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...

 

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...).

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.

55 minutes ago, Boomer said:

Need to fix the landing gear wont go up issue.

?

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.

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 June 18, 20223 yr by lwt1971

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 June 18, 20223 yr by threegreen

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. 

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.

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.

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.

Our daily „PMDG bad“ thread. 

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 😉

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.

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.