33 minutes ago, RobJC said:

So I take it you aren't buying any of their products? And if that is the case, why complain here about it?

I’ll speak for myself but this is kind of a strange take. Can’t someone be critical and wish a certain product could be better and improved? I’ve been buying their products for literally decades. When things are over-promised with a side of arrogance, it becomes annoying. Especially when there are freelance developers bringing better features to the community. If PMDG and their forums weren’t so toxic, I would have an easier time forgetting that they haven’t kept promises, haven’t innovated and overall are just an exhausting company to continue to support. 

18 minutes ago, Bdub22 said:

I’ll speak for myself but this is kind of a strange take. Can’t someone be critical and wish a certain product could be better and improved? I’ve been buying their products for literally decades. When things are over-promised with a side of arrogance, it becomes annoying. Especially when there are freelance developers bringing better features to the community. If PMDG and their forums weren’t so toxic, I would have an easier time forgetting that they haven’t kept promises, haven’t innovated and overall are just an exhausting company to continue to support. 

Agreed I also thought it a strange take, but assumed it was just a tribal thing, like you have to be with PMDG or against PMDG and and no room for nuanced thought. 

I’d happily buy another PMDG product if I thought it was good enough or even if it was just the best available. As you rightly say I doesn’t mean I can’t wish it can be still improved especially when the failings have been pointed out for over  8 years and apparently always on the way. 

This isn’t complaining about some rivet missing or whatever it’s (the LNAV logic) a pretty big issue for many people now. Even PMDG recognise it but seem unwilling to fix it. 
 

I wonder if someone who made this important part of the FMS has left or something as they seem to not be able to innovate any more or fix these things. It just seems odd, to me anyway. 

Edited January 30, 20242 yr by g-liner

5 minutes ago, g-liner said:

This isn’t complaining about some rivet missing or whatever it’s (the LNAV logic) a pretty big issue for many people now. Even PMDG recognise it but seem unwilling to fix it. 

But from what RSR posted recently about the RF legs (https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/641726-pmdg-dev-update-01272024-more-777-previews/?do=findComment&comment=5060122) it does not at all seem like they are unwilling to fix it? He recognizes it's an important issue and wants to fix it properly, but the problem is one of timeline I guess. Unless you're talking about something else.

In any case and I'm speaking in general here now and not about you.. this particular back & forth still ongoing between RSR and the Marc guy seems like a sideshow that too many are getting rather inexplicably worked up about IMHO (but par for the course I suppose for all those bitter with PMDG for x/y/z reason). Marc started down this path with the "embarrassing" comment, and RSR responded the way he did and hey if that's what he wants to respond with in his own forum, so be it. Like RSR himself says on the recent back & forth, this not the first and the last time drama has erupted around himself and what he says, and he certainly doesn't seem to care, probably because PMDG's bottom line continues to be boosted by all their customers 🙂 ... excerpt from RSR: "... and while I appreciated you pointing out that "other communities are upset" by the conversation here- I have been burned at the stake so many times in so many communities that I think I smell extra crispy most of the time as a general rule. We are a good community here and I don't mind you being upset with me about something you didn't like ..."

If RSR's attitude triggers some, all I can say to those folks is to go outside and touch some grass. It's a digital plane for pretend-flying on a computer 🤷‍♂️

 

I do think that they should bite the bullet and get the LNAV/RF legs issue sorted sooner rather than later. Compared to the past, they must have made quite a lot of money with MSFS sales of the 737 and DC6, so I would think that now is the time to get it done (or at least allocate part of the team to it after the 777 is released).

1 hour ago, carlanthony24 said:

So it is sorry did not see that but still stands 

I don’t disagree with you. I didn’t realize the expansion arrow until the other day due to the increased comments to this subject. 

And somehow MY account is the one that ended up getting deleted from the forum.  I appear to have been locked out, with no notification or explanation.  😂

7 hours ago, g-liner said:

You could pay for a type rating on an aircraft and it be zero flight time sim and never then actually fly it as you’re not working for an airline or just wanted the type rating or thought you’d get a job if you bought a type rating etc. 
 

You could start a type rating and get chopped and never fly it IRL. 
 

There’s actually lots of ways you could have a type rating without working for an airline or even have a type rating and never fly the aircraft IRL. 

You misread my post. I agree with you on those. 
 

my argument was that someone could do all those things you listed and the odds of flying AIRLINER style jets (747 in this case)  without working for an airline is slim to none. 
 

 

7 hours ago, threexgreen said:

Now I'm curious. Is it that bad these days?

It’s great these days, back then, a completely different world. 

19 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

If RSR's attitude triggers some, all I can say to those folks is to go outside and touch some grass. It's a digital plane for pretend-flying on a computer 🤷‍♂️

I just realized that I was actually sitting at the computer...eating popcorn (kettle corn to be exact) while browsing this and the other PMDG post, LOL.  Sometimes life imitates memes these days....but it made me laugh when I realized I was doing it. 🤣 (being able to laugh at yourself is a vital life-skill lost on many these days)

Having a very different perspective than many here, concerning PMDG in general...I'm glad I have another hobby to keep me busy while the rest of public waits for the next PMDG release, and not get too drawn into these PMDG posts that always seem to degrade into personal insults to the point the mods just close it.

It's not touching grass, but it is very relaxing, rewarding, and has served this community for the last 20 years.  Almost as fun as flying, but just as rewarding as flying down to mins in bad weather....and just above the DH, see the lead-in strobes in the center of your view, and you put her right on the centerline in the TDZ perfectly. 🙂 

Speaking of that hobby...I just saw in the comments on one of my recent releases at flightsim.to  that I made a mistake on it....who can spot it? 
Proves that ever after painting for as long as I have, I still miss stuff occasionally, LOL
This one was definitely one of those "Oh I know this livery well...this is the 2nd one I did (well 4th if you count my iFly 737s)...I'll just add the logo at the rear doors and push it out." Hehe...I actually missed on my 1st Germania paint...and its been wrong on all of them!! This was just the 1st time someone pointed it out.  Boy do I feel silly (laughing at myself again at this bonehead mistake)

 

32 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

And somehow MY account is the one that ended up getting deleted from the forum.  I appear to have been locked out, with no notification or explanation.  😂

Yeah, but how dare you ask a reasonable question to the almighty RSR? 😅

He is really hot tempered, maybe more than that, reminds me of what happened with FBW, Asobo or even myself when I asked about the HUD.

Really hope to soon see many good competitors making Boeing to the MSFS market, we really need it 

47 minutes ago, bendead said:

Yeah, but how dare you ask a reasonable question to the almighty RSR? 😅

He is really hot tempered, maybe more than that, reminds me of what happened with FBW, Asobo or even myself when I asked about the HUD.

Really hope to soon see many good competitors making Boeing to the MSFS market, we really need it 

It's funny, Marc is still going at it with him... But I'M the one who gets banned.  😁

52 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

Boy do I feel silly (laughing at myself again at this bonehead mistake)

Hey Steve!

I had to do a double take on the error...and thanks for lightening the tone of this thread!

😉

On 1/29/2024 at 4:33 AM, Jeeeno said:

Current B737 bugs and missing feature that will probably be ported over to the 777 and will very much likely be never corrected. Probably a few items are missing in the list below

1. EGT engine figures wrong. Too high in every phase of flight
2. Too aggressive VNAV behaviour resulting in overshooting the profile especially during descent
3. Questionable LOC intercept: sometimes it intercepts LOC too early and the aircraft is forced to turn in the other direction even if you keep airspeed constant during the intercept
4. Overshooting TGT speed with AP and A/T
5. Wonky LNAV behaviour: 25° bank turn at cruise level, RF completely missing
6. Inserting QNH in DES FORECAST page doesn't have any effect at all
7. Wrong FD pitch attitude in the initial climb after lift off
8. Regarding initial climb after takeoff sometimes the aircraft "runs out of trim available", especially noticeable in the BBJ at low weights
9. Absolutely abysmal ground physics behaviour
10. Horrible wingflex: there are a lot of FREEWARE aircrafts with a much better simulation
11. Useless windscreen wipers. When it rains a lot, you can't see anything outside

 

All 100%...except 11....it seems that all of them but Fenix haven't solved that. Even Fenix is wonky but gives you impression that is doing "something". At least they give themselves reason to say "working wipers" LOL.But hey, all of them have some issues....Until main competitor arrives (FSL), we won't know the difference. But even their lunch is eaten by Fenix......

8 hours ago, g-liner said:

Their LNAV in the 78 is now more realistic than PMDGs 737. If PMDG  don’t improve it for the 777 (which is what started all the hoo ha on the PMDG forum) it will also be more realistic than that. WT have done what PMDG haven’t managed to do in 8 years. Produce a decent LNAV. 

I think it is more than “just” the LNAV that is a problem for PMDG. RF legs and other modern RNAV procedures depend on the new ARINC 424 nav data format.

That is already available from Navigraph. They currently supply a full ARINC 424 version of their monthly AIRAC for the Aerowinx PSX 747 sim for instance. 

I’m quite sure that the biggest holdup is that PMDG will have to completely recode the internal workings of the FMS in all their products to work with the new database format rather than the proprietary format they have been using for 20+ years.

This will affect how the FMS fetches waypoint data from disk, how routes, SIDS, STARS and approaches are organized in the FMS memory and processed by their autopilot emulation etc. I doubt it is an easy nor trivial task. 

It would probably be easier to start out with a clean sheet FMS design in a brand new simulated aircraft than trying to modify what probably amounts to many tens of thousands of lines of legacy code.

In the case of the Aerowinx 747, that product was designed from the very beginning to work directly with standard ARINC 424 data, unlike PMDG products which have long used a unique database format, which, (specifically in the case of procedures) is very unlike any modern DB format. If you look at PMDG procedural nav data (which is in plain test format), it is almost like a scripting language. 

Edited January 31, 20242 yr by JRBarrett

1 hour ago, JRBarrett said:

I think it is more than “just” the LNAV that is a problem for PMDG. RF legs and other modern RNAV procedures depend on the new ARINC 424 nav data format.

That is already available from Navigraph. They currently supply a full ARINC 424 version of their monthly AIRAC for the Aerowinx PSX 747 sim for instance. 

I’m quite sure that the biggest holdup is that PMDG will have to completely recode the internal workings of the FMS in all their products to work with the new database format rather than the proprietary format they have been using for 20+ years.

This will affect how the FMS fetches waypoint data from disk, how routes, SIDS, STARS and approaches are organized in the FMS memory and processed by their autopilot emulation etc. I doubt it is an easy nor trivial task. 

It would probably be easier to start out with a clean sheet FMS design in a brand new simulated aircraft than trying to modify what probably amounts to many tens of thousands of lines of legacy code.

In the case of the Aerowinx 747, that product was designed from the very beginning to work directly with standard ARINC 424 data, unlike PMDG products which have long used a unique database format, which, (specifically in the case of procedures) is very unlike any modern DB format. If you look at PMDG procedural nav data (which is in plain test format), it is almost like a scripting language. 

RSR said they started working on the LNAV update to support RF legs TEN YEARS AGO.

A DECADE.  How are we STILL asking "hey when is this gonna be available?"