PMDG DC-6 to be released on Friday, June 18th

[Dominique_K 10,149]

7 hours ago, P_R_S said:

are you sure?

 

This is what Randazzo wrote in the post quoted by Reader on page 4 of this thread. It is admittedly long ago but I have not heard in his recent videos that he said otherwise.

In terms of realism, it is not intended that this product be as detailed as, say, the NGX. While you will need to learn how to correctly (and effectively!) manage the engines and systems on the airplane, it will not have a failures module, nor will we be adding in some of the character driven amenities that our friends over at A2A have done so well with in their vintage airplane line

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Dominique_K

[P_R_S 18]

6 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

This is what Randazzo wrote in the post quoted by Reader on page 4 of this thread. It is admittedly long ago but I have not heard in his recent videos that he said otherwise.

In terms of realism, it is not intended that this product be as detailed as, say, the NGX. While you will need to learn how to correctly (and effectively!) manage the engines and systems on the airplane, it will not have a failures module, nor will we be adding in some of the character driven amenities that our friends over at A2A have done so well with in their vintage airplane line

 

I see, but it seems that some basic failures are there, have alook at The Flying Fabio preview at 00:38:00

Am I wrong?

[Dominique_K 10,149]

3 minutes ago, P_R_S said:

I see, but it seems that some basic failures are there, have alook at The Flying Fabio preview at 00:38:00

Am I wrong?

My understanding of RR’s videos is that redlining (in the general sense) will break things but the 6 wont have a more complex module. 

[P_R_S 18]

11 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

My understanding of RR’s videos is that redlining (in the general sense) will break things but the 6 wont have a more complex module. 

Ok, 🙂 it is enough for me 😎

[a321 207]

7 hours ago, Chock said:

Well, I've not said I don't want to learn that stuff, I'm just pointing out it's pretty hard for new people, I have learned that stuff, and still do learn stuff all the time. In fact today I was re-doing exams for working back at Menzies Aviation at EGCC, where I started again literally this Monday. So yesterday had the aviation medical (again), and now I'm currently about halfway through the 46 exams I have to retake for all the necessary certifications on all the rules and knowledge for working on the airliners, plus I've just done the (very intrusive) UK Government security clearance test form this evening, I'm halfway through the DBS check for the UK, and then I'll have to do the GSAT terrorism security thing again. Then I've got to do all the driving tests for the airside licence (again), then I've got to do all the airport security pass stuff to get the blue airside pass (again), then I've got to be re-certified on all the work stuff for all the vehicles and engine start supervising and headsetting, pushbacks, loading and all the other ton of procedures (again).

This is a lot of stuff and it's a big effort, even bearing in mind I've done all that stuff before and am familiar with it, so I am also trying to help those people who also started working there on Monday as well, but have never done any of that before. Because I remember what it was like first time around and recall how confusing it was when everyone was going on about stuff you've never heard of and using all kinds of strange lingo, where you've got people talking about AKEs, AKHs, ULDs, EBTs, wellworks, AVIs, HAZMATs, hilos, LD8s, LD4s, FEPs, GPUs, APUs, ETDs, zigzags and a million other things you've never heard of but you're gonna be doing an exam on that afternoon.

Whilst the above is not the same as learning how to operate your toy A320 or 737 for MSFS, when these products are a detailed simulation and you've only just started getting into flight sims, as some people are doing with MSFS, then I can sympathise with the task they are facing, since it too is a lot to learn. It's not just all the aeroplane's systems, it's all the how you fly things, and all the ATC, and flight procedures, flight planning, loading, weather, IFR procedures, learning charts and so on. I do that stuff for real and even I think it's quite a lot of stuff for to learn when I look at it in flight sims, And they are more complex than they used to be.

So I'm certainly not averse to learning stuff. But the point is that anyone who comes in cold to flight simming now, literally has to learn it all in one go, whereas those of us who've got pilot's licences and flying experience and have been into flight sims for years and maybe work in aviation too, have had a gentle introduction to it all over a very long period of time, much of which was in concert with the slowly increasing fidelity of the add-on aeroplanes we got for our flight sims and the increasing fidelity of the sim too (it wasn't until FS2002 that Microsoft Flight Simulator even had any built in ATC at all, nor AI aeroplanes, and there was no GPS in the sim until FS2004), so whilst there is a lot of stuff we've learned, we've been able to accumulate that knowledge with the benefit of a somewhat gentler learning curve than anyone who bought MSFS last week and is then suddenly faced with literally everything they need to know to get their realistic add-on airliner working. And as noted, not just the systems on the aeroplane, but also how to fly it, what all the flight planning, fueling, loading and operational routing etc covers.

So it's all very well saying 'learn it' to someone else when they have to do it all in one lump, but that's a very unsympathetic attitude indeed and it's not very welcoming toward people who are new to all this and interested in getting into it. These kind of snobbish elitist attitudes are what garners criticism for places like Avsim, when people who regard themselves as time-served self-appointed veterans are unsympathetic to the tougher learning curve people who are new to all this are facing. And they really are facing a tougher learning curve than we did, because they're coming into it when detailed add-on aeroplanes rival the complexity of the real things, whereas when we were all getting into it, one of the plus points they'd list on the back of the box to our add-on 737 for FS98 was that it featured twelve-sided polygons for the fuselage. Now people start whining if you can't zoom in to a distance of two inches away from the things and read the stencilling on the avionics cooling vent outlet mast.

And for those of you with rose-tinted spectacles who think it was just as hard learning your FS2004 PMDG 737 NG as it is nowadays, I've just pulled out my old PMDG FS2004 CD installation box and took this picture. Anyone wanna take a guess how many pages the manual was for this PMDG 737 NG?

If you guessed 43 pages, then give yourself ten points, because yup, that's your PMDG manual for the FS2004 737600/700 NG, (so that's two aircraft types, with different wings, different engines, different fuselage lengths, different turning circles, different fuel tank and cargo/passenger capacity and a different overhead) and it's not a big page size either as you can see. The FMC manual is a bit longer at around 70 pages, but that's literally all the documentation you got, and to be honest, you could have read it all in about an hour and a half pretty easily, because there are a lot of pictures and the print isn't tiny.

 

I didn't say you specifically, I was talking in General. Its not un unsympathetic view, its life. You want to play in the big league you got to learn, that's life. You want to just fly around or emulate your last holiday trip and take in the scenery, that's why we have defaults. Sadly the notion that it will be easy is what is preventing people from learning, it is setting the expectation. Alas you can buy and read all the manuals you want, you can even become a 737 expert, but then there is the well known fact you also need charts and know how to read them or you are not going to have a great time, again this needs to be learnt. It took me some 2 years to be abele to not only fly the complex add-ons, but learn about flight planning, weights, weather etc etc... Now why would I squander that investment of Money and time to you know... fly planes inverted. The simple fact is there is no getting around this, just as I cant wake up one morning and decide I want to be a brain surgeon, without going thorough the process. Us veterans should of course help people, but at whatever point you come in to flightsimming you are going to have to learn it all and me personally I do not want to see my hobby dumbed down because people expect GTAV style game play...go play that then or dont buy add-ons that require learning, or take the time to learn and see just how rewarding it can be. I am sure there would be the same view point of view if people started saying can we have cod but with super soakers as guns are too violent!. Dont play COD then, but those that like should not have their game game dumbed down because of others.  

Edited June 17, 2021 by a321

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Of course, I guess some people want everything easy, but that's not what I suspect is true for most people. If they thought it was so easy, why didn't they go their real life lisences? I think most people think it is hard. I'm not talking about people with no interest in aviation. I cant believe that most people playing the sim dont have any interest in aviation. I bet many or most of us who sim are the same people who steal hopeful glances to the cockpit when boarding planes in real life, or have an extra look at the CA and FO as they stroll importantly through the halls at airports. 

I think many think it is difficult to learn the complex aircraft, and still get awestruck when seeing a 747 or 380 land. Put in a big crosswind component and we exlaim "how skilled they are!". When first looking at the mess that is the first impression of the dc6 cockpit, I bet many people will feel daunted. How great the feeling of achievement the first time you successfully get the engines started in realistic mode! 🙂

I haven't read a single thread so far about people complaining that pmdg stuff is too difficult and they want it dumbed down. Instead, I see many people of perhaps varying skill levels do their best to share whatever knowledge they have accumulated via youtube or written guides. That is what is most obvious about places like avsim and the sim ecosystem - the common interest and pursuit of learning. 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Andreas Stangenes

[Reader 2,021]

41 minutes ago, a321 said:

I didn't say you specifically

It is possible to quote someone without including the whole of a long (or short) reply. Then other forum users do not need to scroll through something that they recently read, but the person quoted will still receive a notification

[Dominique_K 10,149]

1 hour ago, a321 said:

  Sadly the notion that it will be easy is what is preventing people from learning, it is setting the expectation

I agree with all you said in the post, just underlining the main danger. There is a recurring sad narrative of some on this forum which brands as "elitist" meant in a pejorative way  anybody who looks for some kind of  complexity in simming, specially in the context of the soon-to-come environment of the console.  Make it easy, make it fun. Attract new blood. Diversity.  Blah blah blah. This is the same  philosophy which is slowly detroying our education systems.   

On a lighter touch, and as you spoke of learning brain surgery, I highly recommend this wonderful 1981 book. If you can find it ! 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Dominique_K

[P_R_S 18]

3 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

I agree with all you said in the post, just underlining the main danger. There is a recurring sad narrative of some on this forum which brands as "elitist" meant in a pejorative way  anybody who looks for some kind of  complexity in simming, specially in the context of the soon-to-come environment of the console.  Make it easy, make it fun. Attract new blood. Diversity.  Blah blah blah. This is the same  philosophy which is slowly detroying our education systems.   

On a lighter touch, and as you spoke of learning brain surgery, I highly recommend this wonderful 1981 book. If you can find it ! 

 

 

Did someone remember the comedy "Idiocracy"?

[pstrub 998]

7 minutes ago, P_R_S said:

Did someone remember the comedy "Idiocracy"?

Watched it. Thought it was a documentary 😯😇

[Reader 2,021]

17 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

 "elitist" meant in a pejorative way 

It works both ways, with a few of the "elite" being only too ready to pour scorn on "the rest", especially those who have the temerity to use a console. Flight simulators, even PMDG ones, have something for everyone. I enjoy very much leaving the management of the DC6 to the virtual flight engineer and indeed hearing him speak and watching him operate the aircraft. I have the greatest respect for the user who has learned how to (virtually) manually start the engines and even more for the user who has the depth of knowledge and dexterity to operate single-handedly an aircraft that in real life required a crew of at least three. At the same time, I prefer to be allowed to fly the bits I do know how to without reading that I am deemed to be in some way inadequate or indeed to be scorned. PMDG must think the same way, or they would not have given us the virtual flight crew member.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Reader

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

I can give examples of when people have looked down on people wanting it easy, but I am hard pressed to come up with someone wanting to downgrade a complex system. Is there really such a thing, or are you just making up ghost stories to keep yourself occupied?

[Reader 2,021]

If that comment is directed at me, I don't see a suggestion in my text that anything should be downgraded. I am not asking for any change, just that it is recognised that we can all take what we want from a simulator and what we do take has no bearing on what quality of person we may be. In short, live and let live and enjoy the parts that entertain without disparaging those who choose different parts or different levels of engagement.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Reader

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

I was thinking more about A321 and Dominque_K who I understand are annoyed by all the people wanting it "easy". 

I dont think we are getting "dumbed down" systems because we have whiners among us who convince developers to downgrade their addons from a more complex product to a watered out version. The developers who produced watered out version are setting out to do so from the get go. It is, as I explained in a few posts above, a cost and time issue for the developers. They are deliberately targetting a market segment by doing so. 

PMDG and FSLabs are targetting another market segment, and it not the same segment, although im sure there is some overlap, especially now the last year where we have been starved for complex systems. Even connoisseurs will have had to make do with less than stellar releases because of lack of options in the market. That is about to change 🙂 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Andreas Stangenes

[Der Zeitgeist 1,575]

The main problem I see in the entire study-level vs. easy flying debate is that the flight sim community tends to fracture into different user bases, differentiated by the kind of tools and addons they use, which tends to complicate further development because everything including addons should stay compatible and usable no matter what stuff you use in addition to the core sim.

It's already starting, with lots of people using Navigraph for MSFS, and other people still using the stock nav database. Now addon airport and airplane developers need to test their products with both configurations to make sure they work right.

It gets even more complicated when you factor in things like VATSIM, replacements for the stock ATC and flight planning solutions, avionics addons and things like custom ground service addons for airports.

Now the problem I noticed there is that a lot of the "elite" simmers over time tend to view things like using Navigraph, Simbrief, and replacements for the stock ATC as their own default way to use the sim. And this leads to discussions when someone notices a problem or incompatibility with the actual stock MSFS systems and it gets dismissed with arguments like "just use VATSIM", "you should use Navigraph anyway" or "why are you using the stock ATC, it's word not allowed, use something else instead".

This gets especially problematic when professional addon developers show the same attitude and don't notice bugs and incompatibilites with core MSFS systems any longer. One example is that a lot of the current addon airports for MSFS, almost one year after release, still don't feature standard MSFS features like frequency and ILS autotune, working taxi ribbons and ground services. 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Der Zeitgeist