scandinavian13

PMDG
  • Content count

    21,520
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,654 Excellent

About scandinavian13

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    KJYO

About Me

  • About Me
    Former rampie, airport planner, air traffic control candidate, aviation program analyst, and applications/technology trainer. Now a contractor by day, PMDG by night, and flying around here and there.

Recent Profile Visitors

23,244 profile views
  1. MTOW is pay to play, really. The same 400 at one airline can have a lower MTOW than the exact same 400 at another airline. It's a paper chase of approval via your regulatory authority...so "simulated" is really up to you. Ours turns amber/yellow if you're above the generic MTOW, but it's not like it won't still take off, just like a high MTOW 400 going to a carrier that recertifies it to a lower MTOW doesn't suddenly lose the ability to get aloft. Also: pretty sure the million pound MTOW flight was on a special case / special use permit.
  2. scandinavian13

    PMDG 737 NGX increasing in fuel in left tank?

    Make sure you are only using the FUEL menu under FS ACTIONS > FUEL on the CDU MENU page.
  3. It's tiring. If you have a legitimate concern, and are genuinely here to share said concern, you show up with data. Seriously. Go literally anywhere and just say "you're wrong, it should be this way" and finish with "if you want data just ask" and see what kind of response you get, especially in a technical setting. It's not only a courtesy thing, it just makes sense. Manual references, pictures, some sort of evidence to back a claim. It's not uncommon. ...and it's not really defensive as much as having to see this every time and go through the motions of "what are your references, because we have an entire library and Tech Team saying otherwise." Does that mean they're always right? No. Does it mean that you need to provide some sort of verification so I don't have to ask for it? Yeah. That would make a ton of sense, and save everyone some time. It's incredibly simple: "I think this is wrong. Here's the source as to the reasoning behind my claim." Me: "Hmm...interesting." *well sourced...seems logical...I'll pass it on to the team.* "Thanks!" I'm not going to argue with facts. Facts are facts. Opinions asserted as facts, however, need to be challenged. Example: You need to follow the forum rule about signatures. If you want the reasoning, go find it, or let me know and I'll provide the link. (...and because that method is asinine, the above is a joke, here's the real link.)
  4. scandinavian13

    Aircraft.cfg Issue

    Based on the user name, I'm guessing you entered your name in the topic title. It's best to use that to describe the problem. Just be sure to include it at the bottom of each post (manually type it). Looks like an error caused by the manual editing of the aircraft.cfg, resulting in a duplicate entry.
  5. scandinavian13

    Issues having installed the PMDG 737 800 NG in P3d V4

    That means you're trying to install the FSX version into P3D. That won't work.
  6. scandinavian13

    747-8 observations good and bad so far

    I see lots of words, yet no source and proof. Source? ...or just the usual assertions because someone saw a product in BETA and wanted to get the Gold Star Award for "sticking it to the big guy" for pointing out something was wrong...? Bring facts and data please, referenced. Yes. All bug splatter is the same... ...also, what bugs do you have in your area...? Haven't come across any bugs that lack blood and plasma, and have white goo. Source: 15 years of flying, and cleaning bloody, plasma-y (yellow) bug crap off of the wings from Cessnas to DC-3s, to the larger jets at IAD (CRJ2s through whatever else UAL/UAX happened to be flying at the time). Source? ...or again, basing this on a bunch of subjective opinion? ...are we though? Changes for the sake of changes based on the (unsupported, as of yet) views of some random internet person who claims authority (again, without specific references) isn't necessarily going to be a benefit. Also, you're attributing a lot more of the improvements to the QOTS II to a bunch of people in the forum, when I'd argue that only a few items got picked up here and there. Provide examples of the contributions you're asserting, please. We have an entire team of Tech testers who maintain, fly, and otherwise have experience on the modeled airframe. Verified and sourced. To be honest, if you're going to call someone out in a forum like this, you should provide this as part of your initial arguments. Bring supporting facts and evidence.
  7. scandinavian13

    747-8 Stream. Now

    FIRST
  8. scandinavian13

    Testing Approximately All of the Things

    Definitely. Flew on a DLH 748 last January and went upstairs to have a look up front. Awesome plane.
  9. scandinavian13

    737 Update - PLEASE HELP

    This usually means your version is too old for it to update. OCv2 will make this more obvious, but for now, download the update for the box version (from Aerosoft's support page). Uninstall the version on your computer, install the one you got from Aerosoft, and then try the update.
  10. scandinavian13

    Testing Approximately All of the Things

    Nope. Still available. You have to go through the motions of logging into ACARS to get access to the data functions (origin, dest, flight no, and a flight no on the RTE page; then your ETD, ETE and operator IATA on the ACARS page). It'll still work locally (the existing wind requests and performance data requests that you already have), but external (new) functions won't work. Very basic functions will be automated. VHF and SATCOM are the methods by which ACARS sends/receives data. We have a full VHF and SATCOM reception range simulation. You won't really notice any of this unless you're part of, and flying a flight in, GFO. Short version: you'll continue to be able to use the existing data functions (wind requests and performance data). Anything else requires GFO. Link?
  11. scandinavian13

    PMDG 777 is not inastalled..Help Me PLZ.

    Fair - don't blame you at all. Still..figured I'd give the guy a concession on this one...
  12. scandinavian13

    PMDG 777 is not inastalled..Help Me PLZ.

    I'm guessing he's using some random website to translate, and it may have very odd formatting. Willing to say it's unintentional, despite it being a bit..."loud."
  13. scandinavian13

    Airport recognition

    They both use the same nav data (and very similar, if not exactly same data recognition from that nav data), so I'm curious as to how this is possible. Might you have tried the 777 on a different data cycle, or did you check them on the same day? Full names - first and last - are required here in the forum, by the way.
  14. scandinavian13

    Testing Approximately All of the Things

    Yeah, you get the HI-LOW chime a few times in the preflight at the very least. I think the first time is when you get DATA available when logging into ACARS, and then again when SATCOM comes up (usually a separate event, as SATCOM comes up only after the plane figures out where it is in the world after the IRS alignment finishes).
  15. scandinavian13

    737NGX starts with blank screens in flight. No response.

    Follow the steps here (they were also included in a txt file accompanying the installer, but many overlook it): https://support.precisionmanuals.com/kb/a110/aircraft-loads-up-dead-no-activation-window-no-landing-gear-simconnect-issue.aspx The above site is a great resource if you're having issues. If the knowledge base can't help, create an account (top right), and submit a ticket.