Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JRBarrett

PMDG Update June 17th

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, rka said:

Are you saying you need an efb to tell you which flaps to use?

And yes, I was talking about v speeds mainly. The fmc will also calculate N1, accepts temp entries for that and requires flaps entry.

How did you crash your plane with wrong flaps? Genuinely interested.

Are you genuinely asking why flaps matter on take-off...? Well for a start try yourself and takeoff with flaps 1 from Skiathos with 120 pax.

Also that the FMC "accepts temp entries"... what does that have to with perf calculation? Sure it will accept my D-TO-2 with 60 degrees assumed temperature on a short runway with MTW, because it doesn't care if I extend my takeoff run onto the next highway or take the ILS antennas with me during the climb...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, icewater5 said:

Will be good to see these features implemented, as it is closer to actual airliners obviously.

Meantime, though, on Vatsim you can see loads of 737s flying around quite happily afaik.

Well you can crash into the mountain and keep on flying with crash detection off, so there's that. Apart from that I suppose people flying the 737 on VATSIM (like me) use an external perf calculator like Topcat (like I do) or some online source.
So no ones arguiing the 737 was unflyable, I'm just saying that a study level aircraft that needs external tools for a basic and vital part of the flight is not acceptable, though I understand they navigated around that by calling the 737 "early access". Don't get me wrong I love the 737 and fly it happily every other day (though I am really annoyed having to use that ancient Topcat after all these years again...).

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

He did seem genuine on delivering.

He always is. Yet his release estimates are notoriously off the mark all the time. If you multiply his estimates by 2, then you'll be in the more realistic ballpark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Are you genuinely asking why flaps matter on take-off...? Well for a start try yourself and takeoff with flaps 1 from Skiathos with 120 pax.

Also that the FMC "accepts temp entries"... what does that have to with perf calculation? Sure it will accept my D-TO-2 with 60 degrees assumed temperature on a short runway with MTW, because it doesn't care if I extend my takeoff run onto the next highway or take the ILS antennas with me during the climb...

TBH my performance calculator (topcat) in every situation I’ve had where the runway is short and the weight on the higher end has ASKED for flaps 1, but to be fair, I haven’t tried at skiathos. My gut feeling is that the plane will handle it easily.  The FMC will give you Boeing performance chart speeds, which except for extremely abnormal situations should be more than adequate for sim operations.  The performance calculations used by airlines have more to do with money than whether the plane can handle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So as always, good to keep an eye on the facts. PMDG, more than clearly stated that the first release of 737 (i.e. the -700) will *not* have the EFB, the new LNAV 2.0, simbrief/navigraph integration, better texturing in sections of the aircraft, etc etc... they also stated clearly that *all* of these and more will come as free upgrades to the 737 fleet and consequent variant releases in the following months.

So for all those in uproar about these "missing" features, if they were so important, why didn't you wait till PMDG released them before purchasing the aircraft? Purchasing it knowing well what it had and not, and then complaining about it doesn't make sense... neither does it make sense to complain about this because they couldn't release these features soon enough (given that they're using the C++/WASM codepath, they also face different development roadblocks compared to a dev like Fenix).

I'm not going to wade into the personal angst some seem to have against PMDG and/or RSR and the way they communicate, or handle certain users on their forums, etc. But I do wonder if perhaps this personal angst is also driving the overblown hysteria against PMDG and how the 737 didn't land with some of the above features on initial release. Those who rail against PMDG seem to have a history of sorts with RSR or forums admins, and/or are not liking how they sidelined their focus on P3D (the latter is just business reality driving their decisions, even if they promised new features for their P3D products 2+ years ago, when sales/interest in a sim declines as much as it did then naturally a dev will focus less on it).
 

Edited by lwt1971
  • Like 13
  • Upvote 2

Len
1980s: Sublogic FS II on C64 ---> 1990s: Flight Unlimited I/II, MSFS 95/98 ---> 2000s/2010s: FS/X, P3D, XP ---> 2020+: MSFS
Current system: i9 13900K, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5 4800 RAM, 4TB NVMe SSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gilandred said:

The FMC does not provide realistic calculations that take into account runway length, runway conditions (ie. wet vs dry), atmospheric conditions (wind speed and direction), or intersection departures.  I believe, and would be happy to be corrected if I’m wrong, that the FMC only accounts for aircraft weight in it’s calculations, but nothing else.

The FMC does take input other than weights into account for perf calculation. On TO page 2 you put in wind speed and direction, runway slope, outside air temperature as well as runway condition (dry/wet/wet runway which is skid resistant). It will calculate speeds based just on weight and flap setting, but that doesn't mean it doesn't care about the other data when it is put in. For example, if you put in different winds or change the runway condition you'll get the takeoff speeds deleted and recalculated.

You're right in that it doesn't include certain data points like packs on or off, engine anti-ice on or off, etc. which is why airlines either use ACARS to request takeoff data or an EFB app, both of which include the missing data points, thus making the calculation more accurate and cost efficient, and it is required for the ACARS/EFB and FMC speeds to be within tolerance, e. g. V1 within 1 knot deviation (may be different per airline). If any deviation is too great the ACARS/EFB calculated speeds take precedence over FMC speeds. Most of the time though you'll find the speeds matching or at least be within tolerance.

Edited by threegreen

Microsoft Flight Simulator | PMDG 737 for MSFS | Fenix A320 | www.united-virtual.com | www.virtual-aal.com | Ryzen 9 7950X3D | Kingston Fury Renegade 32 GB | RTX 3090 MSI Suprim X | Windows 11 Pro | HP Reverb G2 VR HMD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rka said:

The FMC does it in case of the 737. I generally agree with you though.

No it doesnt. It gives you v speeds but you have to calculate the rest. 


FAA: ATP-ME

Matt kubanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

So for all those in uproar about these "missing" features, if they were so important, why didn't you wait till PMDG released them before purchasing the aircraft?

Precisely for the reasons I stated I didn't buy the PMDG.

I'm not going to give a developer money who releases an addon with features missing that are standard on freeware/modded addons.

What counts is what's out now not what might or might not be included in the future.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

Precisely for the reasons I stated I didn't buy the PMDG.

I'm not going to give a developer money who releases an addon with features missing that are standard on freeware/modded addons.

What counts is what's out now not what might or might not be included in the future.


That's fair... I guess PMDG felt there was a significant enough market need for the 737 to be released in the state it was, with those extra features coming for free in subsequent months. And they'd be very right, given the many of us who *did* want to get our hands on it now rather than wait longer.  I think it's safe to say their sales numbers have been pretty good, and will continue to be.

  • Like 1

Len
1980s: Sublogic FS II on C64 ---> 1990s: Flight Unlimited I/II, MSFS 95/98 ---> 2000s/2010s: FS/X, P3D, XP ---> 2020+: MSFS
Current system: i9 13900K, RTX 4090, 64GB DDR5 4800 RAM, 4TB NVMe SSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

What counts is what's out now not what might or might not be included in the future.

Cue image of all 777-200ER expansion owners agreeing in unison.

  • Upvote 1

AMD Ryzen 5800X3D; MSI RTX 3080 Ti VENTUS 3X; 32GB Corsair 3200 MHz; ASUS VG35VQ 35" (3440 x 1440)
Fulcrum One yoke; Thrustmaster TCA Captain Pack Airbus edition; MFG Crosswind rudder pedals; CPFlight MCP 737; Logitech FIP x3; TrackIR

MSFS; Fenix A320; A2A PA-24; HPG H145; PMDG 737-600; AIG; RealTraffic; PSXTraffic; FSiPanel; REX AccuSeason Adv; FSDT GSX Pro; FS2Crew RAAS Pro; FS-ATC Chatter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gilandred said:

The FMC does not provide realistic calculations that take into account runway length, runway conditions (ie. wet vs dry), atmospheric conditions (wind speed and direction), or intersection departures.  I believe, and would be happy to be corrected if I’m wrong, that the FMC only accounts for aircraft weight in it’s calculations, but nothing else.

They're definitely good enough for me 😉

  • Like 1

Laminar Research customer -- Asobo/MS customer -- not an X-Aviation customer - or am I? 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Farlis said:

He always is. Yet his release estimates are notoriously off the mark all the time. If you multiply his estimates by 2, then you'll be in the more realistic ballpark.

He suggested two months. Not that far away so the fix may not be difficult. But now that he’s given a timeframe in a public message it’s easy enough to quote it back at him.


Ray (Cheshire, England).
System: P3D v5.3HF2, Intel i9-13900K, MSI 4090 GAMING X TRIO 24G, Crucial T700 4Tb M.2 SSD, Asus ROG Maximus Z790 Hero, 32Gb Corsair Vengeance DDR5 6000Mhz RAM, Win 11 Pro 64-bit, BenQ PD3200U 32” UHD monitor, Fulcrum One yoke.
Cheadle Hulme Weather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boomer said:

Need to fix the landing gear wont go up issue.

I've seen a couple people say this. I'm really interested in your preflight prep, that you manage to take off with sys A entirely depressurized.

... Because otherwise, you press G and the gear goes up (or in my case, using Multi Crew Experience I simply verbally command "gear up".)  There is no "gear won't go up" issue lol. 

  • Like 1

Andrew Crowley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...