And still everyday my BBJ serves me well and flies me everywhere i want without that god word not allowed EFB. Everything i need is Navigraph and Simbrief.

On 3/23/2023 at 1:29 AM, DAD said:

Thanks for posting. Just saw the update before but didn’t try it yet. Many words as usual but better than silence. Beta in sight for the T7 sounds promising but well, if it shares the fate of the EFB…

“T7 beta in sight!”*

PMDG have very good distance vision + they used the James Webb telescope to spot this.

😉

And why is it FBW could implement keyboard inputs into the MCDU of their 320NX, and PMDG couldn't?  Then there's the lovely EFB that comes w/ FBW 320NX, free.   PMDG 738 is a nice work, but IMM the A320NX is more complex and superior in many ways.

4 minutes ago, Noel said:

And why is it FBW could implement keyboard inputs into the MCDU of their 320NX, and PMDG couldn't?  Then there's the lovely EFB that comes w/ FBW 320NX, free.   PMDG 738 is a nice work, but IMM the A320NX is more complex and superior in many ways.

That is because the complexity of PMDG compared to FBW, is like comparing a Maserati to a Smart Car.  

15 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is because the complexity of PMDG compared to FBW, is like comparing a Maserati to a Smart Car.  

Not to go on a tanget because this post if focused on PMDG, but just to clarify this argument falls kinda short if you've read any of the FBW NOTAMs or tried deep testing any of the implemented hydraulic, pneumatics or electrical simulation that FBW has. They're both pretty complex aircraft from a physiciallity standpoint. Yeah you can argue PMDG is a more "complete" product, but don't scoff at what FBW has implemented.'

We all understand you pretty much exclusively fly PMDG now, so you have pre-conceptions about other devs, but give them a go, you'd be pleasantly surprised.

 

On a side note, can the focus for once not be on the EFB, that conversation has been spoken to death. There's other pretty notable topics that was brought up in the PMDG Update.

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by Lucky38i
Addition

20 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is because the complexity of PMDG compared to FBW, is like comparing a Maserati to a Smart Car.  

Nah, a big part of the detail/complexity in the PMDG are configuration options buried in the FMC letting users set the plane up per their desires, not so much the complexity of the plane's functioning systems per se.  For your goofy analogy I'll call the PMDG 738 more akin to a 1994 Chevy Impala, and FBW A320NX more akin to a Tesla Model Y.   Airbus' FBW systems are much more detailed. FBW A320NX does everything PMDG (save hasn't implemented proper RNAV but there are WU's) does except has a lovely functional EFB that imports SimBrief plans instantly, where one can use both SimBrief or WM Planner to populate waypoints per user preference.  Plus and this floors me:  you can input data into the MCDU with the keyboard which PMDG insisted couldn't be done because of SDK limitations.  

 

I will get interested in PMDG again when they have something to show in regards as the 777.

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by jbdbow1970
spelling

10 minutes ago, Noel said:

Nah, a big part of the detail/complexity in the PMDG are configuration options buried in the FMC letting users set the plane up per their desires, not so much the complexity of the plane's functioning systems per se.  For your goofy analogy I'll call the PMDG 738 more akin to a 1994 Chevy Impala, and FBW A320NX more akin to a Tesla Model Y.   Airbus' FBW systems are much more detailed. FBW A320NX does everything PMDG (save hasn't implemented proper RNAV but there are WU's) does except has a lovely functional EFB that imports SimBrief plans instantly, where one can use both SimBrief or WM Planner to populate waypoints per user preference.  Plus and this floors me:  you can input data into the MCDU with the keyboard which PMDG insisted couldn't be done because of SDK limitations.  

 

Yeah a Tesla with a robot driving it, that about sums it up. . 😉

11 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Yeah a Tesla with a robot driving it, that about sums it up. . 😉

Yeah I know you're not as fond of automation, but that indeed is what makes A320NX more complex from a systems POV.  There's still every bit as much stuff "to do" in it over PMDG to get you safely from gate to gate.

 

Moving the stuff under FS Actions and PMDG setup to the EFB would be nice alone.

 

51 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Yeah a Tesla with a robot driving it, that about sums it up. . 😉

That robot is called "autopilot" for a reason

2 hours ago, Noel said:

And why is it FBW could implement keyboard inputs into the MCDU of their 320NX, and PMDG couldn't?  Then there's the lovely EFB that comes w/ FBW 320NX, free.   PMDG 738 is a nice work, but IMM the A320NX is more complex and superior in many ways.

This question seems to come up quite frequently. The reason, from what I gather, why other devs like Leonardo, Fenix, and FBW can have a fully functional EFB so quickly is that they are running certain aspects of their programming outside of the sim. This allows them to get away from the current challenges presented by the SDK. The XBox environment does not allow for this, so those devs decided to essentially either  temporarily shelve that or just not offer it for xbox. PMDG, in order to reach the Xbox market, decided to try to forego those options and are trying to find ways around the limitations. Note that they code in c++ and use wasm, so that's where a lot of the limitations stems from.

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by Kevin_28

3 hours ago, ThomseN_inc said:

And still everyday my BBJ serves me well and flies me everywhere i want without that god word not allowed EFB. Everything i need is Navigraph and Simbrief.

I really need to try the BBJ out more. As an aside, where do you usually spawn it? At a gate or a large GA spot?

21 minutes ago, Kevin_28 said:

This question seems to come up quite frequently. The reason, from what I gather, why other devs like Leonardo, Fenix, and FBW can have a fully functional EFB so quickly is that they are running certain aspects of their programming outside of the sim. This allows them to get away from the current challenges presented by the SDK. The XBox environment does not allow for this, so those devs decided to essentially either  temporarily shelve that or just not offer it for xbox. PMDG, in order to reach the Xbox market, decided to try to forego those options and are trying to find ways around the limitations. Note that they code in c++ and use wasm, so that's where a lot of the limitations stems from.

Leonardo is entirely in WASM with a JS EFB. FBW is a mix of Rust/C++ compiled to WASM with JS for displays. Save for SimBridge, both of these aircraft are in-process aircrafts.

The "problem" that PMDG has, as their UFT is being done in JS, is the communication done between WASM and JS modules, there's no EventBus like in the Avionics SDK,  it's all constrained to simvars which have a pretty limited set of data types. PMDG's entire aircraft is in WASM whereas the UFT is in JS, if you want to say, import Simbrief routes to the aircraft, it has to all go through Simvars. This is problematic because the routes can be quite large and from what I see the `String` Simvar datatype is constrained to 260 characters. So the next option is to use bit logic and setup some kind of serialiser/deseraliser. It depends on who you ask whether this is difficult to do or not.

Edited March 24, 20233 yr by Lucky38i
correction