33 minutes ago, Reader said:

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.

I hope that virtual crew member catches on and PDMG and other parties will make use of that feature in other airliners as well. It allows novices to start flying sooner, learning the procedures 'on the fly' as it were. That way you can choose to just fly the aircraft if you don't feel like programming the FMC this time, or do the FMC but let the virtual crew member take care of other things.

Interesting perspective, @Der Zeitgeist. Im not sure if I totally am convinced about the navigraph issue, though. The new sim is bringing along features we would have to pay  a handsome slump of money for in the other sims. Weather comes to mind. When I would help newcomers to the sim, a weather addon was always the first thing on my recommended list, and their wish list. If you wanted to fly IFR on vatsim you kinda needed navigraph because the nav database wasnt updated. FSUIPC was on everyones "must have" list. MSFS has made all of that easy for everyone. You no longer NEED many of these addons the same way one would before. 

Yes, im sure the reality for addon devs is more complex than ever, but for us as an ecosystem I think it has never been this easy before. I have been a Navigraph subscriber for many, many years, and I still am. But I dont use their nav database anymore. I use their charts, which I highly recommend by the way (but wouldnt look down upon any who dont use it), but I found that using a custom nav database only causes problems when flying in a group. People end up not having the same waypoints, and all sorts of strange effects occur because of it 🙂

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by Andreas Stangenes

20 minutes ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

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. 

In fairness to developers, the SDK is both new and constantly evolving. It has simply not yet been possible to include many of the very advanced features that we have grown used to seeing from the developers of the most complex models, which is probably why we have not yet seen anything from them. 

Just now, Reader said:

In fairness to developers, the SDK is both new and constantly evolving. It has simply not yet been possible to include many of the very advanced features that we have grown used to seeing from the developers of the most complex models, which is probably why we have not yet seen anything from them. 

As far as I know, that is only partially true. The SDK was much more advanced and competent than what we were lead to believe by the complaints from 3PD. It was just written in a different programming language, so the 3PD would have to learn to program in that new way to make use of it. Also, I do belive that the manuals for the SDK was very limited, so it was difficult for them to utilize it. I am losely paraphrasing Matt Nischan here 🙂

18 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

From my understanding, the higher the quality of the textures in the cabin, the lower the FPS.  There is a compromise between how high the quality you want the textures in the cabin to be, and how much FPS you are willing to lose.  I think PMDG chose the best quality of textures that they could use for the cabin, without tanking the FPS.

 

Textures don't hurt performance per say, what does is when shuffling them once your VRAM budget is over. This is one of the reasons to go DX12/Vulkan, so important, this kind of process AKA texture streaming can be done on a separate core without hurting performance or introducing stutters. But it is REALLY hard to perfect.

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by akita

17 minutes ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

Interesting perspective, @Der Zeitgeist. Im not sure if I totally am convinced about the navigraph issue, though.

I know this is getting heavily off-topic here, but I just want to illustrate the point with one example I came across recently.

I really love the WT G3000 mod and I have been using it for a while now. In the most recent update, they included a VNAV advisory function. But to make it work, they had to remove the feature where the G3000 pulls the altitudes for flight plan waypoints from the MSFS world map flight planner as well as any procedures you select in flight and puts it into the G3000 flight plan automatically. Now you have to input the altitude constraints manually.

When I mentioned this in their Discord, the developers explained why this was necessary to make the VNAV calculations work correctly. But I also had a bunch of people immediately jump into the discussion telling me how the stock MSFS flight planner and nav database wasn't even worth using anyway, that "everyone was using Navigraph" and its charts anyway and if I insisted on using the stock MSFS flight planner and nav database, I shouldn't be using the WT mods. 

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by Der Zeitgeist

Sorry to hear about your experience, @Der Zeitgeist. People can be both rude and inconsiderate at times. 

Not to detract from your experience, but to add my own experience with WT, the few times Ive raised an issue there might be a bunch of laypeople all contributing their opinions on what I should do. Oftentimes it is irrelevant to my issue. However, when the devs themselves take the time to answer (which they have done 100% of the time so far), it is spot on, humble and never in a tone as the one you mentioned. 

People who reply in such dogmatic ways as you describe, I would think was very young, since the reply reeks of immaturity and lack of understanding of our complex ecosystem. 

Hello to one and all 
Looking forward to this aircraft . I am a 73yr old novice I have all the PMGD YouTube 

tutorials saved . My question is it purely study level ?

6 minutes ago, Marlinleg said:

Hello to one and all 
Looking forward to this aircraft . I am a 73yr old novice I have all the PMGD YouTube 

tutorials saved . My question is it purely study level ?

Welcome Marlin! 

No, the DC6 has a great artificial Flight Engineer (AFE) that will help you operate the intricacies of the bird so you can focus on flying 🙂 

28 minutes ago, Marlinleg said:

Hello to one and all 
Looking forward to this aircraft . I am a 73yr old novice I have all the PMGD YouTube 

tutorials saved . My question is it purely study level ?

Hey… you’re giving the Six a run for her money! 
 

No- take your time and learn every nuance OR load the a/c on a runway, use the AFE and fly her like a 172. She’s heavier on the controls and super stable. Let the AFE do everything other than the driving and revel in the sensory experience.

She’s as simple or as complex as you’d like, much like yourself, no doubt 😉

This is one of the reasons I’m SO GLAD that this is PMDG’s first MSFS product. She simple enough where she can expose them to the new market/new users, and she’s endearing enough to engender brand loyalty.

When the 737 debuts, a bit more reading will most certainly be in order.

HTH- C

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by cavaricooper

35 minutes ago, Marlinleg said:

Hello to one and all 
Looking forward to this aircraft . I am a 73yr old novice I have all the PMGD YouTube 

tutorials saved . My question is it purely study level ?

I'm delighted you've posted this because it's a rather delicious antidote to some incredibly sniffy posts over the last couple of pages.

I hope you buy it and I hope you love it. Might even give it a go myself - without getting caught up in all the intricacies - if the forum dads will allow me to 😁

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by spacedyemeerkat

I am 80 years old, and my first four  flights as a Private in the US Army was in a C 118, which is military version of DC6. Can't wait until I can fly the PMDG. 

2 hours ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

Welcome Marlin! 

No, the DC6 has a great artificial Flight Engineer (AFE) that will help you operate the intricacies of the bird so you can focus on flying 🙂 

This is exactly the reason I want this aircraft. Luckily for me I get to wait awhie depending on price too, till it makes it to the Market Place. Which I don't mind at all. days, months, years, centuries, I can watch and read what people think of it from using the Flight Engineer, to people who will take hours to start it up! BTW, I also think a extremely smart choice for PMDG, and hope the others have the options so people can fly them as they choose, Flight Engineer help, or manual all the way for those folks.

Edited June 17, 20214 yr by in2tech

29 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I am 80 years old, and my first four  flights as a Private in the US Army was in a C 118, which is military version of DC6. Can't wait until I can fly the PMDG. 

I am 77 years old and flew in DC-6's a number of times when I was just a lad. My Dad was an American Airlines flight engineer for the DC-6 (and later DC-7, Lockheed Electra, Boeing 707 and DC-10). So I am quite interested in the AFE. I remember that he would bring home thick 3-ring manuals about engine operation and Flight Engineer procedures for the DC-6. I wish I had kept copies of these! From a passenger point of view the aircraft was superb. Full first class cabin with a lounge area where passengers could go to read, drink (and smoke!!).  I last flew on a DC-6 in around 1968. I had gone to work for NASA in Houston, and was on a business trip from Houston to Norfolk. The last leg of the flight was a DC-6. I don't remember the airline: Eastern, National, Delta? I must say this, that compared to today's jets the noise and vibration was much worse than I remember from when I was a kid.

1 hour ago, Marlinleg said:

Hello to one and all 
Looking forward to this aircraft . I am a 73yr old novice I have all the PMGD YouTube 

tutorials saved . My question is it purely study level ?

welcome Martin

If by study level  one means necessary adherence to proper engine management and flight profile with endangering consequences if you don't, it seems so.

The Flight Engineer is a nice touch, imitated from A2A Strat and Connie, and add to the realism in my opinion. These aircraft cannot be flown solo.