46 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

this is what people are complaining about? By all means, complain....just understand how it sounds.

It's not just that, it's filling pages arguing against photo evidence that should have put the nitpicking to bed a while ago.

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

Since I got the T7, it's all I fly.

Good to hear! Lots of APL2 Airline routes... Just curious, who are you flying for now?

26 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

It's not just that, it's filling pages arguing against photo evidence that should have put the nitpicking to bed a while ago.

When people complain about fingerprints and scratches on plexiglass it’s ok, but when they unsatisfied with avionics assurance it’s a nitpicking lol

 

51 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

That's not true though. The 777 has RF legs and even if it's not 100 % accurate at all times, following the magenta line and FD are miles better than in the 737.

Honestly, something is very wrong. You can't accept anything that PMDG has got wrong or can improve. I fully understand that you don't know, that you have an issue with what I say, but can you give it a brake? It's getting ridiculous already. This situation is becoming untenable. Show some respect for others' opinions.

Just now, TomCYYZ said:

Good to hear! Lots of APL2 Airline routes... Just curious, who are you flying for now?

Just started flying for Asiana Airlines. Had a couple of weeks with Delta prior to that. Nice looking Livery for Asiana 777.. 

 

 

48 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

It's not just that, it's filling pages arguing against photo evidence that should have put the nitpicking to bed a while ago.

Maybe this video you can see better.  I would say this video is more evidence than the photo.🙂

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_1WpNorKyQ

Edited July 14, 20241 yr by Mo45

58 minutes ago, LRBS said:

Honestly, something is very wrong. You can't accept anything that PMDG has got wrong or can improve. I fully understand that you don't know, that you have an issue with what I say, but can you give it a brake? It's getting ridiculous already. This situation is becoming untenable. Show some respect for others' opinions.

With all due respect, you're simply wrong. The 777 has RF legs, the 737 doesn't. That's a fact. It's also a fact that the 777 follows the magenta line much better than the 737, and that the FD is much more reliable, even it's still not perfect. Anyone who has flown either in the sim can clearly see that. You can even just go on YouTube and watch videos of how both products handle this.

As for the gap between instrument discussion, I've shown actual photos in which it's clearly visible that the aircraft in these pictures have the same gap or lack of gap that the PMDG has. I'm not making that up.

So please quit the personal attacks. All I did was correct *two* things based on facts for the sake of being factual and if that's disrespectful to you, I'm not the issue here. That response was entirely unnecessary.

Edited July 14, 20241 yr by threexgreen

56 minutes ago, Mo45 said:

I would say this video is more evidence than the photo.🙂

Why is a video more evidence than a photo?

Edited July 14, 20241 yr by threexgreen

5 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

Why is a video more evidence than a photo?

I was wondering that myself. ???

If you look at the display size from the Captain and the First Officer's side, which we have been discussing, this shows evidence of how it should be and how PMDG should have done it.

I am not here to nit pick to anybody.  I'm just putting my opinion across.

All the best,

 

 

32 minutes ago, Mo45 said:

If you look at the display size from the Captain and the First Officer's side, which we have been discussing, this shows evidence of how it should be and how PMDG should have done it.

I am not here to nit pick to anybody.  I'm just putting my opinion across.

All the best,

 

 

So you are claiming that this discussion was not about the gaps between the displays. but the displays in the PMDG  are different sizes..... Sorry, you lost me on this....

1 hour ago, threexgreen said:

So please quit the personal attacks. 

Unfortunately, while you are so preoccupied with arguments and playing the "personal attack card," you didn't notice when I said, "First, they introduced these RF legs," and then when I outlined about the same bugs brought from the 737 to the 777. Granted, not to such a degree, but still there and completely wrong A/C behaviour.

Unfortunately, you cannot accept anything, I wish you all the best.

1 hour ago, Mo45 said:

If you look at the display size from the Captain and the First Officer's side, which we have been discussing, this shows evidence of how it should be and how PMDG should have done it.

That's funny; I originally saw this as you posting the video of further evidence that the gaps between displays can differ from side to side - because they actually differ in your video.  😉

Just goes to show, expectation bias is a thing and people tend to see what they think they'll see.

Threegreen is correct; in addition to first hand word from people who see this in real airplanes, he has produced photographic proof that it exists... So there's really no further argument to be made here, that PMDG "should have" modeled it differently.  They clearly just modeled the cockpit they scanned. Why wouldn't they?

As far as why an experienced line pilot would say he hasn't noticed this, I do not know... Maybe difference in fleet size plays into it?  Our fleet isn't huge, at just a few hundred airplanes, but that's enough to see some variety.  It could be as simple as being something that's just gone unnoticed -as it is entirely inconsequential.  But whatever the reason, the fact does remain - it's really a thing, and photographic evidence of that has been produced. 

I fully agree with LRBS that the LNAV still needs work.  Is it improved from the 73?  Absolutely.  Is it realistic yet?  Nope.  Plane should fly these procedures, to use a popular simmer slur, like it is on rails.  Literally.

Edited July 15, 20241 yr by Stearmandriver

Regarding the “gap” between displays. I speak not as a pilot, but as an avionics tech and mechanic who has decades of experience removing and installing display units in a large variety of transport category aircraft. I have not worked on a 777 specifically - but have worked on many large aircraft with a similar display arrangement.

When the aircraft leaves the factory, the displays may be perfectly matched in terms of any gap that may (or may not) exist between adjacent units - but that changes after many years of service in which the displays may have to be removed and reinstalled multiple times for a variety of reasons. 

The part of the display you see sitting in the pilot or copilot seat is just the “face” of the unit, with its attached plastic or composite bezel. The complete display is typically between 10 to 18 inches long front to back. CRT displays are typically very heavy, weighing 30 pounds (or more) each. LCD displays tend to be somewhat lighter.

Each display slides into a metal box or rack. with guide rails down the side. The box is affixed (at its front edge) to the back side of the instrument panel, and also to metal brackets at the back of the unit which attach to braces that are part of the instrument panel structure. There is a multi-pin female quick disconnect connector at the back of the mounting box, that mates with a matching male connector at the back of the display itself. All the electrical and video connections are made here. There is a bit of horizontal and vertical free play in the connector at the back of the rack so it will mate smoothly without risking bent pins.

Removing the pilot or copilot PFD or ND typically takes two people. The yoke, in its normal neutral position, prevents either pilot’s display from coming fully out of its rack, so it is necessary to energize hydraulics and for one person to pull and hold the yoke fully aft while the other person removes or installs the display. 

This normally not necessary for the center MFD/EICAS displays. 

There are a variety of methods used to fully “pull” the display into its mounting rack and lock it fully engaged when reinstalled. It depends on the specific aircraft and display manufacturer. (Most displays are made by Honeywell, Collins Aerospace or Thales). Some use a full length acme threaded screw which runs the full length of the display and screws into a socket at the back of the mounting rack. Some use one or more shorter captive screws that screw into the front of the rack. Newer displays often have a lever assembly with two or more clevis hooks and pins that are released when a handle (which is part of the bottom bezel assembly) is unlocked and pulled forward.

The 777 display appears to be the latter type.

There has to be a little horizontal and vertical free play in the mounting system for the display, or you would never be able to lock it back “home” once removed. There are a lot of individual parts (mounting rails, guide pins and connectors) that have to all align.

Displays might have to be removed for a variety of reasons: for an out and out display failure, or to service filters in the cooling air supply (which are usually at the back of the mounting rack). Sometimes not only the display itself, but the whole mounting rack assembly has to be removed to gain access to wiring harnesses or air ducts behind the mounting box. This may have nothing to do with the display itself, but is done because the rack is  “in the way” of other required maintenance. 

Removing the mounting rack is typically a tedious and aggravating process because of the tight confined space in which one has to work, and the importance of not dropping nuts, screws or washers down inside the instrument panel. 

 When the mounting rack is reinstalled it might not line up quite as perfectly as it did before it was removed. As long as the display can be fully “homed” when reinstalled and there is no overt overlap of adjacent bezels, that is all that matters.

For all these reasons, the front of the display bezels might develop a variety of gaps between adjacent displays as time goes by, ranging from direct bezel to bezel contact to a noticeable gap - and this can definitely exist on two sides of the same instrument panel.

The post above was what I was trying to point out when I commented that someone had probably not worked in avionics, and for that I got blasted.  Oh well, that's Avsim in action. 😉