full time software house, and that is shown in it's price. It is however not infallible, and it may surprise you that in some aspects the ifly 747 comes in nearer in it's behaviour to the real machine.As is often the case if you could amalgamate both products into one, you'd have the perfect product.

The test flight was only brief EGCC (Manchester UK) 23R EKLAD departure, out towards the IOM, FL200 upper airwork consisting of a slow to stall and then back to EGCC via the MIRSI STAR, one hold and self position for an RNAV overlay using the 05L ILS FMC entry. That is the flying the coded ILS procedure using LNAV and VNAV rather than the ILS LOC/GS modes. You still get the raw data ILS showing so it gives a good indication of how well the RNAV is working out. This was followed by a go-around and a seat of the pants circle to land 23R.

I'll just condense my scribbled notes into points now rather than writing a full report.

Empty aircraft ZFW 178,000kg 25,000kg fuel, take off weight 203,000kg. FMC generated speeds and thrust using TO-2 and max assumed temp of 64C.... Ifly  V1 100 VR 111 V2 131 , for some reason the FMC would default to 40C and not accept 64C assumed which gave N1 93.2......... PMDG V1 117 VR117 V2 135  N1 92.2  .....Real world figures taken from Boeing OPT app  V1 117 VR118 V2 135 N1 90.2. On this account PMDG comes in close and note that it respects 117kts as the minimum V speed? It's correctly respecting the VMCG.

One area where ifly comes out top is it models the eicas maintenance pages, present leg faults and confidence tests on the centre CDU and allows you to display these pages on the lower eicas. These are often brought up to help diagnose issues. A very nice feature to play with I thought, and great for real world pilots transitioning onto the 747 to play with and get familiar with them. The centre CDU in the PMDG appears to be U/S unless I'M missing something, their future updates with global ops may change this though, but I did read in their forums they weren't simulating maintenance pages. I was also amazed to see that the ifly allowed me the change the drag and fuel flow values in the FMC where as the PMDG didn't. This is quite an important real world task as you check the drag/FF values on your computer flight plan and make sure the FMC has the same values, which change from time to time with MEL issues or historic fuel use data. If there is a discrepancy you need to update the FMC to the flight plan figures, and probably 7 out 10 pilots will be scratching their heads at this point because if you try and overwrite the current figure the FMC wont accept it. There's a secret trick .... you have to type the word "ARM" and enter it 6R (bottom right entry) you can then overright the FMC drag/FF figure. This is perfectly modeled by ifly and was a delight to see, again a great feature for real world pilots to learn and practice with.

I tried an aborted start on number 1 with autostart engaged , PMDG nailed it but ifly contined to turn the engine and burn fuel with the fuel control switch in cutoff. Pushing the start switch in killed it though. 

Engine idle figures on the GE real world rough rule of thumb ... N1 25% EGT 350 N2 65% (25-35-65)  ifly was 24-39-66 , PMDG 25-38-65 both in the ball park there. EGTs can be variable. Other figures I noted, cabin alt on the lower eicas was moving in 1ft increments on the ifly, PMDG correctly rounded to nearest 100ft.

Take off and climb out very similar, though PMDG does feel a slightly better flight model, and their instruments much smoother and so more realistic.

The route I programmed was WAL to IOM then to a point 20 miles abeam a point on the STAR this would require the aircraft to do around a 150 degree turn. In the real Honeywell FMC it wouldn't like that and so would actually start its turn before reaching IOM giving a more gentle curve in the pink string. The ifly presented this perfectly just how I would expect to see it in the real aircraft which was great to see, I was a little disappointed that the PMDG FMC decided to go straight over the IOM and the reverse course, giving a very unrealistic acute pointed course portrayed on the ND, not the lovely realistic turn of the ifly jet.I'm sure I have seen these realistic curves before on the PMDG so maybe it was just having an off day.

I didn't fly that far though to see what would happen, instead heading south of the track to try a stall. Here the PMDG excelled giving a great demonstration of the secondary stall as I deliberately tried to recover too early from the primary stall, it's stick shaker sound however didn't sound right to me, more like a pneumatic drill that the real thing. The ifly sounded much better however it didn't start it's stall until about 25kts into the red bricks so not so good.

Returning back to the route I selected direct MALUD on the  MIRSI STAR with a restriction to cross at FL170. On the VNAV page the PMDG gave an accurate countdown to TOD to the nearest mile. The ifly was also accurate, and unlike the PMDG I was impressed to see that the ifly FMC started to countdown in 0.1s of a NM once it got within 10NM of TOD as per the real thing.

Descents and speed reduction were handled well by both jets, the ifly FMC decided to command 150kts once entering the hold for a reason that escapes me. In the real jet if you enter a hold while still descending in VNAV the jet will on occasions level off on crossing the holding fix, for example descending to FL60 the aircraft will level at FL68 if that's the height it passes the fix at.It's a known issue. None of the simulated jets did this, I was glad to see!

Both jets handled the RNAV approach well, however my real world procedure is to set the MDA in the MCP initially just before leaving platform height and then set missed approach altitude once 300ft or more below missed approach altitude, so you're winding the MCP ALT window through your passing altitude. The real world aircraft will ignore this as it is on approach logic as it's known. Both sim jets though had a tendency to stop the descent and level off in VNAV ALT  if you wound the knob too slowly, it could be avoided though with a swift spin of the mouse wheel.  The fly in the ointment for the PMDG was that the go-around altitude wasn't coded in the FMC procedure, I'm not sure if this is something new as I've not noticed it before, or I have a corrupt database somewhere. The ifly had the correct 3500ft coded though. The result was the PMDG jet seemed intent on leveling at 1757ft and that was using both VNAV or F LCH it simply wouldn't go any higher. 1757ft was quite random until I realised it was 1500ft above Manchester's 257ft AMSL.

So, as I say just a very small flight and haven't even scratched the surface of what these sims have hidden within them but as you can see both jets do some things better than their counterpart and less well with other things.

Going back to the question, if you want a realistic 747-400 sim is PMDG the only option worth considering ? absolutely not, the ifly has some amazing attention to detail. Is the ifly a study level sim? again absolutely.

Which would I recommend you buy? well to be honest you can't go wrong with either so my recommendation is just that you do get one, it doesn't matter which, and enjoy flying it while you can. Flying a 747 is a fantastic experience both in the real and simulated worlds, sadly the real world machine is now in her last couple of years as a pax machine at least so enjoy this magnificent aircraft, there'll never be anything like her ever built again. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

 

Edited December 27, 2018 by jon b

[snapshot21 254]

38 minutes ago, jon b said:

Okay, I managed to get a couple of test flights in today with both the ifly and PMDG 747-400s. There seems to be much interest in the authenticity of the ifly 747 and naturally people are interested in how it compares with the PMDG version. Equally people have pointed out that this is a thread about the ify aircraft and shouldn't be a comparison thread with the PMDG, which is a fair comment. Inevitably though the two products are being compared as the PMDG version is seen as the gold standard and the ifly as somehow a cheap " sub par" version. If you will allow me I'd like to share the findings of my very brief tests flights today,you may find them interesting and indeed to some surprising even. I shall try and compare the two products to the real aircraft rather than each other though inevitably there may be comparison between the two, I hope you can forgive that and I will try and do so objectively.

Firstly, I'll reluctantly talk about myself very briefly only so you can put my observations into context. I've only just bought the ifly 747, just last night in fact, my interest was sparked solely from reading this very thread so I have very little experience with the product and have only really done 2 flights  and a bit of playing around on the ground with it. I own the PMDG QOTS2 747 on P3D which I have more experience with but not a great deal more to be honest. I was previously a tester/ technical advisor for PMDG on their first two 747-400 products for FS2004 and FSX back in the mid 2000s, and I even get a mention in the Aerowinx PS1 manual from the 1990's for those who can remember that far back! For the day job I'm a current 747-400 captain with around 16,000 hours on type and have been flying her for the last 22 years.

To get this out of the way at the beginning, both of these products are fantastic, neither in any way can be considered a bad product in any way and both are way above the mainstream simulator products in my opinion. The question here is just about choice and also for those wanting to start flying a virtual 747-400 do I need to buy the PMDG product to gain an authentic recreation of the 747? The simple answer in my view is no , you don't the ifly 747 does a cracking job of simulating the big jet. While it also has to be said the PMDG is more refined in it's flight model and graphics without a doubt,and the amount of research and access to real aircraft and level D sims is apparent, as is the fact it's put together by a full time software house, and that is shown in it's price. It is however not infallible, and it may surprise you that in some aspects the ifly 747 comes in nearer in it's behaviour to the real machine.As is often the case if you could amalgamate both products into one, you'd have the perfect product.

The test flight was only brief EGCC (Manchester UK) 23R EKLAD departure, out towards the IOM, FL200 upper airwork consisting of a slow to stall and then back to EGCC via the MIRSI STAR, one hold and self position for an RNAV overlay using the 05L ILS FMC entry. That is the flying the coded ILS procedure using LNAV and VNAV rather than the ILS LOC/GS modes. You still get the raw data ILS showing so it gives a good indication of how well the RNAV is working out. This was followed by a go-around and a seat of the pants circle to land 23R.

I'll just condense my scribbled notes into points now rather than writing a full report.

Empty aircraft ZFW 178,000kg 25,000kg fuel, take off weight 203,000kg. FMC generated speeds and thrust using TO-2 and max assumed temp of 64C.... Ifly  V1 100 VR 111 V2 131 , for some reason the FMC would default to 40C and not accept 64C assumed which gave N1 93.2......... PMDG V1 117 VR117 V2 135  N1 92.2  .....Real world figures taken from Boeing OBT app  V1 117 VR118 V2 135 N1 90.2. On this account PMDG comes in close and note that it respects 117kts as the minimum V speed? It's correctly respecting the VMCG.

One area where ifly comes out top is it models the eicas maintenance pages, present leg faults and confidence tests on the centre CDU and allows you to display these pages on the lower eicas. These are often brought up to help diagnose issues. A very nice feature to play with I thought, and great for real world pilots transitioning onto the 747 to play with and get familiar with them. The centre CDU in the PMDG appears to be U/S unless I'M missing something, their future updates with global ops may change this though, but I did read in their forums they weren't simulating maintenance pages. I was also amazed to see that the ifly allowed me the change the drag and fuel flow values in the FMC where as the PMDG didn't. This is quite an important real world task as you check the drag/FF values on your computer flight plan and make sure the FMC has the same values, which change from time to time with MEL issues or historic fuel use data. If there is a discrepancy you need to update the FMC to the flight plan figures, and probably 7 out 10 pilots will be scratching their heads at this point because if you try and overwrite the current figure the FMC wont accept it. There's a secret trick .... you have to type the word "ARM" and enter it 6R (bottom right entry) you can then overright the FMC drag/FF figure. This is perfectly modeled by ifly and was a delight to see, again a great feature for real world pilots to learn and practice with.

I tried an aborted start on number 1 with autostart engaged , PMDG nailed it but ifly contined to turn the engine and burn fuel with the fuel control switch in cutoff. Pushing the start switch in killed it though. 

Engine idle figures on the GE real world rough rule of thumb ... N1 25% EGT 350 N2 65% (25-35-65)  ifly was 24-39-66 , PMDG 25-38-65 both in the ball park there. EGTs can be variable. Other figures I noted, cabin alt on the lower eicas was moving in 1ft increments on the ifly, PMDG correctly rounded to nearest 100ft.

Take off and climb out very similar, though PMDG does feel a slightly better flight model, and their instruments much smoother and so more realistic.

The route I programmed was WAL to IOM then to a point 20 miles abeam a point on the STAR this would require the aircraft to do around a 150 degree turn. In the real Honeywell FMC it wouldn't like that and so would actually start its turn before reaching IOM giving a more gentle curve in the pink string. The ifly presented this perfectly just how I would expect to see it in the real aircraft which was great to see, I was a little disappointed that the PMDG FMC decided to go straight over the IOM and the reverse course, giving a very unrealistic acute pointed course portrayed on the ND, not the lovely realistic turn of the ifly jet.I'm sure I have seen these realistic curves before on the PMDG so maybe it was just having an off day.

I didn't fly that far though to see what would happen, instead heading south of the track to try a stall. Here the PMDG excelled giving a great demonstration of the secondary stall as I deliberately tried to recover too early from the primary stall, it's stick shaker sound however didn't sound right to me, more like a pneumatic drill that the real thing. The ifly sounded much better however it didn't start it's stall until about 25kts into the red bricks so not so good.

Returning back to the route I selected direct MALUD on the  MIRSI STAR with a restriction to cross at FL170. On the VNAV page the PMDG gave an accurate countdown to TOD to the nearest mile. The ifly was also accurate, and unlike the PMDG I was impressed to see that the ifly FMC started to countdown in 0.1s of a NM once it got within 10NM of TOD as per the real thing.

Descents and speed reduction were handled well by both jets, the ifly FMC decided to command 150kts once entering the hold for a reason that escapes me. In the real jet if you enter a hold while still descending in VNAV the jet will on occasions level off on crossing the holding fix, for example descending to FL60 the aircraft will level at FL68 if that's the height it passes the fix at.It's a known issue. None of the simulated jets did this, I was glad to see!

Both jets handled the RNAV approach well, however my real world procedure is to set the MDA in the MCP initially just before leaving platform height and then set missed approach altitude once 300ft or more below missed approach altitude, so you're winding the MCP ALT window through your passing altitude. The real world aircraft will ignore this as it is on approach logic as it's known. Both sim jets though had a tendency to stop the descent and level off in VNAV ALT  if you wound the knob too slowly, it could be avoided though with a swift spin of the mouse wheel.  The fly in the ointment for the PMDG was that the go-around altitude wasn't coded in the FMC procedure, I'm not sure if this is something new as I've not noticed it before, or I have a corrupt database somewhere. The ifly had the correct 3500ft coded though. The result was the PMDG jet seemed intent on leveling at 1757ft and that was using both VNAV or F LCH it simply wouldn't go any higher. 1757ft was quite random until I realised it was 1500ft above Manchester's 257ft AMSL.

So, as I say just a very small flight and haven't even scratched the surface of what these sims have hidden within them but as you can see both jets do some things better than their counterpart and less well with other things.

Going back to the question, if you want a realistic 747-400 sim is PMDG the only option worth considering ? absolutely not, the ifly has some amazing attention to detail. Is the ifly a study level sim? again absolutely.

Which would I recommend you buy? well to be honest you can't go wrong with either so my recommendation is just that you do get one, it doesn't matter which, and enjoy flying it while you can. Flying a 747 is a fantastic experience both in the real and simulated worlds, sadly the real world machine is now in her last couple of years as a pax machine at least so enjoy this magnificent aircraft, there'll never be anything like her ever built again. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

 

Now this is the kind of insight and opinion which we should put weight on. Thanks for the review! Good to see ifly is right up there especially considering its price point.

Edited December 26, 2018 by snapshot21

[thibodba57 462]

1 hour ago, snapshot21 said:

Now this is the kind of insight and opinion which we should put weight on. Thanks for the review! Good to see ifly is right up there especially considering its price point.

It has to be cheaper.  You have people like Anders telling the world it's a sub par junker akin of Abacus or CLS without any knowledge so no one gives them the time of day.  I can't wait to test to 73 MAX from them granted I've never flown a 73. But I do have a couple thousand hours flying the 74 and I've been impressed with their work and the teams receptiveness to critique.  I can honestly say, they have never questioned my intelligence or intent when I've given them feedback unlike another developer.  And a disclosure, I test to keep my nose in the books.  I paid for their products and they do not pay me a dime for my time or advise.  So all the credit I give them they have earned.

[cowpatz 243]

4 hours ago, jon b said:

I tried an aborted start on number 1 with autostart engaged , PMDG nailed it but ifly contined to turn the engine and burn fuel with the fuel control switch in cutoff. Pushing the start switch in killed it though.                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Nice to see another RW 747 driver involved in flight simulation and your knowledgeable comments on the iFly/PMDG 747s. RW I flew the 747-200 for 4 years and the 747-400 for approx 14 yrs Some 10,000 odd hours between them. They are fantastic aircraft in every respect. A pure joy to fly. I helped out a little bit with the iFly team when they put this together along with a little bit of beta testing as well. Their dedication to accuracy was surprising and really challenged my own knowledge of the systems. I did a type change back to the 767 during the development process so trying to remember the systems and procedures was a challenge as my head was now filled with 767 details, and although similar to the 747 in some systems, it is quite different in others. It is a bit like being asked to recall the colour of your wife's eyes, after having stared at them for many years! I'm now on the 777 but would still prefer to be on the Whale.

I was interested in your comments on the aborted start with autostart engaged. I have attempted this on both the GE and RR engine variants and found that it works correctly with the Fuel flows reducing to 0 and the start discontinued with N2 or N3 reducing to max motoring or 0 depending on whether the start was aborted before or after starter cutout. I did not check to see, that despite the zero indicated fuel flow, that fuel was actually still being consumed from the tank. I can see that there is a slight error in that when a fuel cutoff switch is placed to cutoff, prior to starter cutout, the N2 or N3 should register max starter speed where as they are indicating the %RPM at cutoff selection. Not a biggie and may be a P3D simulation limitation.

As you stated for some reason the stick shaker/buffet is happening some 20 to 25 kts below the top of the bricks (GE FL340 225T 28% MAC). I cannot recall this happening during the beta tests. Buffeting may occur at some speed below the top of the bricks (depending on flight regime) but certainly not to that magnitude (that I could recall from sim details and If a simmer were to get themselves into that position in the first place then they sure have more problems to deal with other than sim fidelity!!). The secondary stall works for me as it did in the RW sim.

Safe flying.

Edited December 27, 2018 by cowpatz
format