You only have one chance...PMDG, Fenix or Maddog?

[Matt Webb 171]

#1 Fenix

#2 PMDG

#3 Maddog

Hanging out for the Asbo ATR though.  👍

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

3 minutes ago, dolbinau said:

For those that say they aren't that interested in Airbus, only Boeing etc. - I kind of started the same journey but trust me as the years go by you will and should want to learn more aircraft. It makes it so much more enjoyable to be able to use a range of aircraft and compare/contrast the different systems of the different planes. 

I’d do the same as far as learning as many as possible, however in my case, between working and my other hobbies which are of higher priority to me right now, I have limited time to learn new aircraft, especially ones with a vast design difference as is the case between Boeing and Airbus.

If I was either retired or didn’t have other hobbies that were so time consuming, then I’d do the same. As it stands now, by the time I get home around 5pm, head out for my nightly running session which is around 2 hours of warm ups, training, cool down and recovery stuff, I’m not usually wound down until around 8pm. Then it’s dinner, wife and any after hours work obligations that might need tending to. Just don’t have the hours needed for a whole lot more “me” time. 😂

[Biology 1,347]

I would definitely go with the Fenix, I already have the others for P3D while Fenix has the potential to be the most realistic airliner in any simulator thanks to its ProSim base.

[jcomm 5,939]

Well,

I believe the FBW A320 is good enough for the kind of simming I do these days (*), so, unless Fénix is released as a real bargain, or the flight dynamics are really top-notch, I'll stay with FBW A320 for the time being....

Then I have to opt between 737 and Md-80. I'll wait for both to be released and will check the outcome, user oppinions, watch youtubes... , but I am more fond of the MD-8x

(*) Long go the days when I really dreamed for a fully simulated aircraft. full ARINC, full everything. Aerowinx PS1 and later in 2014 PSX were also my temporary "beaches". Indeed if it was the kind of objective I had then, the Fénix would also be my choice because I really like the modern Airbuses.

Edited February 20, 2022 by jcomm

[Biology 1,347]

47 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Well,

I believe the FBW A320 is good enough for the kind of simming I do these days, so, unless Fénix is released as a real bargain, or the flight dynamics are really top-notch, I'll stay with FBW A320 for the time being....

Then I have to opt between 737 and Md-80. I'll wait for both to be released and will check the outcome, user oppinions, watch youtubes... , but I am more fond of the MD-8x

FBW A320 is getting really good these days indeed. I have been following their GitHub since the project begun and I need to say that they write really clean and effective code, not even mentioning the fact that they have really skilled people such as Andreas Guther who implemented an entire autopilot and FlyByWire system using Matlab Simulink. I'm personally an A320 "nerd" who loves to experiment with all sorts of interesting procedures and non-normals, which is why I'm still quite excited for Fenix. It has everything I can dream of - dynamic interacting physically based systems, endless amount of non-normals and even circuit breakers. While FBW also plans to get there eventually, implementing such things from scratch take a lot of time.

I also need to mention that A320 is the aircraft that got me into P3D last year as I wasn't happy with X-Plane alternatives (I have tried both FF and ToLiSS, but neither had the systems completeness or depth I hoped for) and now it will likely be the aircraft that will get me into MSFS.

Edited February 20, 2022 by BiologicalNanobot

[JLuis 409]

2 hours ago, Peter Webber said:

Yes agree with the discount side! I always wondered if that's why PMDG are releasing the 737-700 first, In the knowledge that a lot of customers with the NGXU discount would not be able to wait for the discounted 737-800 but would buy the full price 737-700 regardless? I believe if the 738 was released first, the discount would then apply, and not so much interest at a later stage for the other variants when they are released. A good sales strategy!

 

Regards,

 

Peter Webber.

People are thirsty for complex addons (study level). The first one that release will have this advantage... In my opinion, PMDG is aware of this and used this strategy to sell more products. Thirsty people want water. You have a full glass that would be the 737-800, but you find a glass on the way around the 737-700 what do you do? Wait another 6 weeks with thirst or drink the first cup you find... PMDG has a strong market team thinking about it as selling more.

Regarding the discount, I think it is fair for PMDG to provide the credit to the user's account to let him define the moment to use it. In my case I don't intend to buy the 700 but the 800.

[Chock 17,769]

10 hours ago, bendead said:

About that, is possible to activate the autothrottle, autopilot and manipulate the FCU "HDG, SPEED, etc..." without aligning the INS?

Anyway to do it during flight?

Although some systems on airliners can function without the INS having been aligned, a lot of them depend on the airliner 'knowing where it is', which is what the INS tells it. However, whilst the navigation systems on an airliner, and specifically the inertial navigation system, is constantly updated via cross-referencing the data it receives from many sources, including radio beacons, the primary source for that is GPS satellites, and since the initial data it gets for that is set up when you align the INS, you do really need that initial set up for things to work to their full capabilities.

The INS can take up to fifteen minutes to align. How long it actually takes depends on where you are on the planet when you do that, because what the INS does, is uses the movement detected by a set of ring laser gyros which detect the rotation of the Earth, when it combines this information with detection of the magnetic pole of the Earth's direction, it cross references these two bits of information, and that's how it learns where it is. As you probably know, the world spins around at 15 degrees per hour, but at the equator, you are spinning faster than you are when near the poles a bit like how you spin faster on a merry go round on a ride, whereas in the middle you are not spinning fast at all, which is why it takes less or more time for the aeroplane to suss out where it is for different locations because it is detecting that rotation rate.

After the aeroplane starts moving, it measures all the movements it is then making and it adds or subtracts that info from the starting point where it knew where it was when the system was aligned, and that's how the navigation systems can continue to know where the thing is, but with some errors this means that after a flight of several hours, it can be a bit 'off', which is why you might than realign the INS after a flight in preparation for another flight. Having said that, even the very earliest inertial reference systems, which used traditional gyroscopes rather than ring laser gyros and did not have the benefit of modern GPS signals, were still good enough for an airliner to perhaps only be maybe a mile or so 'out' after having flown across the Atlantic, by which time they could use radio beacons to update where they were, so it was not really a big deal although it is one of the reasons why airliner corridors over the Atlantic are several miles wide and set at different altitudes for opposite directions.

You might be interested to know that submarines do this stuff too, since when they are deep under the water, they cannot detect radio signals from a GPS, so they use an INS to know where they are. They can float a buoy on a wire up on the surface to update their system, or extend a long antenna from the conning tower, but in combat they would not want to do that since it would give away their position. In peacetime, they do periodically float their buoy to update their INS system. Back in WW1 and WW2, when there was no GPS, they would shoot their position with a sextant whilst surfaced, set their gyros from that, then use the gyros whilst submerged to continue to know where they were even when submerged, and even back then it was fairly accurate for a good few hours so long as they knew what the currents were, but unlike modern submarines which can stay underwater for weeks at a time and which are actually faster underwater than they are on the surface, WW1 and WW2 submarines were faster on the surface than when submerged, so they were mostly used as surface vessels which would only submerge to sneak in for an attack, thus it didn't matter that their inertial reference gyros were not good for extended periods.

All of this funky new ring laser INS stuff on modern airliners means they are very accurate, which is what all that 'RNP' stuff is about, but it is still the case that you do need them to be aligned prior to setting off or you will find your primary flight display screens will eventually just go black and display some text saying they have no data; so to align properly, you have to be parked up with the wheel brakes on to allow your aeroplane to figure out where it is. So the short answer is: Nope, you can't align the INS whilst moving. the crew of an ATR tried to do that once because they were rushing their pre-flight, and so they tried aligning the INS when taxying out for take off, sadly they were in a mountainous region in low cloud, and so they eventually struck a mountain side when they lost their nav systems shortly after take off whilst in low clouds. Similarly, a 737 took off once and also did not have its system aligned, meaning it too lost its primary flight displays not long after take off, but on that occasion it was daylight in clear weather and in reasonably flat terrain, and so they were able to return to the airport and land the thing using VFR.

Airports used to have the latitude and longitude position painted in big letters on the front of the stand so that crews could type that into their nav systems, and you can actually still do that with a modern INS and speed up the align process a bit by giving the systems a good 'starting point' for them to begin working out where they are, but you won't find many airports these days with that info painted on the head of the stand, so it is usually the case that the crews just let the system suss it out whilst they are on a turnaround. This is not normally an issue because even the fastest turnarounds for a 737 are about 25 minutes, and most of the time it will probably take maybe five minutes for an INS to align itself. Of course in the sim we can 'cheat' and use a 'fast align' option if we want to, which is why the PMDG 737 can be a 'jump in and go' option.

If you like using failures on your sim aeroplanes, this is one of the advantages of the 737, since you can tell the exact thrust settings by looking at the throttle lever positions, which is why it is a good idea to make a metal note of the positions of those levers for various phases of flight, so if you lose your displays, you can still estimate your speeds and use the standby artificial horizon to know your speed and AoA.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Chock

[Peter Webber 339]

30 minutes ago, JLuis said:

People are thirsty for complex addons (study level). The first one that release will have this advantage... In my opinion, PMDG is aware of this and used this strategy to sell more products. Thirsty people want water. You have a full glass that would be the 737-800, but you find a glass on the way around the 737-700 what do you do? Wait another 6 weeks with thirst or drink the first cup you find... PMDG has a strong market team thinking about it as selling more.

Regarding the discount, I think it is fair for PMDG to provide the credit to the user's account to let him define the moment to use it. In my case I don't intend to buy the 700 but the 800.

Great analogy.I'll also be waiting for the 737-800. Was never interested in other variants! (BTW my thirst has been partially quenched thanks to FBW! So I will remain hydrated during the next few weeks with a few extra $$$ in my wallet!).

[SAS443 1,723]

38 minutes ago, Chock said:

This is not normally an issue because even the fastest turnarounds for a 737 are about 25 minutes, and most of the time it will probably take maybe five minutes for an INS to align itself. Of course in the sim we can 'cheat' and use a 'fast align' option if we want to, which is why the PMDG 737 can be a 'jump in and go' option.

And you "should" not need perform a full alignment on a turn around.

What is important is to reset the any wandering accelerometers (you have True North figured out already), and this is done by the  "fast alignment" and takes less than 45 seconds. A glance on the IRS L/R positions and their residual groundspeed when parked at the gate will indicate the need.

[Michael Moe 495]

14 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

And you "should" not need perform a full alignment on a turn around.

What is important is to reset the any wandering accelerometers (you have True North figured out already), and this is done by the  "fast alignment" and takes less than 45 seconds. A glance on the IRS L/R positions and their residual groundspeed when parked at the gate will indicate the need.

Cant remember if its simulated in the PMDG? Whats the real life procedure for this fast alignment between flights?

Thanks Michael Moe 

[SAS443 1,723]

9 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

Cant remember if its simulated in the PMDG? Whats the real life procedure for this fast alignment between flights?

Thanks Michael Moe 

good question re: PMDG, I would also like to know 🙂
On the top of my head you move the selector(s) from NAV into ALIGN and enter your position. Then move them back to NAV.

[dolbinau 72]

Out of curiosity does anyone have a system for how much they spend on add-ons? E.g. I try to get 1 flight for every $1 I spend on an add-on (e.g. if PMDG 737 cost $50 I'd want at least 50 flights to make it worth it). How often do people actually use the add-ons they buy? (And you can imagine once you have a stack it does take a while to rotate through them all).

[Ixoye 1,821]

Fenix without a doubt as it seems far ahead of the competition.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Ixoye

[tull 290]

Maddog defo

[flyinpilot212121 724]

I’d go with the 737 for sure, reasons being I’m not an A320 kind of guy and never really was. I’d really love the maddog but I enjoy too much replicating real time real word flights so that would be limiting, and I absolutely love the looks of thr 737 both inside and out in general.

Now, having said all that, this is hypothetical of course, I will say that I will for sure be getting the PMDG 737 and the maddog, the fenix I’m not sure yet, it’s not because the quality isn’t there in fact it looks outstanding, but I’ve had a few A320’s in the past that once I bought them, I’d fly them a couple times and they would then just sit in the hanger, not sure why but the A320 just doesn’t grab me, no fault of fenix of course, if PMDG would make an Airbus it would be the same. But who knows, once I see the fenix in streams etc I may decide to purchase, if anything to at least support an up and coming developer with the possibilities of other future offerings, so I do wish fenix extreme success.

Now that Airbus by inibuilds looks very very interesting 🤔.