First "Heavy" for MSFS?

[MattNischan 3,778]

10 hours ago, StAgre said:

The Longitude is a nice plane now, but it's still not really a comparable experience to, say, the PMDG or Fenix.

I'm curious what makes folks say this. With 130 pages worth of systems documentation and deeply complex and complete systems simulation (certainly to the level of those others mentioned), performance that matches book, a flight model tuned with pilots and the engineers themselves, crazy deep sim of the G5000, one of the best LNAVs in any sim for any plane, VNAV, RNAV+RNP, full GPS simulation with real satellite locations and SBAS coverage areas, what else is it missing other than a cabin?

Edited January 18, 2023 by MattNischan

[Jazz 1,046]

3 hours ago, bendead said:

PMDG talking about a possible partner for a 787

I took that to mean Boeing. When this was brought up in an interview I listened to recently he talked of a partnership with a company that makes 787's. I took that to mean Boeing. Given PMDG's history of partnering with them.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Jazz

[Konterhalbe 295]

I guess it doesn't make much sense to say "partnership with a company that produces 787s in R/L", because it's just Boeing which does and ever will produce 787s.

He could have just said "Boeing" if he meant it, but I guess his statement was towards a company in the sim business.

[threexgreen 3,139]

55 minutes ago, Konterhalbe said:

He could have just said "Boeing" if he meant it, but I guess his statement was towards a company in the sim business.

PMDG aren't even willing to partner with FSDT for GSX integration into their aircraft. Something tells me it's out of the question they would partner up with another developer to develop an entire aircraft.

22 hours ago, jon b said:

I don’t know for sure but I suspect it will be identical, is that just on the 737 max or is it on the existing 737s they have out?

It's a customer option on the real 737 NG and PMDG included this in their 737 NG.

[Jazz 1,046]

1 hour ago, Konterhalbe said:

I guess it doesn't make much sense to say "partnership with a company that produces 787s in R/L", because it's just Boeing which does and ever will produce 787s.

He could have just said "Boeing" if he meant it, but I guess his statement was towards a company in the sim business.

It's an illogical guess though, don't you think? Given their history.

I don't suppose any of us actually know but it's obvious what is more likely. PMDG working with QW or whoever sure seems unlikely as there is no history of it and plenty of them working with Boeing.

Time will prove some or all of us right or wrong, I suppose. Fun to speculate though. Now and then.

[Stavros 295]

5 hours ago, Jazz said:

It's an illogical guess though, don't you think? Given their history.

I don't suppose any of us actually know but it's obvious what is more likely. PMDG working with QW or whoever sure seems unlikely as there is no history of it and plenty of them working with Boeing.

Time will prove some or all of us right or wrong, I suppose. Fun to speculate though. Now and then.

He literally said this partner builds 787s. It's pretty obvious who he's referring to. He can't say Boeing's name because they haven't signed an agreement yet, and Randazzo obviously enjoys saying things that make people want to speculate.

Edited January 18, 2023 by StAgre

[Jazz 1,046]

31 minutes ago, StAgre said:

He literally said this partner builds 787s. It's pretty obvious who he's referring to. He can't say Boeing's name because they haven't signed an agreement yet, and Randazzo obviously enjoys saying things that make people want to speculate.

Yes, that was the impression I came away with. Could be wrong, of course but certainly seemed that way.

[Gilandred 690]

10 hours ago, MattNischan said:

I'm curious what makes folks say this. With 130 pages worth of systems documentation and deeply complex and complete systems simulation (certainly to the level of those others mentioned), performance that matches book, a flight model tuned with pilots and the engineers themselves, crazy deep sim of the G5000, one of the best LNAVs in any sim for any plane, VNAV, RNAV+RNP, full GPS simulation with real satellite locations and SBAS coverage areas, what else is it missing other than a cabin?

I suspect a couple reasons.  One, marketing.  And two, it’s free (with premium edition).  Slap a $60 price on it and suddenly it becomes study level!  Ok maybe not….

[g-liner 388]

On 1/14/2023 at 12:12 AM, micstatic said:

You don’t have to. Never really understood why people are locked down and only willing to fly real world flights operate day present day. Any flight that can be flown in a 737 can also be flown in a 777. 

Quite, I’ve flown short haul in heavies loads. It’s actually usually more fun than in most of the 737s as the brakes are usually more efficient and the performance is often better. Many airlines particularly in places like Japan operate heavies for short haul. 
 

As the 737 keeps getting stretched and bodged it has faster approach speeds and poor brakes, especially compared to a 787 or 777. 
 

Obviously passenger numbers on the route or size of the airport might be the decider for an airline though. 

[g-liner 388]

On 1/18/2023 at 3:32 PM, Jazz said:

I took that to mean Boeing. When this was brought up in an interview I listened to recently he talked of a partnership with a company that makes 787's. I took that to mean Boeing. Given PMDG's history of partnering with them.

That would be great news, QW have gone stealthy again about their 78 and the HD 78x mod is great but their new entire 789 is still a long way off and likely won’t ever be in marketplace due to the way the devs and marketplace work. 
 

I’m still hopeful one of the surprises this year is working title getting involved in the asobo 787 as one of the avionics updates. 

[Stavros 295]

On 1/18/2023 at 8:29 AM, MattNischan said:

I'm curious what makes folks say this. With 130 pages worth of systems documentation and deeply complex and complete systems simulation (certainly to the level of those others mentioned), performance that matches book, a flight model tuned with pilots and the engineers themselves, crazy deep sim of the G5000, one of the best LNAVs in any sim for any plane, VNAV, RNAV+RNP, full GPS simulation with real satellite locations and SBAS coverage areas, what else is it missing other than a cabin?

I haven't really sat down for a flight, but my first impression of the avionics update was that the Avionics are excellent - but the rest of the plane still feels a little bit empty. There are a surprising number of buttons that aren't functional- the radio/map/flightplan controls that are right in front of you, the HUD, engine fire switches, etc - that are certainly modeled in other addons. On top of this, it *isn't* free, the Premium Deluxe edition is an $85 upgrade.

Not saying it's a bad plane, it's quite admirable the work that has been done to improve it, but it's obvious there are things besides "it's not sold as a $50 addon by a payware developer!" that differentiate it from, say, PMDG and Fenix.

[MattNischan 3,778]

On 1/23/2023 at 7:19 PM, StAgre said:

the radio/map/flightplan controls that are right in front of you

Those buttons are only used if the avionics are in reversionary mode, which is effectively never. We felt the value proposition wasn't very good there.

On 1/23/2023 at 7:19 PM, StAgre said:

the HUD

The HUD is not even usable in the real aircraft yet; it has yet to be certified and while the hope is that it might finally be certified this year, there is no documentation on it as of yet.

When it becomes usable in the real plane and we have documentation from the manufacturer then we can add it.

[Fiorentoni 4,212]

I think the Longitude is still some way off of PMDG and Fenix in those regads, e.g. door animations, inop button / switches, failures, custom w&b.

Edited January 25, 2023 by Fiorentoni
Rephrasing for peace.

[DeepestRed 214]

42 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

How about animated doors ... study level

Yes, it's well known that line training captains put a lot of emphasis on full motion simulators' ability to properly capture the subtleties of operating the cabin doors.

[btacon 1,786]

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

No disrespect to you because you have done a lot for MSFS, but... How about engine fire switches in the "complete systems simulation"? How about failures "to the level of those others mentioned"? How about custom weight & balance, not having to use the awful MSFS default menu (correct me if that has changed by now)? How about animated doors?
Again, no disrespect because what you did for free for this community is astonishing, and the Longitude and CJ4 are really great planes for free... but saying there's nothing missing from study level / from PMDG and Fenix-level sounds a bit delusional.

Calling WT and Matt “delusional” is beyond disrespect. It is outrageous and besides, what qualifies you besides being a gadfly on Avsim to judge what is and what isn’t “study level”

Edited January 25, 2023 by btacon