2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I assumed that "pitch up" shortly after take off was because I activate the autopilot quite early, but you are saying that this is an actual flaw in the flight dynamics of the PMDG 777?

I am not sure what you consider "engaging the autopilot quite early."

For the Boeing 777 and later Boeing 747 variants, FAA certification permits autopilot engagement as low as 200 feet AGL after takeoff. Individual airlines may establish more restrictive Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), but they cannot operate below the certified minimum. As a result, it is common to see autopilot engagement at 200, 500, or 1,000 feet AGL, depending on company policy, but not below the aircraft's certified limit.

The 200-foot certification threshold was not selected arbitrarily. It is directly tied to the aircraft's demonstrated low-altitude autopilot performance and the stringent certification requirements concerning potential altitude loss following a critical autoflight system malfunction. These are certification-engineering criteria rather than pilot-operating limitations.

Historically, earlier 747 variants, including the 747SP, 747-100, 747-200, and 747-300, were generally certified for autopilot engagement at 250 feet AGL. That certification basis was initially carried forward into the 747-400 program, with later refinements allowing engagement down to 200 feet AGL.

Regarding the behavior observed in their 777 simulation, what is being presented appears to be the result of incorrect flight control system modeling and a misunderstanding of the aircraft's Fly-By-Wire and speed trim logic.

In the real aircraft, once performance data have been correctly entered and the takeoff trim has been properly set during preflight, the aircraft should rotate smoothly to the commanded pitch attitude with only light aft control pressure from the pilot. Following rotation, the aircraft should maintain the target pitch attitude without significant pitch oscillations, continuous trimming, or repetitive pitch-up/pitch-down tendencies unless commanded by the crew or influenced by significant atmospheric disturbances.

Unfortunately, rather than objectively investigating these concerns, there appears to be a tendency to dismiss or minimize reports from users who identify discrepancies. This approach can be effective because many customers have not had the opportunity to fly the actual aircraft and therefore must rely on the developer's interpretation of how the airplane should behave.

When a position is endorsed internally by RSR and subsequently reinforced by beta testers, contrary evidence from official documentation, certification data, and experienced pilots with thousands of hours on the aircraft can be overlooked. Once that occurs, meaningful technical discussion becomes difficult, and inaccuracies may persist across the product line. In my view, this helps explain why recurring issues—both major and minor—continue to appear throughout their simulations.

1 hour ago, Mclovin10 said:

Yes, Go fly the 777 manually and dont engage auto pilot. The plane will pitch up a ton once above 100ft agl or so.

I use MSFS2020.

Just tested a manual load it and go PMDG777 takeoff.

No problems.

I recently flew the 777F from Germany to Memphis, TN. It was about a 9 hour flight. But it flew the route perfectly. No nose bouncing at all. It flew the step climbs from 320 up to 380 perfectly. Crossing the pacific was probably the most boaring part of the flight. It flew the arrival and approach like a champ. I turned off the AP about 3 miles out and hand flew the plane the rest of the way to the ground, there was no pitching. I consider myself luckier than others.

2 hours ago, vonmar said:

I use MSFS2020.

Just tested a manual load it and go PMDG777 takeoff.

No problems.

I can literally reproduce this nearly 3/4 of the time. Give it another 3 attempts. The thing about the PMDG 777 is that it doesn't feel BIG. It's as nimble as an A318. It doesn't feel like it has the massive amount of inertia that the real thing (likely) feels like. I know that FBW mitigates a lot of that "big RV driving" feel, but its responsiveness and overall pitch just physically doesn't make sense to me. Granted, I'm a PPL flyer that does circuits in a Cessna, but the Fenix A320 "feels" what I would guess is much closer to real life and the PMDG 777 is way "twitchier" than that plane. I have been a PMDG customer for literally almost 30 years. They were revolutionary in their early days. I've probably bought every product they sold up until I saw what they were offering for 2020. It's almost sad to watch a company go from the pinnacle of effort and reproduction to what they are now -- a company that essentially has only offered 3 planes and have ported them over with touchups for 4 different platforms. Think about it -- in over a decade, they haven't released an honest new plane. All that tells me is they're happy sitting back doing minimal effort for maximum payout. I just wish people would start voting with their wallets.

10 minutes ago, Bdub22 said:

I can literally reproduce this nearly 3/4 of the time. Give it another 3 attempts. The thing about the PMDG 777 is that it doesn't feel BIG. It's as nimble as an A318. It doesn't feel like it has the massive amount of inertia that the real thing (likely) feels like. I know that FBW mitigates a lot of that "big RV driving" feel, but its responsiveness and overall pitch just physically doesn't make sense to me. Granted, I'm a PPL flyer that does circuits in a Cessna, but the Fenix A320 "feels" what I would guess is much closer to real life and the PMDG 777 is way "twitchier" than that plane. I have been a PMDG customer for literally almost 30 years. They were revolutionary in their early days. I've probably bought every product they sold up until I saw what they were offering for 2020. It's almost sad to watch a company go from the pinnacle of effort and reproduction to what they are now -- a company that essentially has only offered 3 planes and have ported them over with touchups for 4 different platforms. Think about it -- in over a decade, they haven't released an honest new plane. All that tells me is they're happy sitting back doing minimal effort for maximum payout. I just wish people would start voting with their wallets.

They're in the business of making money. What do you expect them to do give it away for free? Is that how you would run a business? Give away a product for free? You have no idea what amount work needed to bring their products to a new platform and support it and stay profitable. They're a business that has financial responsibilities just like anyone else. They gave out massive discounts to those who purchased the 2020 products who wanted the products also in 2024.

1 hour ago, Bigmack said:

I recently flew the 777F from Germany to Memphis, TN. It was about a 9 hour flight. But it flew the route perfectly. No nose bouncing at all. It flew the step climbs from 320 up to 380 perfectly. Crossing the pacific was probably the most boaring part of the flight. It flew the arrival and approach like a champ. I turned off the AP about 3 miles out and hand flew the plane the rest of the way to the ground, there was no pitching. I consider myself luckier than others.

yep no issues at my end in either sim

35 minutes ago, Bigmack said:

They're in the business of making money. What do you expect them to do give it away for free? Is that how you would run a business? Give away a product for free? You have no idea what amount work needed to bring their products to a new platform and support it and stay profitable. They're a business that has financial responsibilities just like anyone else. They gave out massive discounts to those who purchased the 2020 products who wanted the products also in 2024.

Unfortunately, your perspective suggests a lack of awareness of the standards this company once set for itself. What is even more concerning is the belief that a company's primary objective should be maximizing revenue rather than delivering a high-quality product that earns customer trust and, ultimately, profitability.

This is the very same company that, for years, produced outstanding products, maintained high standards, and operated as a successful business without giving anything away for free. Profitability and quality were never mutually exclusive.

Today, however, the situation appears fundamentally different. Quality control has deteriorated to the point where virtually every release is plagued by significant bugs and deficiencies. More troubling is the apparent unwillingness to acknowledge or address these issues in a meaningful way. As a result, customers are left paying premium prices for unfinished products while known defects remain unresolved for extended periods.

Meanwhile, competing developers continue to improve their products, listen to customer feedback, correct deficiencies, and deliver meaningful updates. The contrast could not be more apparent. The issue is not the pursuit of profit; every business exists to make money. The issue is abandoning the commitment to quality that made customers willing to spend their money in the first place.

59 minutes ago, Bdub22 said:

I can literally reproduce this nearly 3/4 of the time.

You have a problem with your setup or procedure.

Are you now testing now with MSFS2020?

38 minutes ago, Bigmack said:

They're in the business of making money. What do you expect them to do give it away for free? Is that how you would run a business? Give away a product for free? You have no idea what amount work needed to bring their products to a new platform and support it and stay profitable. They're a business that has financial responsibilities just like anyone else. They gave out massive discounts to those who purchased the 2020 products who wanted the products also in 2024.

This is hogwash. Of course I understand the motivation behind owning a business, but if you look at other developers that charge less for far superior quality, you'll finally begin to understand what I wrote and why. It's upsetting watching a company that used to put everything they had into a product and now, they're doing the bare minimum while still commanding top dollar. If you can't see this, you're either not looking close enough or a word not allowed beyond all help.

edit: why did this forum allow me to say "far" earlier in my comment, but then changed it to "word not allowed" at the end? I literally wrote "far beyond all help". Why would that be censored?

edit 2: but it allowed me to write it in my edit? Mods, if you have some insight, that would be great. I'm 99% sure I wrote the word "far", but I'm 100% certain I didn't swear or use a word that anyone would find offensive.

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by Bdub22

Just now, vonmar said:

You have a problem with your setup or procedure.

Are you now testing now with MSFS2020?

2024

1 minute ago, LRBS said:

Unfortunately, your perspective suggests a lack of awareness of the standards this company once set for itself. What is even more concerning is the belief that a company's primary objective should be maximizing revenue rather than delivering a high-quality product that earns customer trust and, ultimately, profitability.

This is the very same company that, for years, produced outstanding products, maintained high standards, and operated as a successful business without giving anything away for free. Profitability and quality were never mutually exclusive.

Today, however, the situation appears fundamentally different. Quality control has deteriorated to the point where virtually every release is plagued by significant bugs and deficiencies. More troubling is the apparent unwillingness to acknowledge or address these issues in a meaningful way. As a result, customers are left paying premium prices for unfinished products while known defects remain unresolved for extended periods.

Meanwhile, competing developers continue to improve their products, listen to customer feedback, correct deficiencies, and deliver meaningful updates. The contrast could not be more apparent. The issue is not the pursuit of profit; every business exists to make money. The issue is abandoning the commitment to quality that made customers willing to spend their money in the first place.

I personally do not have any issues with their products. They work just fine for me. When I did have an issue they were very attentive and solve my issue. That's going back from FS9 to today. Their products are great and they do issue updates quite frequently. Maybe not to your liking or satisfaction. I'm very satisfied with the 737"s and 777's. Fly them all the time with no issues.

22 minutes ago, Bigmack said:

I personally do not have any issues with their products. They work just fine for me. When I did have an issue they were very attentive and solve my issue. That's going back from FS9 to today. Their products are great and they do issue updates quite frequently. Maybe not to your liking or satisfaction. I'm very satisfied with the 737"s and 777's. Fly them all the time with no issues.

Same for me, and the price was very good.

PMDG's coupon offer going from P3D to MSFS2020 helped with the cost to get me started with MSFS2020 and PMDG aircraft.

PMDG 737-700 for MSFS2020 cost me USD $FREE.

PMDG 737-600 for MSFS2020 cost me USD $4.99

PMDG 777-200 for MSFS2020 cost me USD $35.99

1 hour ago, Bigmack said:

They're in the business of making money. What do you expect them to do give it away for free? Is that how you would run a business? Give away a product for free? You have no idea what amount work needed to bring their products to a new platform and support it and stay profitable. They're a business that has financial responsibilities just like anyone else. They gave out massive discounts to those who purchased the 2020 products who wanted the products also in 2024.

I think what he is trying to say is that one would expect them to MAKE AN EFFORT, to win us by making something great and not just re-release add-ons as “revolutionary” with the same plus extra bugs from previous versions. Yes they were (revolutionary) two versions ago. So at this point it does feel like money grabbing rather than a passion project that actually is worth the money.

I understand that they dove deeper in visuals, higher fidelity sounds because they both have become an expectation. And that for them that is costing money. The problem is that the expectations have become higher but the PMDG team seemed to have fallen behind and it’s (was) a very slow wake-up call. They released their MSFS planes with the most basic stuff in the beginning to rush to be the first, only to realise that the bar has been raised to a lot higher level than expected. So what did we get? A product that would have been a standard for P3D, but not so much in MSFS anymore and we all payed the price for this realisation. Versions of Big Updates and years and years later we are reaching A standard. But it has taken quite a few detours, realisations, disappointments to get here. And newer sim releases constantly keep interrupting their processes, not to mention that once they released their T7’s headed back to re-release all their 737’s, and the same will go on for their 747. I just wonder how many years until we see a genuinely new plane, a breath of fresh air, and how many new sim releases will screw up their planning?!

48 minutes ago, Balint Szarka said:

I think what he is trying to say is that one would expect them to MAKE AN EFFORT, to win us by making something great and not just re-release add-ons as “revolutionary” with the same plus extra bugs from previous versions. Yes they were (revolutionary) two versions ago. So at this point it does feel like money grabbing rather than a passion project that actually is worth the money.

I understand that they dove deeper in visuals, higher fidelity sounds because they both have become an expectation. And that for them that is costing money. The problem is that the expectations have become higher but the PMDG team seemed to have fallen behind and it’s (was) a very slow wake-up call. They released their MSFS planes with the most basic stuff in the beginning to rush to be the first, only to realise that the bar has been raised to a lot higher level than expected. So what did we get? A product that would have been a standard for P3D, but not so much in MSFS anymore and we all payed the price for this realisation. Versions of Big Updates and years and years later we are reaching A standard. But it has taken quite a few detours, realisations, disappointments to get here. And newer sim releases constantly keep interrupting their processes, not to mention that once they released their T7’s headed back to re-release all their 737’s, and the same will go on for their 747. I just wonder how many years until we see a genuinely new plane, a breath of fresh air, and how many new sim releases will screw up their planning?!

Thre's not much has change with the 737NG since the fs9 days. But there have been major improvements since. I don't remember seeing EFB's or nav data updates in the FS9 or FSX versions. Also the VNAV wasn't that great. Other than the Max8 the Boeings haven't change much. I'm glad they kept the same quality Boeings products updated to 2024. Now that the 777-900 has gotten FAA approval, hopefully they will make that product. And I'll be the first in line to buy. But that's just me. If all you folks who says nothing has change and you are so unhappy with PMDG, stop buying their products. I personally enjoy flying their planes. Come on Ifly with the new mAX8.

4 hours ago, Bigmack said:

I personally do not have any issues with their products. They work just fine for me. When I did have an issue they were very attentive and solve my issue. That's going back from FS9 to today. Their products are great and they do issue updates quite frequently. Maybe not to your liking or satisfaction. I'm very satisfied with the 737"s and 777's. Fly them all the time with no issues.

I fully understand that.

However, even if you fly these aircraft regularly and personally do not experience any issues, that does not necessarily mean those issues do not exist. In some cases, it may simply reflect a different level of familiarity with how the real aircraft is expected to behave. I do not say that in a derogatory manner; rather, I believe it is important to keep an open mind and recognize that what works for one person may not work for another.

Beyond personal opinions, there are numerous reports on their own forum from users raising concerns about unresolved issues. What is particularly disappointing is that these concerns often remain unaddressed while the product continues to be marketed as though everything is functioning as intended. In my view, knowingly selling a product with well-documented unresolved problems while minimizing or dismissing customer feedback is not a sound business practice.