18 hours ago, Jazz said:

but I'm seeing it several times a day in one form or another

My own peeve (well, one of many actually) is the whole "could of" "should of" "would of" thing. It's just wrong. I know language evolves, but this is just disrespectful to the language. It should of course be "could've" as in an abbreviated form of "could have". Understandable for a non-native speaker perhaps, being a reasonable interpretation of the sound of the phrase, but otherwise just lazy and wrong. To (mis)quote your avatar image, "this is something up with which we should not put".

And don't get me started on "leverage" - IT'S A NOUN! (not a verb).

Meanwhile, back at the original topic - I'll be there for whatever version of the 777 arrives first, not because of any great systems modelling but just because I always enjoy the look of the PMDG stuff. Likewise the 747, although I'd prefer the -100 or -200 myself, and ideally the -SP model.

(final note to any other interested pedants, if you haven't already read it, get "Eats, shoots, and leaves" by Lynne Truss. Absolute magic)

1 hour ago, threegreen said:

Obviously, you're not going to be able to simulate an MCAS failure, whether in its original form or what it is now.

Why is that obvious? I would say for a study level simulation that pilots can also use to train their QRH procedures at home it would be of vital importance that such a failure is simulated. 

What you don't train for you won't be able to react to accordingly when it really happens.

21 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Why is that obvious? I would say for a study level simulation that pilots can also use to train their QRH procedures at home it would be of vital importance that such a failure is simulated. 

What you don't train for you won't be able to react to accordingly when it really happens.

Reread his post. It‘s Boeing who dictates what failures can be included. And Boeing couldn‘t care less (sic!) about whether someone uses PMDG as a training tool. But they sure as hell don‘t want 200 youtubers recreating the crashes, even if the actual failure on the MCAS was of a different nature. The less people talk about MCAS the better for Boeing.

37 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Why is that obvious? I would say for a study level simulation that pilots can also use to train their QRH procedures at home it would be of vital importance that such a failure is simulated. 

What you don't train for you won't be able to react to accordingly when it really happens.

Because everybody and their mom will be uploading videos recreating the accidents and showing everyone how they could have saved the plane and all that, even if MCAS has a much smaller impact on flight now than in the accidents. I'm sure Boeing isn't going to like that.

Besides, might as well simulate a runaway trim instead which is similar in nature but doesn't come with the name 'MCAS'.

Edited December 19, 20232 yr by threegreen
Improved grammar so the language experts here won't crucify me!

50 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Why is that obvious? I would say for a study level simulation that pilots can also use to train their QRH procedures at home it would be of vital importance that such a failure is simulated. 

What you don't train for you won't be able to react to accordingly when it really happens.

Literally no one is using a video game for real life abnormal training.  Is it fun to see if the PMDG reacts the way the real plane or a real sim does?  Sure.  Can it be a marginally more entertaining way to visualize running a QRH procedure than good old chair flying?  Sometimes.  Is it training?  I'm hopeful no one believes that.

There's nothing to train anymore, for an MCAS-only erroneous activation.  The system can only fire a single time per high-alpha event, for no more than a few seconds.  Regular electric trim, manual trim, the control column cutout switch, and either or both stab trim cutout switches all override it.  It is a non-event, as it originally should have been.  And remember, it's just an extra channel of the speed trim system that has been on 737s for a LONG time; it's not an entirely new system.  The STS trims nose-down in NGs at high alpha as well...

2 hours ago, threegreen said:

Obviously, you're not going to be able to simulate an MCAS failure, whether in its original form or what it is now.

Oh, but you know people are gonna try.  🙄

I have nothing but scorn for untrained people who use consumer desktop software to play accident investigator.  It's a highly complex and sensitive discipline, and it's beyond ludicrous to think anyone on YouTube is gonna learn or demonstrate anything useful.  Using the deaths of real people to boost a make believe social media presence is... PAINFUL.  

14 hours ago, rlashier said:

My own peeve - those who use the term “irregardless” when regardless is more than sufficient. 
Rich

Something else that irritates me: On the "Rebuild Rescue" YouTube channel they're always saying something "needs fixed" !?! 

It either "needs to be fixed" or it "needs fixing".

I will just drop this one in before a moderator requests everyone to get back on topic.....

"What do you got?"

I've created a monster 😆

I'm getting the sense that everyone bottles these frustrations up and some catharsis was required. It's turned into a therapy session of some sort 😄

I'm gonna join in then I guess:

PMDG threads have a certain reputation, but this one is... different.

Edited December 19, 20232 yr by threegreen

3 hours ago, andy1252 said:

And don't get me started on "leverage" - IT'S A NOUN! (not a verb).

It’s a noun and a verb.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/leverage

Best news ever!!! Absolute LOVE the 777 😃

This thing could really be ready to roll out in a few weeks.

1 hour ago, JetCat said:

Best news ever!!! Absolute LOVE the 777 😃

This thing could really be ready to roll out in a few weeks.

Please stay on topic. This thread is about grammar and the meaning of usernames. Thank you!

So the thing I hate most is people starting a sentence with a conjunction.

Going to give a nod to my Newfoundland friends with the phrase “where ya to?”.

Ok back on topic for me 😀