I spent about an hour today, shook out the cobwebs out of my head, and finally got the MCDU in the Fenix programmed and am flying it now for the first time in around 8 months,  😉

15 minutes ago, ThomseN_inc said:

Try this one

Virtual Performance Tool

That costs money.. Not sure you're really getting the point here. I'll put a rest to this here.

8 hours ago, KL Oo said:

Well at the moment this developer is barely in the game. After spending years telling everybody we didn't need an EFB they've now spent almost equally long trying to make one to the points its becoming a running joke.

There are freeway developers out there who've built complex EFB. For some reason the Gods of Flight Sim over at PMDG just can't seem to make it happen.

 

To be honest, PMDG bashing is becoming the favourite sport of these fora.

They have explained their reasons, some of the programming gods here who apparently know better simply can't accept that.

10 minutes ago, DavidP said:

To be honest, PMDG bashing is becoming the favourite sport of these fora.

They have explained their reasons, some of the programming gods here who apparently know better simply can't accept that.

100% agree, although can't help thinking PMDG in many ways have created a rod for their own back. 

Would probably have saved them a lot of forum grief by starting with a tablet that didn't link to the aircraft and then adding functionality later.

Even before the MSFS version I had many more hours in the 737 without a EFB, so it really doesn't stop my enjoyment of it..

G

 

 

Looking forward to the 777 all though not to many Click spots😁. Will see the airline2sim videos again when it hits.

As others i hope performance is good with EFB.

July is dedicated to their 747 mostly.

Michael Moe

I decided to do a flight with the Fenix today after months and months away from it. Wow, what a drain on FPS. With the PMDG 737, I get a solid lock on 30 FPS, and if I unlock FPS, I see between 40-45 FPS most times. Today I struggled to get 22 fps with no other changes. Back to the 737....

3 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

That costs money.. Not sure you're really getting the point here. I'll put a rest to this here.

I do...you can't or don't want to spend money on it. Quite simple.

2 hours ago, Gazzareth said:

100% agree, although can't help thinking PMDG in many ways have created a rod for their own back. 

Would probably have saved them a lot of forum grief by starting with a tablet that didn't link to the aircraft and then adding functionality later.

Even before the MSFS version I had many more hours in the 737 without a EFB, so it really doesn't stop my enjoyment of it..

That isn't really how PMDG operate though. If they are not able to do something properly (remember the weather radar?), then they prefer to wait until they can.

30 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

That isn't really how PMDG operate though. If they are not able to do something properly (remember the weather radar?), then they prefer to wait until they can.

I don't disagree, but if you think about it - a tablet that didn't even link to the aircraft could give you more functionality than the tablet in the p3d 737/777....

.... then again they may have gone that route if they realised at the outset how long it would take.

 

G

6 hours ago, thepilot said:

I am not excited for the EFB as such (my bog-standard iPad is a million times better and more realistic) but to be able to finally compute performance properly especially for the -600, -700 and -900 variants will be a welcome addition. (For the -800 I use the payware VPT which is likely the most sophisticated tool there is.)

Not sure if this has been posted but I use this to calculate takeoff and landing performance in the PMDG.  Works a treat, links to Simbrief as well.

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/38471-vas-airplane-toolbox/

6 hours ago, F737MAX said:

Fenix sim has complaints about how long it's taking them with v2, IAE engines, etc. However, their attempt to strive for the best recreation possible, initially several updates in response to user issues, and the occasional comment on progress gives them somewhat of a pass with regard to their lengthy development timeline.

PMDG is not in my good books after I was burned by their expensive 777-200ER expansion pack in P3D. Even so, I would love to see them 'smash it out of the park' with their 777 for MSFS. I'm just not confident that they have gotten to grips with MSFS to be able to achieve that.
I want to be proven wrong though!

This is where I think the PMDG hate gets out of whack.... The 777-200ER was very bad no doubt (I bought it myself)   But lets be honest the PMDG hate in MSFS has nothing to do with the actual product, just your past experience with the developer. 

I love the Fenix, but it couldn't land in a stiff crosswind until a few updates down the road.  If the 737 did that there would be blood in the streets.

Fenix taking ages for a V2 with new engine types..... Great they are working really hard to make it great!!! PMDG taking ages for a integrated EFB......FAIL YOU SUCK, TRY BETTER.

Fenix gets "the occasional comment on progress gives them somewhat of a pass with regard to their lengthy development timeline."  But PMDG who updates their product all the time and gives occasional progress reports (in fact many more than Fenix) gets hammered.

MAKE IT MAKE SENSE!!

So another PMDG update thread gets sidetracked with another Fenix vs PMDG debate on business practices and who is delivering what or whatnot by the developers? Yeah that makes the MOST sense. Who did not see this coming and part 87 coming up in the next two weeks with another Rob  Razz update . Keep up the rambling I will just go back to flying the Maddog and will get excited  here when we have a 777 release announcement.

Edited June 6, 20232 yr by jbdbow1970

1 hour ago, nrunning24 said:

 But lets be honest the PMDG hate in MSFS has nothing to do with the actual product, just your past experience with the developer. 

I don't believe "hate" is the appropriate term to use in this situation. 

There is a significant amount of dissatisfaction due to unfinished products throughout the entire aircraft development process, both in the past and present. IIt's worth mentioning that there are unfinished products on various platforms, as they tend to leave bugs unattended even after promising to fix them before moving on to new projects.Lately, people have become weary of bad business practices that prioritize profit over quality products. They are tired of dealing with constant bugs and poorly executed updates.

These unsatisfactory complaints are self-inflicted wounds resulting in costumer dissatisfaction. 

2 hours ago, nrunning24 said:

MAKE IT MAKE SENSE!!

OK, real simple for those of you sat at the back.

One is a new developer striving to achieve the most realistic representation of a popular narrowbody airliner on a new platform at a ridiculously reasonable price point. When it failed to land properly in a crosswind, it received negative feedback, which was acted upon alongside numerous other fixes.

The other is an established player who has rested on its laurels to deliver a different popular narrowbody airliner that it has decades of experience in building, yet had the same faults as every previous iteration. Not only have new issues cropped up in updates that should not have passed QC, it's also the second most expensive airliner add-on to purchase (and that's before anyone interested buys the other 3 variants to complete the family set).

No hate. Just critical appraisal.

 

Edited June 6, 20232 yr by F737MAX

1 hour ago, F737MAX said:

OK, real simple for those of you sat at the back.

One is a new developer striving to achieve the most realistic representation of a popular narrowbody airliner on a new platform at a ridiculously reasonable price point. When it failed to land properly in a crosswind, it received negative feedback, which was acted upon alongside numerous other fixes.

The other is an established player who has rested on its laurels to deliver a different popular narrowbody airliner that it has decades of experience in building, yet had the same faults as every previous iteration. Not only have new issues cropped up in updates that should not have passed QC, it's also the second most expensive airliner add-on to purchase (and that's before anyone interested buys the other 3 variants to complete the family set).

No hate. Just critical appraisal.

 

Ones a port and the other is well being built in its own code go figure

Edited June 7, 20232 yr by carlanthony24