kevinh

Members
  • Content count

    3,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

kevinh last won the day on September 25 2012

kevinh had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

310 Excellent

About kevinh

  • Rank
    BAVirtual Pilot

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    EGKA

Recent Profile Visitors

4,868 profile views
  1. Didn't think it was. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
  2. It doesn't look that shallow from the previews, but it isn't PMDG depth for sure. And the 787 is incredibly complex, so even producing a shallow sim is a challenge.
  3. You said "barring a remake of existing PMDG aircraft" then listed the MD-11, which would be a remake. Also saying the Airbus is ugly is highly subjective, even in this "Boeing friendly" zone. I happen to think the 737 is uglier than any Airbus. But that's only my opinion, I'm not stating it as fact. It hasn't stopped me being a customer for the PMDG 737 three times over, excluding expansions. I think we can safely assume the 737MAX and 777X will get made. Hopefully the 777-200ER will also appear. Surely this thread should be about what else people might like, assuming PMDG have spare capacity to make something else. Given the very demanding conditions Boeing places on release of 787 data I think any PC based 787 sim requires a significant degree of reverse engineering. QW are clearly prepared to do this. I'm not sure PMDG are.
  4. The J41 was a technology test bench, like the DC-6B. Sales numbers are therefore less important, as Kyle has often stated in threads like this. The J41 also happens to have been an aircraft RSR flew. PMDG make sims of aircraft they collectively like, in the near certain knowledge that PMDG customers will like them too. Hence the continued and welcome support of the J41. My guess is that the MD-11 doesn't tick all the same boxes for PMDG as the J41 does. It would be a mammoth task to remake to current PMDG standards for predictably low commercial returns. It also would mean something else, possibly of more interest, would NOT get made.
  5. Do they provide the tablet to use it on? That's quite a few more Peronis*. *Other beers are available not to drink. ;)
  6. Absolutely. It's not cheap but it works like a charm. It works best with Windows but you can use it on an iPad using Air Display. You can try it free with a 30 day demo licence.
  7. Yes but you have to buy their charts to go with it. The Aivlasoft EFB uses sim navdata to create charts. On topic a 747-200 would be a great classic to have in PMDG depth.
  8. Well I guess we all have different priorities. I found the CS777 EFB a PITA to use, but credit to them for trying. If I had a tablet I'd use that for charts. Instead I use Aivlasoft's EFB which is brilliant as it synthesises charts to match your navdata so it's always correct to the sim.
  9. That's like saying the 777 is no good without an EFB. The 747-8 has 777 avionics, so you will get things like electronic checklists. I'm very much looking forward to the 747-8 release. An EFB that just displays charts isn't much use in a desktop sim. The Capt Sim 777 has such an EFB. It is hard work to populate (and keep up to date) and more or less useless in practice as the charts are too small to read. The really useful things in an EFB need performance data. PMDG will only ever use real data so that's unlikely to happen. QW appear to be offering something that looks like the real thing in their 787.
  10. I think you can adjust PFD and ND refresh rates in the CDU. That might also affect how the weather radar updates.
  11. Well there's the answer. 90 nm is the maximum range Active Sky produces weather radar information. So that is all PMDG can display.
  12. The weather radar information comes from Active Sky and that will only produce weather data for the cloud draw distance you have selected. That defaults to 90 nm. You could try extending the cloud draw distance, ensure 'detail' is also selected in AS, to see if the weather radar draws more distant returns.
  13. Since posting my last reply to you I looked in their forum again and found posts that support your view that the A319 will be out before SP1. A beta tester posted: "The A319 will follow shortly after the V4 release, and after the bug fixes from the V4 version have been rolled back into the FSX/P3Dv3 version of the A320X". That implies the order is v4 update, roll back fixes in v4 to FSX/P3Dv3, release the A319. I still don't see that as making good development sense though. However I guess they want some income from selling the expansion. Andrew Wilson posted this: "The system updates (SEC FPLN, FIX INFO) and bug fixes that have been done will go into an update for P3D V3/FSX right after the P3D V4 version has been released. SP1 will then follow sometime after for all platforms, and SP1 will be the last update for FSX/P3D V3." Again that clearly says there will be an FSX/P3Dv3 update right after v4 update release. I had assumed SP1 would include things like SEC FPLAN and FIX INFO but that's coming sooner. Clearly what they mean by SP1 is a much more comprehensive update. At least the 32 bit users will be left with a fully functional A320.
  14. You seem to have misread what I wrote, because what I suggested isn't what they are doing. They aren't just doing v4 compatibility they are adding a lot of functionality too. Some of which relates to SP1. Doing the v4 compatibility work first wouldn't have taken all this time. Also there's no indication on their forum that the A319 is coming before SP1. It wouldn't make any sense to release the A319 expansion at the current level of development then develop both to SP1 standard.
  15. What they should have done is get the A320 working in v4, then do the SP1 upgrade for FSX/P3D, and finally add the extra 64 bit functionality (HD sounds, etc). It's very frustrating to wait for all the extra stuff to be tested. PMDG chose to do the P3Dv4 port first with the promise that additional P3Dv4 features would come along later. I certainly hope SP1 for the A320 is coming before the A319 release otherwise we'll be waiting for a very long time. I don't recall seeing the release order you quote referred to on the FSL forum.