3 minutes ago, odourboy said:

He's such a drama queen. Everything there's a PMDG development hiccup he throws Asobo under the bus. LOL 

He does the same with Lockheed Martin too.

36 minutes ago, ark said:

Seems to me what the sim VNAV really needs in order to make necessary adjustments is a/c position and ground speed info, which I assume is available in the sim. I don't think VNAV needs to know WHY the ground speed is what it is, e.g.,  while a shift in wind can impact ground speed and the VNAV profile, so can a shift in throttle position.

Al

Yes, MSFS has the same simconnect variables as FSX and P3D for ambient wind direction and speed at the aircraft’s current position, along with indicated and true airspeed, Mach number, ground speed and static and TAT air temperature.

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by JRBarrett

17 minutes ago, tyrodes said:

Broken flight planning (e.g. made up waypoints, turn-around bug, reshuffling flight plan, etc. )

Those are limitations of the default MSFS flight planner and NAV system. PMDG aircraft have never used the default nav system in any platform. They have their own custom FMS, and custom nav database.

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by JRBarrett

8 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

Yes, MSFS has the same simconnect variables as FSX and P3D for ambient wind direction and speed at the aircraft’s current position, along with indicated and true airspeed, Mach number, ground speed and static and TAT air temperature.

Incorrect.. Simconnect variables are not the same as P3D..

P3D has more variables and functions via Simconnect than MSFS..

However, FSX <---> MSFS has the same Simconnect variables, but.. MSFS has less Simconnect functions since some FSX functions were deprecated, for example all camera functions and weather functions.. among others.

As a final note, the difference between MSFS vs P3D is because Lockheed martin added those functions and variables themselves over the years, where as MSFS took over FSX and used what was there without having a copy of what LM has done all this time.

S.

24 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

Those are limitations of the default MSFS flight planner and NAV system. PMDG aircraft have never used the default nav system in any platform. They have their own custom FMS, and custom nav database.

Maybe as a strategic partner ASOBO would like PMDG to use the built in flight planner (supposed to be fixed in February SU)  similar to the way NXi does?  Also, FBW-dev and WT-CJ4 have their own custom FMS and they have trouble gathering your flight plan from the built in flight planner due to, I believe, current limitations.  Mabey PMDG is also stuck at this point?   Just wondering of course.  

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by tyrodes

10 minutes ago, simbol said:

Incorrect.. Simconnect variables are not the same as P3D..

P3D has more variables and functions via Simconnect than MSFS..

However, FSX <---> MSFS has the same Simconnect variables, but.. MSFS has less Simconnect functions since some FSX functions were deprecated, for example all camera functions and weather functions.. among others.

As a final note, the difference between MSFS vs P3D is because Lockheed martin added those functions and variables themselves over the years, where as MSFS took over FSX and used what was there without having a copy of what LM has done all this time.

S.

Yes, P3D has many more simvars than MSFS (or FSX) but those variables I specifically mentioned: ambient wind direction, ambient wind velocity, indicated airspeed, true airspeed, Mach, groundspeed, SAT and TAT are present in MSFS, and work exactly the same as they do in FSX and P3D.

I monitor each of these variables on every flight I do in MSFS with the SDK simvarwatch utility.
 

 

10 minutes ago, tyrodes said:

Maybe as a strategic partner ASOBO would like PMDG to use the built in flight planner (supposed to be fixed in February SU)  similar to the way NXi does?  Also, FBW-dev and WT-CJ4 have their own custom FMS and they have trouble gathering your flight plan from the built in flight planner due to, I believe, current limitations.  Mabey PMDG is also stuck at this point?   Just wondering of course.  

Until WT overhauls the default flight planner and nav system, I don’t think any complex add-on that uses a realistic FMS emulation is going to be able to use the default system. Hopefully once WT fixes the broken default Nav and planner, all aircraft (default and third party) will be able to use it seamlessly. 

Well, on one hand we've pretty much heard all this before when we switched to P3D.  It's not that much different.  On the other hand, I/we had hoped these kinds of things would get sorted much sooner with the new sim.  It seems like the development cycle for 3PDs for the new sim is going to be about the same as it was for P3D, maybe a hair quicker, but not that much.

As far as Robert's posting style, yeah, he could cut it waaaaayyyyyyy down...lol.  When you really have no news to share, just say that.  Say what you're waiting on and from who you're waiting on and let it ride.

I've been super optimistic about the new sim, but I must say all of my predictions have been completely wrong.  In my defense though, I did say from the very beginning, the sim needed to be totally unlocked in terms of the variables that go into a sim for those making 'study level' stuff.  I think we're starting to see this play out now to some degree.

For PMDG to now take the release date off the table, so to speak, might come across the wrong way to some, but I see his point.  While that is worrying, I have a feeling at some point, they/we will end up with what we need or want.  That's the ups and downs of the development cycle. The bad news is yeah, we could be well into the fall or winter months of next year for this type of product.

I would like to at least hear if this aircraft will be RNP capable.  He could have at least given us some of the features of the 'new' LNAV, etc.  I'd feel more than safe going out on a limb and saying it would be, but it would be nice to officially hear that.  We don't need to 'see' it in screen shots, if they're not to that point, but I think they could at least state the fact in postings.  Same goes for other features.

Anyways, I guess we wait for a while longer...lol.

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by Jeff Nielsen

I did say it won't be here for some time and no one believed me. I'm calling Q4 2022 

You can ask him questions live now on Fabios channel on Twitch,tv

I predict it will pass all of 2022 and we still won't have a simple and solid weather system.
This development is very much blocking the simulator's progress. Asobo has devoted thousands of hours of development to this and has gone nowhere.
If Asobo were able to quickly solidify the weather system and open up to third-party developers, we would have several hours of development allocated to other areas and simulator progression would be much faster. We don't want to be in 2023 and still discussing the meteorological system with aircraft developers complaining about it.

Microsoft wants more revenue 👉 Flogs Asobo to create new content and introduce new features at very short deadlines 👉 Asobo is stretched thin, trying to meet expectations and deliver within deadlines with little time for testing 👉 More content but also a plethora of bugs and broken features and dev support 👉 Customer and developers complain 👉 More hotfixes 👉 Stable sim for a few weeks 👉 Start the cycle again 

26 minutes ago, FlightSimToday said:

I did say it won't be here for some time and no one believed me. I'm calling Q4 2022 

Wanna make a game out of it? Closest one wins?

I'm guessing May 21st, 2022.

9 minutes ago, Republic3D said:

Microsoft wants more revenue 👉 Flogs Asobo to create new content and introduce new features at very short deadlines 👉 Asobo is stretched thin, trying to meet expectations and deliver within deadlines with little time for testing 👉 More content but also a plethora of bugs and broken features and dev support 👉 Customer and developers complain 👉 More hotfixes 👉 Stable sim for a few weeks 👉 Start the cycle again 

Enjoy the rapid to changes to MSFS while it lasts.  Because after 3 years of release of MSFS (2023), Microsoft will probably cut the budget for MSFS and the number of devs working on MSFS will be reduced. And as the years progress beyond year 3, the devs working on MSFS will be gradually reduced, as the budget for MSFS shrinks (the budget for MSFS and the devs working on it will be cut, because I don't think MSFS will generate the same amount of revenue 3 years after its release).

These first 3 years will probably see the most advancement of MSFS as possible.  I'm fine with it.  For FSX, we got 2 patches and that was it. 

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

Just now, abrams_tank said:

Enjoy the rapid to changes to MSFS while it lasts.  Because after 3 years, Microsoft will probably cut the budget for MSFS and the number of devs working on MSFS will be reduced. And as the years progress beyond year 3, the devs working on MSFS will be gradually reduced, as the budget for MSFS shrinks.

These first 3 years will probably see the most advancement of MSFS as possible.  I'm fine with it.  For FSX, we got 2 patches and that was it. 

I'm looking forward to it, as long as they maintain the adequate server capacity for the userbase.