PMDG's secret project? The 747-100!

[xender]

Omg! If true then this is great!

I really wish that they do something else than ANOTHER 737, my god. There are so many interesting planes out there! Can you imagine a pmdg/fenix quality c130?

Im bored to death of set-and-forget type airplanes.

[bennyboy75]

4 hours ago, Luis Hernandez said:

That's what people said about the Ready For Pushback 747-200 back in FS8-FS9 times. And look how everyone is missing it, including me.

While I love the -400 instead, I admit I'm more tempted to get the -100 (and the -400) than the 777-300. I'm sure there will be an Avianca and an Aerolíneas Argentinas livery in no time after release.

Naaah, make it $74.71. 3 cents less than the -400 they want to port 😂

RPF was amazing but it was a long time ago. There were still plenty of -200s flying around IRL back then. Now it’s an almost extinct type. I’m not saying that it won’t be good, but it’s an oddball type that is probably too hard for an average user. 

[jon b]

10 hours ago, bennyboy75 said:

Not sure a 747-100 is going to be a big seller. For one it’s a 3 person cockpit with an insanely high workload for a single MSFS pilot and the demands of flying raw data is beyond the scope of most desktop pilots. Even when you see the likes of Flightdeck2sim in the steam gauge aircraft he is clearly at the limits of his capacity for much of the time, and he’s a real rated pilot.

There’s a reason that that the A320 family consistently ranks number one on Avsim and Volanta etc, and that’s simply because the high level of automation lends itself well to desktop simulation. 

I’m inclined to agree, this will be quite a hardcore thing to operate, although I’ll probably buy it personally as I like the aircraft.

We used to operate the 747-400 along side the 747 classic and those classic pilots were from a different breed, proper larger than life pilots with real skill and character.

Compare that now to the current generation of bland people coming off 2 years on an A320, who are happy to quote a manual at you but actually have very little flying skill, and it’s a world apart.

I’d say a classic 747 would be beyond the capabilities of quite a large percentage of today’s graduates coming out of flight school. The reason being from what I can see is it’s a completely different sort of person now training as pilots to decades gone by.

Some, including airline management would say that’s a good thing, I however am not so sure.

Anyway I digress slightly, yes the -100 will be fun , but very hard work and will take a lot of study.

[TOGA-saurus]

1 hour ago, bennyboy75 said:

RPF was amazing but it was a long time ago. There were still plenty of -200s flying around IRL back then. Now it’s an almost extinct type. I’m not saying that it won’t be good, but it’s an oddball type that is probably too hard for an average user. 

Ready Por Fushback? 👀

I remember picking up that box in the store and nearly drooling at the cover with the KLM 747 on it and begging my parents to get it for me. What an incredible add-on back in the day.

I'd absolutely love to see a -100. Imagine a proper JT9D simulation, or even if they go with the really early birds, a JT9D-3A, with the blow-in doors and extra noise. Not to forget the unforgiving sensitivity of trying to start them up in cross/tailwind conditions!

[JRBarrett]

3 hours ago, Bernard Ducret said:

It probably will have one GPS since they put one in the DC6, for my part, I hope the GPS can be removed (or I won't buy) as I belong to the old RFP/CIVA masochist club (FSLabs where is the Concorde?)!

We're at an age where even horses would be retrofitted with GPS.

Any real world 747-100/200 still flying in 2024 would have to have at least one GPS fitted because that is required for ADS-B which is mandatory now. The diminished number of r/w VORs could be problematic for enroute navigation, (just as it is in the DC-6), although the CIVA can be used for enroute RNAV. It would not be useable for most RNAV approach procedures however.

The flight engineer workload is not excessive when compared to something like the Concorde. The F/E is busy during engine start and ground operations, bringing generators, packs and hydraulics online, but fuel management is not too complicated.

[Ilari Kousa]

I was surprised to see we still have two active in Europe.

[Lucky38i]

10 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

You did not understand my post. I rather them to release a 777X or a 787 before an old rust bucket like a 747-100. I will never buy that.

That's great that you won't buy that, but I think JustFlight's continued success (and recently FSS) showcases that there is a large enough market wanting Classics this is a profitable endeavour. I certainly look forward to it.

I don't sim because I'm focused on what aircraft is currently active or which aircraft a particular airline flies. I sim because I like flying. So bring on the relics

Now we just need someone to start working on the classic 737 lineup.

Edited October 7 by Lucky38i

[martinboehme]

1 hour ago, TOGA-saurus said:

Ready Por Fushback? 👀

I remember picking up that box in the store and nearly drooling at the cover with the KLM 747 on it and begging my parents to get it for me. What an incredible add-on back in the day.

For those who want to bask in nostalgia, here's a really well done retrospective video on the RFP:

 

[VeryBumpy]

I'm not a fan of PMDG's arrogant customer relations.

Having often flown and fully enjoyed the high workload planes of A2A's B377 and FSL Concorde X. A 'decent' 747-100 would not be a huge enticement to my interest, especially from PMDG.

The only way a PMDG classic could capture my interest is if it went WELL above and beyond in features with things like deep wear and tear management garage or things like the FlightFactor 777v2 incredible walk around inspections and pushback driving ability.

[Bernard Ducret]

1 hour ago, JRBarrett said:

Any real world 747-100/200 still flying in 2024 would have to have at least one GPS fitted because that is required for ADS-B which is mandatory now. The diminished number of r/w VORs could be problematic for enroute navigation, (just as it is in the DC-6), although the CIVA can be used for enroute RNAV. It would not be useable for most RNAV approach procedures 

I am not so much interested to be « legal » in the sim in 2024 with a GPS, but indeed love to programme the CIVA with the coordinates as was then done. The same can be found in charts (I am using Aivlasoft), so wether ground stations are vanishing is of no concern.

I am doing the same with BS planes, no GPS but the old King KNS-81. When I stopped flying in RL, GPS were not (yet) on my instrument panels! Hence my reaction, which I fully understand, few simmers would sympathise with and that’s fine too.

[Bohemond]

Insta-buy for me.  I love the challenge of flying the older birds.  I hope for the 744 and 748, too.  Prior to the FSS 727F release, V1-Simulations live-streamed a "first look" flight on YouTube.  Later in the flight, a "Robert S. Randazzo" joined the chat and said, "We'll have something to scratch your classic jet itch here in a bit, V1."  He didn't spill anything more specific and left the chat not long after.  Here's the link to the stream and the time-stamp for his comment is 2:24:26.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNE2x9-fAis

[SAS443]

2 hours ago, Bernard Ducret said:

So wether ground stations are vanishing is of no concern.

I think he is referring to VOR/DME-updating of INS position to account for the accumulated drift error during extended operations.
Short flights, no problem, but longer flights solely on INS NAV will lead you several miles off track since small accelerometer errors == large position errors over time.

I did beta testing of JF INS (mounted on their Vickers VC10, very interesting aircraft in itself) and one flight I ended up approx 30NM off route during an Oceanic crossing, uncorrected. Keep in mind that some airways/tracks  over the N.Atlantic are just 25NM "wide", so you better keep tabs of your INS position error during those long hauls.

Edited October 7 by SAS443

[jon b]

Of course the reality is a 747-100 flying in the present day in its original avionics fit wouldn’t be allowed to use those PCBN reduced separation  NAT tracks.

Even on the 747-400 in the last couple of years before it was retired we were banished from using them as our FMC wasn’t considered fast enough.

I was flying the 400 series before GPS was integrated into it’s navigation systems so crossed the Atlantic on IRS, and you’re quite right once we got within range of the navaids in western Ireland and the aircraft updated its position using DME/DME it would suddenly realise it was about 3 miles off track and make a correcting turn.

Edited October 7 by jon b

[Suff1xed]

I’m not against this as an aircraft to learn and experience.  
 

In South Africa, we have 2 747 Classics in a museum. A 747-200 and a 747SP and recently had the opportunity to sit on the 747SP flight deck and did think that it would be great to have a 747 Classic in the sim. 

[james42]

17 hours ago, outermarker said:

I frequently visit the Justflight forum, and I'm sure I read with my own eyes that someone from Justflight replied to a post that they are no longer working on the 747 classic, but the project is in ‘good hands’. It seems to have been deleted since.

Very interesting. Justflight already has a good few aircraft in development, so it makes sense for them to offload the 747. I'm guessing PMDG could do with a new product line after essentially canceling the MAX.