It's also worth noting that Robert and Mathijs have actually explicitly said it was with Boeing after they made that statement.

Was able to, at least, quickly pull a few quotes from discord from Mathijs. Robert stated it other places and I am too lazy to go digging to find it.

Quote

 

"Our delivery to Boeing is nearly completed and that means we can start to look at that one again"

"Boeing was rather happy"

"Boeing is using our code for a major training product."

 

 

Edited May 3, 20251 yr by Kevin_28

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Ok, so based on your inquiring around at the specific Boeing facilities you've been to (and the folks there that you specifically spoke to), those folks telling you that they are not affiliated or do any work with PMDG therefore leads to your opinion that PMDG is lying... got it 🙂
 

I would say more chastened to not have been able to be beta tester with all that experience I would say.

10 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Ok, so based on your inquiring around at the specific Boeing facilities you've been to (and the folks there that you specifically spoke to), those folks telling you that they are not affiliated or do any work with PMDG therefore leads to your opinion that PMDG is lying... got it 🙂
 

 

8 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I just dislike it when folks call someone a liar unless they know first hand or can reasonably demonstrate the lies.

Please refrain from accusing me of lying. I didn’t say that they lie! You need to read my post again carefully. Only one person at those facilities knew about the software, and none of them were aware of any projects with them. They all knew about the limited access to Microsoft/ASOBO. Once again, let's show some decency and avoid accusing others of lying just because you disagree with what you see.

8 hours ago, DavidP said:

I would say more chastened to not have been able to be beta tester with all that experience I would say.

It's very sad to see people like you making unfounded accusations. 

 

37 minutes ago, LRBS said:

It's very sad to see people like you making unfounded accusations. 

 

Usually indicative of people who have to outline their vast qualifications on a flight sim forum - sorry, seen it a lot in the past.

Pointless squabbling yet again. Please stop.

I think PMDG certainly have been doing commercial work for Boeing and I also think RR is a very astute business man.

PMDG have reaped the benefits of going all in with MSFS from an early stage across both PC and Xbox. 

Developing high fidelity add ons for flight sims with a small team is a high man hour investment and I'm pretty sure RR has noted the presence of the Asobo Max and more particularly the iFly Max and the impact these two planes will have had on potential PMDG sales.

Whilst he's been dropping big hints about Max development the two above planes have simply beaten him to the start line. Much better to take the Boeing commercial work, put the Max on the back burner and concentrate on the 777 line and the 747 where they have no visible competitors....

14 hours ago, LRBS said:

 

Please refrain from accusing me of lying. I didn’t say that they lie! You need to read my post again carefully. Only one person at those facilities knew about the software, and none of them were aware of any projects with them. They all knew about the limited access to Microsoft/ASOBO. Once again, let's show some decency and avoid accusing others of lying just because you disagree with what you see.

"Be careful..."?

Methinks you doth protest too much.

I've worked on projects like this before and believe me, a random periodic customer walking around the shop asking questions does not frequently get confidential information.

More to the point, in a large organization spread across many sites, I have seen it where there's things going on in one office that no one in the other offices knows about.

If you're not intimate with PMDG, or with whomever they might be working with at Boeing, there's a very high likelihood you're not nearly as "connected" as you seem to mistakenly believe.

So unless you KNOW, don't cast aspersions, which is exactly what you've done.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

"Be careful..."?

Methinks you doth protest too much.

I've worked on projects like this before and believe me, a random periodic customer walking around the shop asking questions does not frequently get confidential information.

More to the point, in a large organization spread across many sites, I have seen it where there's things going on in one office that no one in the other offices knows about.

If you're not intimate with PMDG, or with whomever they might be working with at Boeing, there's a very high likelihood you're not nearly as "connected" as you seem to mistakenly believe.

So unless you KNOW, don't cast aspersions, which is exactly what you've done.

I just asked questions. After so many years, you start to know people, and you can ask questions, exactly what I did. Of course, after such a long time, you make "connections", getting the right information? I don't know. Regarding "casting aspersions", I just disagreed with @Kevin_28 statements, and from what I found, it appears not to be the case. Now, some of you are very judgmental and accuse me of damaging criticism, or that I accuse them of lying. Why? Because it's not what you wanna hear, opinions can't be articulated here, but others are OK, even though they are not "intimate" with them. We should be able to disagree without accusing people because of their opinions, that they "cast aspersions or they lie. You might reach similar conclusions after interacting with so many people in these places.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, LRBS said:

I just asked questions. After so many years, you start to know people, and you can ask questions, exactly what I did. Of course, after such a long time, you make "connections", getting the right information? I don't know. Regarding "casting aspersions", I just disagreed with @Kevin_28 statements, and from what I found, it appears not to be the case. Now, some of you are very judgmental and accuse me of damaging criticism, or that I accuse them of lying. Why? Because it's not what you wanna hear, opinions can't be articulated here, but others are OK, even though they are not "intimate" with them. We should be able to disagree without accusing people because of their opinions, that they "cast aspersions or they lie. You might reach similar conclusions after interacting with so many people in these places.

 

 

 

It is my understanding that Boeing (or at least some part of the company) uses Aerowinx PSX - not for the flight part, but for teaching systems and procedures. I know for a certainty that Atlas Air uses PSX as part of their training syllabus as I have a friend who flys for them.

Of course, PSX is not really a “consumer” flight sim, though it is priced low enough (for non-commercial users) that it is affordable for (ahem) “serious” simmers. I use it in conjunction with MSFS using a scenery bridge program and it works fantastic for that purpose. I doubt very much that I will purchase the PMDG 747-400 when it is eventually released because PSX fills all my “747-400 needs”.  I might get the Classic version however.

54 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

It is my understanding that Boeing (or at least some part of the company) uses Aerowinx PSX - not for the flight part, but for teaching systems and procedures. I know for a certainty that Atlas Air uses PSX as part of their training syllabus as I have a friend who flys for them.

Of course, PSX is not really a “consumer” flight sim, though it is priced low enough (for non-commercial users) that it is affordable for (ahem) “serious” simmers. I use it in conjunction with MSFS using a scenery bridge program and it works fantastic for that purpose. I doubt very much that I will purchase the PMDG 747-400 when it is eventually released because PSX fills all my “747-400 needs”.  I might get the Classic version however.

That is exactly right. Besides that, other developers don't use these "pompous" statements even though they also have to sell software and survive.     

Aerowinx, because I'm very familiar with it, was approved by the FAA, ICAO, and CAA. Even in the initial stages, it was used, as I know, by Lufthansa, Atlas, Polar, and China Air, and if you talk with other instructors at these facilities, they will mention and even recommend its use for the initial stages as a very reliable and accurate software.

Now, PMDG brings us decent software at a reasonable price for this game. Buggy? Oh yes, like many, my most significant dissatisfaction is the reluctance to accept that there are issues and the disrespect towards the customer. If you say what they want to hear, you are the best (same issue here); if not, even if you are qualified and point out problems, they and their supporters will jump on you. So, this behaviour will do no good, and the software will never improve. Very sad.

46 minutes ago, LRBS said:

That is exactly right. Besides that, other developers don't use these "pompous" statements even though they also have to sell software and survive.     

Aerowinx, because I'm very familiar with it, was approved by the FAA, ICAO, and CAA. Even in the initial stages, it was used, as I know, by Lufthansa, Atlas, Polar, and China Air, and if you talk with other instructors at these facilities, they will mention and even recommend its use for the initial stages as a very reliable and accurate software.

Now, PMDG brings us decent software at a reasonable price for this game. Buggy? Oh yes, like many, my most significant dissatisfaction is the reluctance to accept that there are issues and the disrespect towards the customer. If you say what they want to hear, you are the best (same issue here); if not, even if you are qualified and point out problems, they and their supporters will jump on you. So, this behaviour will do no good, and the software will never improve. Very sad.

PMDG Discord is the prime example you can not say anything negative without deleting comments or banned.

On 5/3/2025 at 2:23 PM, Kevin_28 said:

"Boeing is using our code for a major training product."

Let’s hope it’s not anything related to PMDG’s LNAV coding/logic.

Edited May 5, 20251 yr by Bdub22

3 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

. I use it in conjunction with MSFS using a scenery bridge program and it works fantastic for that purpose.

Glad to see another Aerowinx user! The only thing I use MSFS for is providing a visual "world" for PSX to fly in. 

 

1 hour ago, Bdub22 said:

Let’s hope it’s not anything related to PMDG’s LNAV coding/logic.

Haha! >.< I'm happy to admit that their lnav is certainly not the best. No problems admitting that. That being said, it is most certainly not the worst. I can point out other issues (some that I feel are more consistently distracting) in the lnav/vnav systems with other msfs study level airliners, but I still consider them to be fantastic add-ons.

Edited May 5, 20251 yr by Kevin_28