4 hours ago, WestAir said:

Think the core feature is VNAV? It needs to know what the weather is to work and we don't have a weather API.

I doubt that. Does the real aircraft need all that weather information to produce a VNAV profile?

I am disappointed that the PMDG B737 will be further delayed. I was looking forward to a good representation of the B737. Whatever fixes PMDG needs will surely help other developers. So, MS/Asobo get it done, please.

Never saw this coming lol.

3 minutes ago, flyinpilot212121 said:

Well here’s hoping the maddog is in better shape for a sooner release. 

I was holding off on learning the fbw, maybe it’s time to sit down and get to know each other. 

Well the maddog has VNAV too, so they need the same stuff from Asobo as PMDG needs (weather API). If PMDG is already reluctant in releasing unfinished stuff, Leonardo is even more. Both are really perfectionist enterprises. I wouldn't hold my breath for anything. Fenix probably got the same kind of problems, they have been really quiet for a couple of weeks. (Actually on discord there is enough talk that leads me to this very conclusion that the A320 is even further off than the 7373...). It could very well be that none of them releases in 2022.
Then again once Asobo does their homework it might go really quick, if we're lucky.

2 minutes ago, synape said:

I doubt that. Does the real aircraft need all that weather information to produce a VNAV profile?

Yes, at least if you want a accurate one. Between 80 knots tail and 80 knots headwind there are about 16 (!) miles of difference in regards to the end of the path. So instead of the approach fix you might end up BEHIND the airport...
Of course any sane simulator pilot can account for that manually, but that's another topic.

4 hours ago, WestAir said:

Think the core feature is VNAV? It needs to know what the weather is to work and we don't have a weather API.

 

So, how come the WT CJ4 and G 1000 NXi have vnav functionality (obviously, in both cases still a work in progress)?

That's a shame but I'd much rather wait for a good, solid first release and get a good initial impression. PMDG is always worth the wait. 

While I know the development headaches logistics of maintaining 2 sub apps in the same platform can be challenging, I strongly feel that MS/AS did the whole community a disservice when they felt as though all simmers/players of aviation related products could be satisfied in the same application.  So with that....I know WHY they never did this...but this is my graphical (and automotive) rendition of how MSFS "should" have been created. 

This is for entertainment value only, not to start a whole sub-thread on the subject.  But I imagine if they could 'a pulled it off...we'd not have cross-platform coding gremlins setting Devs back weeks/months (or not at all!).  I do fully believe the conspiracy theory that most of the headaches for the items "Simmers" are concerned about are when Dr. Frankenstein merged his monster together in the lab...in the form of the xBox code added to the base sim. 🤔  Yes...other issues persisted before the merge, but one can only imagine the complexity it added to addressing them.  Anyway....already typed too much...enjoy the pic. 🙂

Feel free to add your own creative analogies, hehe....keeping it tongue and cheek of course (and clean, LOL). 🙂 

DISCLAIMER:
My apologies in advance to all the El Camino fans out there...no actual El Caminos, Chevelles or Chevy trucks were harmed in the making of this parity.  All likeness to any automotive icons, real or imagined, are purely coincidental.  The viewers of these images shall hold the maker harmless, and no claims of feeling slighted that the maker did not cite Ford vs Chevrolet products.  Any lawsuits arising from claims of hurt feelings...real or imagined, shall be squashed in a pre-trial hearing.

3 hours ago, RTK1972 said:

Microsoft should replace Asobo with the guys from DCS, at least they are listening and delivering.......

Asobo is just a very good Team, look at what you have with this Sim and what this Team has done over the year; this is realy not NOTHING they can`t do all at once - i am just lucky for what i have.

We have to be a bit patient as with everything: It is ready when it`s ready, you not knowing what goes on behind this scene so pretty shure not all is Asobos fault..

cheers 😉

13 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

So, how come the WT CJ4 and G 1000 NXi have vnav functionality (obviously, in both cases still a work in progress)?

I don't know, sadly. This is all way above my level of understanding. I only recite what I've heard from smarter people.

4 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

That's probably the core functionality they are talking about (this and weather radar / terrain radar, which is all tied together).

The inability to extract the position of clouds and precipitation data from the sim environment in a C++/WASM project definitely makes weather radar a no-go at this time.

Terrain display should be possible in the current state of MSFS if an aircraft uses its own stand-alone terrain database rather than extracting terrain data directly from the sim. That is how the terrain system works in all of PMDG’s products for P3D, so hopefully they can adapt that for MSFS. One of the Fenix A320 previews showed they have terrain display working, so I assume PMDG will be able to do the same. 
 

30 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

So, how come the WT CJ4 and G 1000 NXi have vnav functionality (obviously, in both cases still a work in progress)?

I guess it is related to the js/html vs WASM/C++ approach.

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by espent

The day RR announced development of the 737 for MSFS, I bought it together with a new pc. Till then I was an enthusiastic P3Dv4 pilot convinced MSFS was only for low and slow. I actually figured that all the problems he mentions now had been dealt with as we know PMDG will not lower their standards. But alas, as often as we are experiencing broken features, it must have frustrated PMDG too. Should LM publish P3Dv6 now, I think I am very tempted to get my hands on that and to install all my abandoned add-ons again, including my PMDG iron!

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by phmcr

35 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

So, how come the WT CJ4 and G 1000 NXi have vnav functionality (obviously, in both cases still a work in progress)?

My guess is that they are using improved version of MSFS assets with code native to it, so they have access to terrain, weather and other things.

PMDG and other need to use some other languages because of the complexities and maybe also some port over of older code to save some time, I think they use P3D to test/debug the MSFS 737

But I might be wrong

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by bendead

41 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

Never saw this coming lol.

^ this.

Gotta love pmdg’s products but their habit of long-winded waffly announcements that carefully under-promise, which actually turn out to be long-winded waffly announcements that over-promise, is beyond parody.