8 minutes ago, RustyFlyer said:

PMDG unquestionably produces terrific products. But, from my strictly objective perspective, many of the posts in this thread (and in similar other threads) almost appear to reflect attributes verging on cult-like worship of this particular 3PD.

(21 yrs. PP)

(p.s.: I totally get it- PMDG is unique in many regards, but..............)

If we could combine the best parts of the Maddog X, FSLabs A320, and PMDG we would have the perfect airplane.  

On 10/19/2020 at 3:26 AM, FAZZ3 said:

Robert gave a small one-liner update on the MSFS version of the 737 from in his latest Oct 18 update about their BBJ product line for P3D.

"PMDG 737NG3 for MSFS: We still expect this product to be 12+ months away based upon the condition and trajectory of MSFS."

So maybe a 2022 release at best.

Link to update post

How can it take that long to make one aircraft??  They should have all the physics data from prior versions.  J

9 minutes ago, Oldschool61 said:

How can it take that long to make one aircraft??  They should have all the physics data from prior versions.  J

because you can't even start working on it until an SDK is set.  that's why they put the team back on p3d

1 hour ago, micstatic said:

because you can't even start working on it until an SDK is set. 

Tell that to the FlybyWire guys, so they can stop work on the A320 right away.

"12+ month" this is PMDG marketing strategy and not a software/SDK problem because FIRST "study level" aircraft for FS2020 mean LAST for P3D market and actually end of P3D at all.

2 hours ago, airlinejets said:

Tell that to the FlybyWire guys, so they can stop work on the A320 right away.

Let’s be clear about this.  I love what FBW are doing, but they are currently modding a plane, not building one.  Not the same thing.

2 hours ago, airlinejets said:

Tell that to the FlybyWire guys, so they can stop work on the A320 right away.

In all honesty, the A320 by them still flies as bad as it did when it was released. Most of the stuff they add is cosmetic, the AP is ridiculous, the MCDU is far far away from being A320 MCDU and performance is very wrong. Every time i go back to FSL's A319/320 from testing a new release of that 320 for MSFS (no matter what it's still a default aircraft) i am presented with a sensation of security and reliability.

Last time i used it, it decided to ignore the route at a given point and just flew straight, also ignoring DCT TO commands issued on the MCDU. How fun.

So... I sincerely doubt they feel the need to use the SDK to the extent PMDG or other known good developers will.

2 hours ago, Nuno Pinto said:

In all honesty, the A320 by them still flies as bad as it did when it was released. Most of the stuff they add is cosmetic, the AP is ridiculous, the MCDU is far far away from being A320 MCDU and performance is very wrong. Every time i go back to FSL's A319/320 from testing a new release of that 320 for MSFS (no matter what it's still a default aircraft) i am presented with a sensation of security and reliability.

Last time i used it, it decided to ignore the route at a given point and just flew straight, also ignoring DCT TO commands issued on the MCDU. How fun.

So... I sincerely doubt they feel the need to use the SDK to the extent PMDG or other known good developers will.

This 

11 hours ago, airlinejets said:

Tell that to the FlybyWire guys, so they can stop work on the A320 right away.

Lol, and we have today's winner of the internet.

8 hours ago, Nuno Pinto said:

In all honesty, the A320 by them still flies as bad as it did when it was released. Most of the stuff they add is cosmetic

Bashing freeware modders who invest their time in improving the sim and are not charging exorbitant prices for adding the left intake reverse knob....nice.

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

Bashing freeware modders who invest their time in improving the sim and are not charging exorbitant prices for adding the left intake reverse knob....nice.

You are a good example what the difference is between an "serious flightsim enthusiast" and an "occasional simmer".

The Flybywire guys are enthusiasts with good intention. But comparing their ambiitiones project with FSL is just ridiculous.

Edited October 22, 20205 yr by JoeFackel

Bashing? It's the truth, just stating that because some people seem to think it'll become something usable someday.

I'm not comparing it to FSL, i said "when i go back to FSL". It's not comparable.

I'm sorry if you don't like reality or opinions about the (low) quality of current offers and labelling me, someone with over 10 years of simulation and over 20000 hours "wasted" in the hobby an occasional simmer, now THAT is interesting.

@Nuno Pinto,  sorry old friend, but you're totally missing the focus ...

The NEO in MFS is designed way ahead of what FSLabs and other pre-historic devs do... It's meant to simulate a CRM environment where your co-pilot ( to your choice of sex which you can define in one of the CFG files ) starts taking the clothes off...

From there on, nothing works, you miss all of the ATC, you start losing visual accuracy and your hands are so sweat on final that the stick escapes causing that weird wing drop as you listen to the sexy "retard... retard...".

You guys really don't want to see the positive aspects....

Edited October 22, 20205 yr by jcomm

Unfortunately the only way the a320 will become usable, is when Asobo fixes it up.  Until then the Flybywire guys are doing their best to put lipstick on the pig.  That's not bashing the Flybywire guys, they're doing the best they can with the tools at their disposal.

15 hours ago, B777ER said:

Aerosoft planes are like the guy set up on the street selling "Rolex" watches. Sure it "says" Rolex and people looking from afar will say it is but, it really isn't. 

come on dude, they're way better than that 😄

as someone else earlier in the thread suggested, there's a huge chunk of simmers who are far more comfortable with Aerosoft standard airliners, which lie somewhere between the dumpster fire default MSFS planes and PMDG at like $200 or whatever they are