This community is so extremely toxic. 
 

It‘s not important if the Update is „free“ or not. The OP said that it feels like another 747-8 which is clearly wrong. The LNAV is good but the VNAV is a bit weird, for example: when deploying speedbrakes the aircraft increases thrust. Avionics are ok, but there is not depth in the systems compared to PMDG. 
 

It is a nice free upgrade, but it is still a default plane and feels still like a default plane. You really can't compare it to PMDG, but that is what the OP did. 
 

I really cant get it. How you can compare a clunky modeled default plane (Cockpit and Model) which cant get the strobes correct with PMDG with the words „ it feels the same“. And this has nothing to do with WT. 

 

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by Ponymetzger

I think some people are missing the point - Where did Matt say he feels nothing is wrong? No where. They are asking for feedback. 

Legit saying "It doesn't act like a 747-8" and not going into further details doesn't actually help at all. 

Anyway, you can report bugs as you would normally do on their discord or the MSFS forums and again this is a BETA. 

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by Zangoose

Boeing 747 First Flight | Aircraft & Avionics Update 2 BETA | Real Airline Pilot - YouTube

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

 

EDIT: WT are not really aircraft developers, but rather avionic system developers. This shows on the 747 and 787 obviously much more than on the Longitude. I wasn‘t expecting anything else, but some people obviously were which is why we have this weird kind of discussion here.

I’m not really sure this means anything. Developers don’t suddenly become aircraft developers there still just developers working in another environment. At its core it’s just programming and implementing using RL feedback and present data. You also kinda glossed over what they’ve done for the CJ4

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by Lucky38i

2 hours ago, btacon said:

 I was an ATC for 15 years and I can clearly see you must be a real driver.  Your pompous and smug attitude tells it all.

-B

I appreciate your insightful advice.

 

Although Matt's work is appreciated, there are currently significant bugs that need to be addressed. I didn't mean to criticize his programming knowledge. I simply pointed out some bugs he may not have noticed and questioned how one can do their job with incorrect information. It's discouraging to witness individuals becoming upset simply for having discrepancies pointed out to them. 

 

And @btacon really it is not necessarily to behave like a child. I did not insult you. 

3 hours ago, LRBS said:

Ok, as a developer if you feel that is nothing wrong with this early beta version I think that you actually have a bigger problem than you can think and the guidance provided is totally wrong.

As a real 748 driver allow me to give you some quick points just noticed from this short video:

 

In the real airplane, there is no trend vector for altitude on PFD.

 

VNAV speed band is showing incorrect data.

 

Very high ROD (in excess of 5,000 FT/MIN) in VNAV PATH. From what I see from the video it is more likely an emergency descend.

 

And that brings to another issue, TD is not correct.

 

Very high pitch and abrupt angle changes during descend.

 

In VNAV path during descend aircraft is busting 250 KTS below 10K.

 

Incorrect FMAs.

 

When he pushed APP mode he got incorrect info on MCP and after full intercept wrong info on MCP as well.

 

Unfortunately, you are correct that as a developer it is impossible to do your job with the info you have right now.

If you are a real 747-8 pilot, you can also go to the Working Title Discord channel and give feedback there. I think their Discord channel is: https://discord.com/invite/Fa6w2xK

You can also start a new thread in the beta forum for AAU2: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/c/aau02/389

I'm sure if you are civil and constructive in your feedback, Working Title will take the information you give them, to make the 747-8 even better.

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by abrams_tank

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

I'm sure if you are civil and constructive in your feedback, Working Title will take the information you give them, to make the 747-8 even better.

Absolutely. And from what they said (Dev Q&A, Discord) and what they've done so far (CJ4, Longitude) , most of the issues that received criticism are totally within the scope of WT's improvements. While they're not going for the systems depth of the Longitude or PMDG, they still aim to implement everything needed for normal day-to-day operations. And for the stuff they choose to include, I've always been under the impression that the guys at WT keep on fixing bugs until everything works as intended and as close to the real thing as possible.

I'm pretty sure they agree that the most commonly used AP modes should behave correctly without unrealistic VNAV descent rates or otherwise incorrect behaviour and will fix it in due time, as well as the issues with incorrect data on the displays.

It's the first beta release of the 747 improvements, and I'm quite sure the major bugs will be ironed out before AAU2 gets released to the general public. I wouldn't get my hopes up for future updates to see more buttons working, more pages included in the CDU/FMS, except maybe a few additions, but I'm positive everything we see now will get better over time. 

 

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by pstrub

I believe the giant negative vs in vnav at tod is fixed internally as seen in the video, according to John, one of the package testers for WT on their discord.

3 hours ago, Ponymetzger said:

This community is so extremely toxic.

You are correct.

But at AVSIM we are not here in a professional aviation environment where safety is a factor for pilots and passengers where mistakes can be paid with human lives (for that go to PPRuNe site). We are merely passionate aviation hobbyists appreciating the work being offered to all of us for free by passionate developers improving default airplanes well beyond what we were used to with other simulators. 

So this toxicity your are pointing at would not exist if one (competent) individual would offer his/her professional or even amateur advice/guidance in a civil and constructive manner so as to work further on what needs to be improved, which is the objective of a Beta release by the way...! 

This ability to communicate is something that is learnt in reputable airlines when going through cockpit crew training (CRM): you can (1) guide and rectify respectfully or (2) tell your flying partner off when a mistake is done, the resulting difference between the two attitudes can be guessed. In a distant past Captains were behaving in the second mode showing off their wealth of knowledge to the rookie sitting on the right, nowadays, the first mode is generally adopted.

It is most unfortunate that we seem to be unable to communicate in a less agressive and arrogant way at a time when communication vectors are so prevalent in our daily lives. What could be pleasant and fun rapidly becomes nasty and sour.

Matt, keep faith and thank you for the good job and all your efforts during the Beta phase to further refine what is already a great achievement!

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by Bernard Ducret

9 minutes ago, Bernard Ducret said:

It is most unfortunate that we seem to be unable to communicate in a less agressive and arrogant way at a time when communication vectors are so prevalent in our daily lives. What could be pleasant and fun rapidly becomes nasty and sour.

Matt, keep faith and thank you for the good job and all your efforts during the Beta phase to further refine what is already a great achievement!

Well stated!

Just read this thread. Honest to goodness, it is a beta and not finished. Some individuals in this forum need to get up in the morning on the other side of the bed.

I note that the plane is pitching up and down at the start of the video. Is that a problem with the MSFS flight model, or something inherent with the 747-8?

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by Christopher Low

Lots of hyperbole in this thread. 
 

Surely the question is how well the plane works as a long-haul option? 

There are some really good bits - the LNAV works well for me, easy to load a simbrief flight plan via the world map, aircraft follows this beautifully.

VNAV, though, and vertical flight modes in general seemed pretty buggy during my flights. I was getting a descent rate of 10,000 feet per minute at one stage.

My impression is that VNAV (and even FL CH) still need quite a bit of work to make this a viable longhauler.

 

Omg this is gold avsim again lol

3 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

My impression is that VNAV (and even FL CH) still need quite a bit of work to make this a viable longhauler.

Day 1 release of a 1 month beta by Working Title. Their skills and ability are self evident by the work they have already accomplished. I am fully confident that the final release will meet the needs of 95% of the simmers who fly it.  Is it “Study Level”?  Of course not. Can it fly from point A to point B and reasonably simulate automated flight? Yes, even now beta 1 release it can and it will only get better with each iteration until release. Those are not just my words but they are echoing the comments made by 737 NG Driver in his full flight test drive released yesterday and can be found in this thread and his closing comments begin at 1 hour and 4 minutes  

-B

3 hours ago, LRBS said:

Although Matt's work is appreciated, there are currently significant bugs that need to be addressed. I didn't mean to criticize his programming knowledge. I simply pointed out some bugs he may not have noticed and questioned how one can do their job with incorrect information. It's discouraging to witness individuals becoming upset simply for having discrepancies pointed out to them.

Friend, this is my last response to you but once again you prove just how insufferable you come across when you feel that you are being completely reasonable. 

Physician, Heal Thyself!

-B

Edited May 13, 20233 yr by btacon