Azapata87

I’ll throw in a vote for KONT. Spent several years there. Unique airport. Fun fact. Other than LAX it’s the only other airport in Southern California with runways that will support CAT 3 auto land. (In real life anyway). 

Pretty sure PMDG has this implemented too. I’ve never been one to enjoy my aircraft and flights not going perfectly in the sim though. No failures please. I can fail on my own. Unaided.

8 minutes ago, Noel said:

I'm guessing the PMDG 737 doesn't play well with changing the simulation rate in-sim, yes?

It plays better than most. It has an auto cruise function that automatically controls simulation rate. This was brought over from there 777 and 747 lines.

59 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

I would usually pull snippets from a long post such as this one, but I feel its worth the read again when its lost a few pages back with all the posts coming in.

It would be easy to label me as a tainted source of reference since I'm involved in the project.  But regardless, I know a solid opinion when I see it, and @MDFlier has a very good one. (hehe...in my opinion of his opinion).

What I got out of his post is that he understands a lot of nuances that are often missed when we get into spirited discussions about pricing and value for what you pay.  It's more than just what the end-user winds up paying for a product.

If you factor in the valid and poignant statements MD made in the last two paragraphs, you should be able to at least relate to the risk PMDG took, the offer to make good on "buy our P3D stuff now, we'll take care of you in MSFS", and the fact that this plane runs so well in MSFS (That was not just by chance, there was a LOT of work in the back end to make this happen)...that even at its current price and pricing model, its not a bad deal...especially if you average the cost out over the few years you'll be flying it!

 

 

Absolutely! If I were to divide the initial cost by the sheer hours of enjoyment I get out of these addons it turns out to be some cheap entertainment for me. This is one of my only hobby’s. 
 

I haven’t bought it yet. Waiting for the weekend 🙂

I like pretending to fly BIG ones. The bigger the better. That’s why I’m buying the -800 and the -900.

Glad I saw this before doing a clean install. Thought something had corrupted after a processor upgrade today.

With a little practice you learn how to be efficient with time.

I load up MSFS, while waiting, quickly plan a flight on simbrief. Load it up in the Fenix (turn around state with APU on). Instant board the passengers finish programming the mcdu and pushback. That all should take a few minutes at most 🙂. 
 

Ofcourse if you want to pretend your in real life your gonna need a lot of free time to waste. 
 

depending on what region of the world  you like to fly in, find some short flights that work for you, my go tos are 

las-lax,ont,sna,San,bur,oak, sfo or any combination of those are usually easy for me to complete before the family needs me. 

I’m positive similar city pairs with similar flight times can be found anywhere in the world. 
 

Anyone remember 2001 when people were calling for desktop flight simulators to be banned? Call it what it is, a game. I enjoy this hobby. 

Typically you don’t unless you have customs available. 
 

the current FAA 5010 airport master record form for that airport shows none and the airport name on that record has no “international” in it 😉

2 hours ago, nicboyGS said:

For those PMDG praises, you are actually getting a P3D port over plane with the same level of cockpit and slightly better external model. There is no completely new build claimed by RJR as the project started. If you feel you are satisfied because of it is a PMDG plane, your standard has declined for years!

It’s a 737.. how different could your “new build” possibly be. Couple finger prints on the LCD screens? Better cabin? Don’t get me wrong that would be cool but meh that isn’t gonna affect my enjoyment of an airplane. The EFB  is coming.

I also own and love the Fenix A320 it’s is almost perfect. I still fly the PMDG 737 because the quality isn’t as far off from the A320 as the haters would claim it to be. IMO. 

34. Addicted to flightsim since fs2000.

I don’t understand the ridiculous constant pitchforking. The 737 is arguably the best it’s ever been. if you dont like PMDG nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to buy their product. 

2 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Should be no need.  We should just put it to bed and talk about how the mountains in the US look a lot more wrinkly now due to the better data. 
(Yikes!  I hope that isn't ageist now or that will be another can of worms! )

I will let that slide but please if we discuss the sims colors don’t bring up its gray color palette. My hairs been going more gray lately and that may just trigger me.

I was really excited for the beautiful island of Catalina and it’s airport, and Disneyworld.. oh and the San Diego updates. 

I do cold and dark but often skip checklists and use my own mental flow.. rarely I’ll forget a step like setting take off trim and autobrakes. I just like pressing switches and operating the machine. 
 

Often it’s  like I just jumped in the plane and have to rush to power the plane on and get out of the airport before the monsters from The Langoliers eat the plane. 

Not a Halo guy but the Pelican sure is fun for when I don’t have time to plan a something in an airliner 😄

8 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Exactly! And they need to tell inibuilds to stop working on that stupid, useless A310 that no one asked for. Why give us an awesome, high fidelity plane like that when there are game shattering bugs! I mean, no one is able to play MSFS right now because of the almighty bugs! Why would they put all that work into the 40th anniversary and edition when the sim is completely unplayable for everyone!??? /s

You had me going until the /S. 

The FBW A320 is great for being free and it is a NEO which does have some worthwhile differences to the FENIX CEO A320.

For me it comes down to being a parent of two little kids with very little time for simming. When I do have time to do a quick flight I want something that is complete and will work correctly all of the time. I don't have the patience or the time to figure out why something isn't working or if a feature has been implemented in the branch I am using.  

I guess Im willing to “pay" for convenience.

22 hours ago, bendead said:

One thing I would love but it will never happen because it's so rare, is a HUD. 

One of My favorite parts about flying the 737. Wish I could have one in the A320.

My zoom gets stuck when fs realistic is open. Anyone have this problem? 
 

If I turn the master switch off in fs realistic it works just fine.

9 hours ago, DJJose said:

I now understand why the plane was priced so low. It requires an ultimate navigraph subscription to truly shine. If you want all the bells and whistles of this amazing little bird, you need one. Keep this in mind if you decide to buy the HJet.

I’d say that’s a little far fetched. You need a subscription to view the charts in the Fenix A320 as well.. but that does not hamper most peoples enjoyment. 

Pricing really has nothing to do with this.

I’m about 98 percent sure I’ll be buying this weekend. Curious about the pitch sensitivity. If it’s true to the real world aircraft then that’s fine with me. 

I’d love an A321neo. I’m itching to simulate some Hawaiian flights.

Flew the Dark star from LAX to HNL and LAX to PANC in real time. Very satisfying and Quick. 
 

Fun to land without ever having a visual of the runway out of the window.
 

You’re  both right, he’s getting into the weeds and explaining that the Airbus logic automatically turns on the fuel pump for the APU.

As far at the pilot is concerned they do not need to do anything with the fuel pumps to start the APU.