What is included in this build?:
The official change list doesn't cover the full breadth of changes, as it only captures changes made as a result of reported items- but we also made a number of visual and efficiency improvements to ensure stable, consistent performance for all users. These updates were taking place in the background as part of the 777F beta workup process, so they don't appear in the change list for the 77W, but The W benefits from them all the same.

PMDG 777-300ER for MSFS - 2.00.0049 / 03OCT24
======================================
14652: [General - Suggested/Missing Features] Cabin door girt bar fittings missing (jbrown)
14622: [External Model - Geometry] Upper flap fairing should slope underneath flaps (jbrown)
14762: [External Model - Geometry] L4 door object moving with L3 door while door is opening. (jbrown)
14742: [Systems - Lighting - VC/2D] External Emergency lights exhibiting large halo effect at greater distances. (jbrown)
14738: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Door 5L Floating screws when door open (jbrown)
14665: [Main Panel - PFD] Landing Bar on PFD should cover lines below it (abashkatov)
14706: [Main Panel - ND] POS button drawing issues on ND (abashkatov)
14711: [Main Panel - EICAS Display Issues] The N2 scale on the secondary engine page seems to be wrong (abashkatov)
14743: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] VC window shades not aligned (vscimone)
14713: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Accept Button geometry (vscimone)
14718: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Screw needs to be removed (vscimone)
14744: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Floating screws in VC (vscimone)
14748: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Misalligned screws on center pillar (vscimone)
14750: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] EEC cover modelling (vscimone)
14658: [General - Unsure] Ruddertrim Steps (abashkatov)
14720: [Main Panel - Standby Gauges] ISFD brightness adjustement is to slow (abashkatov)
14405: [EFB - General] EFT brightness setting page issue (rmurdoch)
14726: [FMS - Route/Legs Pages] Routing using dashes for WPT after VECTORS in synoptic route pages (emvaos)
14620: [Sounds - Internal/Cockpit] 737 fuel pump sound used in the 777 > The volume has been lowered to be hardly audible (jdoorman)
13137: [Systems - Engine Start Controls] N1 vs N2 relation at very low N2's during engine start adjustments (emvaos)
14669: [AFDS - Thrust Modes] N1 Limit printout in THR REF and THR fix [upper EICAS] (emvaos)
14681: [AFDS - Pitch Modes] Reset thrust limit to AUTO at end of step climb even if manual thrust limit previously selected (emvaos)
14712: [AFDS - Thrust Modes] Auto change to CRZ lim in DES even if manual thrust limit previously selected (emvaos)
14693: [FREEZES - All Types] Fix for saving a panel state with an approach featuring a MAP before runway (emvaos)
14688: [FMS - Performance Pages] QRH V speeds hidden in last column if REF SPDS selected OFF (emvaos)
14657: [FMS - SID/STAR pages] Adding real life quirks to the DEP/ARR CDU key (emvaos)
14707: [Virtual Cockpit - Functionality/Click-Spots] Tooltip incorrect (hvanrensburg)
14639: [Sounds - External] Sound improvement suggestions > Volume adjustments roar, altitude and speed (jdoorman)
14619: [Sounds - Internal/Cockpit] No speed brake sounds in VC > Volume and distance adjustments (jdoorman)
14632: [Sounds - External] Pack sounds heard at same volume everwhere outside > Volume and distance adjustments (jdoorman)
14630: [Sounds - Internal/Cockpit] Reported flaplever raise and drop sound not loud enough > adjusted the volume for it to be more noticeable (jdoorman)
14700: [General - Ground Operations] Unable to release Air Start after engine started with Air Start Unit (hvanrensburg)
14671: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Cockpit texture problem on pilots seat backs. (vscimone)
14682: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Mis alligned screws on glareshield (vscimone)
14684: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] APU Bleed AUTO text needs bright up (vscimone)
14664: [Virtual Cockpit - Functionality/Click-Spots] Master Dimmer control switch modeling (vscimone)
14672: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Floating textures in VC on VR (vscimone)
14676: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Landing lights and Turn off lights Modell (vscimone)
14846: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Hole in flight deck on the left side, behind the captain's seat. (vscimone)
14843: [Sounds - Internal/Cockpit] ALTN VENT switch has no sound (hvanrensburg)
14844: [Sounds - Internal/Cockpit] M/D FLOW switch misses sound (hvanrensburg)
14845: [External Model - Geometry] Waste service panel/decal missing + potable water service panel/decal in the wrong position (jbrown)
14836: [External Model - Geometry] Hatch latches on belly positioned wrong (jbrown)
14818: [General - Engines] Missing contrail on engine 2 (jbrown)
14595: [FMS/AFDS - VNAV] Fix for modulated thrust for Go Around [2000fpm] (emvaos)
14809: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Small gap between overhead and CB panel (vscimone)
14790: [Main Panel - EICAS Messaging Issues] New Messages should be on top (abashkatov)
14800: [External Model - Geometry] Wrong texture on main cabin door sides (jbrown)
14803: [Systems - General/Not Sure] Wi-Fi/Satcom option should only provide the Satcom option (hvanrensburg)
14792: [EFB - General] Inhibited ground connections are not correctly reported to the UFT (cbpowell)
14785: [Virtual Cockpit - Functionality/Click-Spots] Center Right Fuel tank switch animation INOP (vscimone)
14778: [Virtual Cockpit - Functionality/Click-Spots] Moving the IND LTS switch from DIM to BRT behavior (hvanrensburg)
14777: [Virtual Cockpit - Functionality/Click-Spots] Light test switch behavior when using the mouse wheel. (abashkatov)
14768: [FMS - Functionality Problems (General)] MCDU 3 Cabin Call carrot layout (abashkatov)
14721: [FMS/AFDS - VNAV] RCMD FL during climb (emvaos)
14513: [General - Flight Model] Fuel flow dependency on Mach speed tweaks (emvaos)
14767: [General - Flight Model] FF temporarily very low at TOGA fixed (emvaos)
14769: [FMS/AFDS - LNAV] Fix in Handling "empty" SIDs with no runway specific routing (emvaos)

We also included some changes to the tablet, which I am calling out separately because the tablet is independent from the airplane proper:
00000: [Tablet] - Fixed the navdata update issue, where users could not update to the latest Navdata via the tablet
00000: [Tablet] - On screen home button added to the status bar
00000: [Tablet] - Captain and First Officer Tablets now have independent brightness settings

Thanks for the heads up Bob

Regards

 After this release, we can acknowledge some well-deserved cosmetic improvements.

Unfortunately, there are still unrealistic physics reactions to the pitch trim and pitch axis. We are three pilots type-rated in this airplane enjoying the MSFS2020, of which two are still flying this aircraft, and I am no longer current in this type of plane. Our findings on three different computers are that they are still far away from what the actual airplane behaves in reference to:

THIS AIRPLANE IS VERY STABLE AND DOCILE. PMDG Hand-flying reactions on the pitch axis are way too unstable and wobbly, resulting in big pitch variations of up to +/-3 degrees. As an example, if you are not quite on the correct trim, the airplane will compensate for that trim speed very gently, with a linear slow response, not in such a quick motion. NOT REALISTIC AT ALL.

Some unnecessary pitch variations can be noticed on the approach after disconnecting the AP in no-wind conditions and no turbulence. In such conditions, the airplane will fly steadily, like an arrow, with little or no corrections from the pilot.

There are still problems with the LNAV; almost before every turn it can be observed spikes in the FD left/right; after establishing in the turn, we still can notice unnecessary bank variations, not realistic at all. The airplane will bank smoothly at a constant rate and maintain that attitude unless there is moderate turbulence.

 

The throttle reaction is sloppy, and the correct speed adjustments are not anticipated. 

Before flare, at about 100 ft ra, it can be noticed some pitch up tendency which the AIRPLANE DOES NOT DO THAT IN REAL LIFE. The airplane has actually landing flare compensation to prevent floating or tail strike, at 50 ft ra, flight control systems will apply a small nose-down pitch. 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

After this release, we can acknowledge some well-deserved cosmetic improvements.

Unfortunately, ......

Ok, but have you reported this to PMDG ??

2 hours ago, LRBS said:

 After this release, we can acknowledge some well-deserved cosmetic improvements.

Unfortunately, there are still unrealistic physics reactions to the pitch trim and pitch axis. We are three pilots type-rated in this airplane enjoying the MSFS2020, of which two are still flying this aircraft, and I am no longer current in this type of plane. Our findings on three different computers are that they are still far away from what the actual airplane behaves in reference to:

THIS AIRPLANE IS VERY STABLE AND DOCILE. PMDG Hand-flying reactions on the pitch axis are way too unstable and wobbly, resulting in big pitch variations of up to +/-3 degrees. As an example, if you are not quite on the correct trim, the airplane will compensate for that trim speed very gently, with a linear slow response, not in such a quick motion. NOT REALISTIC AT ALL.

Some unnecessary pitch variations can be noticed on the approach after disconnecting the AP in no-wind conditions and no turbulence. In such conditions, the airplane will fly steadily, like an arrow, with little or no corrections from the pilot.

There are still problems with the LNAV; almost before every turn it can be observed spikes in the FD left/right; after establishing in the turn, we still can notice unnecessary bank variations, not realistic at all. The airplane will bank smoothly at a constant rate and maintain that attitude unless there is moderate turbulence.

 

The throttle reaction is sloppy, and the correct speed adjustments are not anticipated. 

Before flare, at about 100 ft ra, it can be noticed some pitch up tendency which the AIRPLANE DOES NOT DO THAT IN REAL LIFE. The airplane has actually landing flare compensation to prevent floating or tail strike, at 50 ft ra, flight control systems will apply a small nose-down pitch. 

Thank you!!! I knew there was something up with the jet. Please report it to pmdg! Please!

48 minutes ago, SierraDelta said:

Ok, but have you reported this to PMDG ??

 

35 minutes ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Thank you!!! I knew there was something up with the jet. Please report it to pmdg! Please!

The other two pilots brought the issue to their attention, but they consistently evaded responsibility and attributed the issues to other factors, despite the absence of similar challenges for other developers. I have been barred from their forum due to their inability to accept constructive feedback, and the support I received was unsatisfactory.

 

Customers encountering similar challenges are advised to address their concerns with the support team or on the forum if they are not blocked.

 

Regrettably, PMDG, a former industry leader, appears to be undergoing a shift toward an undesirable direction.

3 minutes ago, LRBS said:

 

The other two pilots brought the issue to their attention, but they consistently evaded responsibility and attributed the issues to other factors, despite the absence of similar challenges for other developers. I have been barred from their forum due to their inability to accept constructive feedback, and the support I received was unsatisfactory.

 

Customers encountering similar challenges are advised to address their concerns with the support team or on the forum if they are not blocked.

 

Regrettably, PMDG, a former industry leader, appears to be undergoing a shift toward an undesirable direction.

I feel like every PMDG topic you come in here with your super detailed and nit-picky comments about SUPER minor items. Yes the FD is a little jerky (although definitely massively improved over the 737)  It's software for a entertainment based sim and priced accordingly.  feels like you are expecting exact 1:1 with the real airplane at super magnitudes of reduction in cost that Boeing charges for their sim environment to airlines.

I don't love PMDG and especially their communication but outside of Fenix and maybe iFly (assuming MAX meets expectations) who in the last 4 years produced a complex modern airline at the level they do?  Its not perfect but its pretty dang good.

Also looking at your post history, because I'm so intrigued why you have this obsession, it seems you basically post negatively about everything.  Not the greatest way to live life.

11 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

I feel like every PMDG topic you come in here with your super detailed and nit-picky comments about SUPER minor items. Yes the FD is a little jerky (although definitely massively improved over the 737)  It's software for a entertainment based sim and priced accordingly.  feels like you are expecting exact 1:1 with the real airplane at super magnitudes of reduction in cost that Boeing charges for their sim environment to airlines.

I don't love PMDG and especially their communication but outside of Fenix and maybe iFly (assuming MAX meets expectations) who in the last 4 years produced a complex modern airline at the level they do?  Its not perfect but its pretty dang good.

Also looking at your post history, because I'm so intrigued why you have this obsession, it seems you basically post negatively about everything.  Not the greatest way to live life.

The Fenix and the 777 are the only two aircraft I fly in MSFS 2020, love them both. 

55 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

I feel like every PMDG topic you come in here with your super detailed and nit-picky comments about SUPER minor items. Yes the FD is a little jerky (although definitely massively improved over the 737)  It's software for a entertainment based sim and priced accordingly.  feels like you are expecting exact 1:1 with the real airplane at super magnitudes of reduction in cost that Boeing charges for their sim environment to airlines.

I don't love PMDG and especially their communication but outside of Fenix and maybe iFly (assuming MAX meets expectations) who in the last 4 years produced a complex modern airline at the level they do?  Its not perfect but its pretty dang good.

Also looking at your post history, because I'm so intrigued why you have this obsession, it seems you basically post negatively about everything.  Not the greatest way to live life.

Well, your opinion doesn't align with the reality at all. Those are not " super detailed and nit-picky comments about SUPER minor items "; those are real facts about the product and shared by real pilots who have at least 4,000 HRS flight times in this type. When was the last time you flew this airplane for a living? I assure you that any real pilot observing this kind of flight behavior will ground this aircraft for a long time due to these "minor items."

Just so you know, I praise PMDG for certain items in my post history, as I did about this one in certain aspects. Because you don't know, you need to become more familiar with the airplane and operations, and you mistakenly believe I am obsessed with pointing out real facts. You sound like PMDG can't point bugs. It's so upsetting for the ones who can't accept reality. 

If for you this is acceptable there is no space for any other discussion.

Unfortunately, what PMDG claims that their 

"777-300ER is  magnificently detailed simulation of the Boeing 777-300ER", it's a long stretch. 

Yes, it is a good product with very nice programming, but some other items are below average compared to other developers regarding what was mentioned in the topic. 

For the observation above: I have a friend who is currently flying the 777 into Sydney and he has said that the pitch simulation in the PMDG 777 is completely off and not what happens in the real aircraft. 

I'm not saying things arnt off, fully admit things might be off but LRBS literally comes on every PMDG thread to complain about this....  All for a product that is in the ~100X (depending on airline size) less expensive than the actual Boeing electronic product.  Like I get that things can always get better but it honestly seems like he can never be happy and I'm sorry a software dev making 70K a year hasn't fully been able to replicate the Boeing internal programming effectively enough, especially when 99% of the market is happy with the product.

Edited to add: I used to work at Boeing, the SE team working on each individual system on these modern jets are almost 10+ deep.  Unless Boeing gives the source code to PMDG, which they obviously wont its asking a lot to a small team of devs to replicate these systems 1:1

Edited October 4, 20241 yr by nrunning24

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

"777-300ER is  magnificently detailed simulation of the Boeing 777-300ER", it's a long stretch. 

Yes, it is a good product with very nice programming, but some other items are below average compared to other developers regarding what was mentioned in the topic. 

This is my main point of contention..... What other devs that sell a 777-300Er are they below?   Seems like you expect them to be better than some mystery dev that doesnt exist.

27 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

Edited to add: I used to work at Boeing, the SE team working on each individual system on these modern jets are almost 10+ deep.  Unless Boeing gives the source code to PMDG, which they obviously wont its asking a lot to a small team of devs to replicate these systems 1:1

This is very true also, however a smoother simulation of the pitch / trim motion is not impossible and can be achieved.

But yes expecting a 1:1 is impossible on any desktop based platform even if they did have the source code for all the systems. The different factors such as hardware forces, external forces and input forces will be impossible to detect / compute on a desktop based sim. But it can be tuned to “feel” like it. Which is what’s been done on sims until now right? 

29 minutes ago, nrunning24 said:

especially when 99% of the market is happy with the product.

 

Now, this is clear where you are coming from. The same answer from PMDG, they claim that only 1% will see these problems and there is no reason to fix them (even they are capable of) while they claim that " that are capable of reproducing the complex world of the modern flight deck in finite detail..."

Also they advertise that their products are used by " individuals, companies, pilots and professional flight crews in nearly every country around the world. A leader in the development of advanced simulation technologies, PMDG's simulation software has become well known for attention to detail, innovation, and thoroughness. "

Now I understand why you are defending them even though they have space for improvement. 

This is exactly why many people don't like their way of doing business. But you guys refuse to understand and keep on fighting even when you are wrong.

Go file a ticket on the pdmg site and let come back with an update. 
 

bellyaching here each and every time isn’t working out well.