Jump to content

bpcw001

Members
  • Content Count

    671
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bpcw001

  1. Hi, after some search requests gave me a 504 Gateway Timeout, I kindly ask you to enlighten me: What is actually new/fixed in the 1.20.XXXX versions of the NGX for an FSX user? I redownloaded the latest base package from my PMDG account, but the readme does not contain any list of changes. Please be so kind as to give me some links or a short bullet-pointed list of what changed. Thanks
  2. Wow. I was contemplating to finally jump from FSX to P3D, but reading about the dynamic lighting and other perfomance problems here and over at FSL is quite discouraging, especially considering what kind of impressive hardware some people throw at it. For me, PMDG and FSL stuff not running properly on P3D v4 is definitely is a no-go. These are the only addons I fly, and most of my flying happens real-time during nights. Seems like I'll have to stay on good ol' FSX for some more time until this gets sorted out, no matter by which party.
  3. Anyone with an ASUS ROG-STRIX-Z270E-GAMING motherboard here who has run into any problems with NGX and 777? I'd be getting a fair deal on that one, but wanted to make sure it won't cause issues with PMDG before I pull the trigger. Thanks.
  4. I get your point, but that's exactly the reason why I an NOT too interested in flying the Queen. Different simmers have different motivations. Some like to go for contemporary realism.
  5. I didn't say the LR wasn't flying at all, but compared to the number of ER's, their number is quite small. Sure, there are some airlines that do monster legs like Delta from/to Johannesburg, or Qatar from/to Doha, or Emirates from/to Dubai. Also, some more exotic airlines like Turkmenistan Airlines fly them. Still, it appears that the LR has never gained real traction with the airlines, which directly jumped to the -300ER as soon as it was available. Fire up Flightradar24 or something like that and you'll occasionally find a LR among the masses of -200/300ER's and 200F's. I love the -200LR. But it's a waste flying them on legs a 200/300ER can do, and the airlines appear to think the same.
  6. I do get it. And I certainly wouldn't expect them to do it for free. But I'd like the -200ER version(s) too. The -200LR is not doing too much flying these days if you don't fly the freighter version. For pax, mostly -300ER and -200ER out there.
  7. Yes, this is the sequence I have been using all the years to get the compact engine display. FSX too. If this doesn't work any more, then it's yet another reason for me to not upgrade.Still on the older version of the T7 and watching issues like that one coming in ...
  8. Yes, it would be nice to have the new ground friction model, but there are so many problem reports regarding the new version on this forum, also from folks who run FSX. If the ground friction model is the only change in FSX, I am going to hold my horses on that update. I'd be more interested in a list of bugfixes for the FSX version (if such thing exists).
  9. Thanks for all your replies. Microupdate so far released for P3D only. Maybe the reported issues on P3D will be sorted out before the FSX release in case they'd affect FSX as well.
  10. Hi, I am currently flying the T7 in FSX without any problems. I gathered from the forum here that there is a new update out (1.10.8383.0) which gives some users some trouble. Now, I am wondering if I should install this update or not. I would not want to ruin my currently perfectly working setup. Could someone kindly tell me what the key changes were in this T7 update, or point me to the changelog? Thank you
  11. Rev 3 fixed all issues. Thanks again for pointing me to the updated navdata. Case closed.
  12. Hi all, thanks a lot for your suggestions. I was still on revision 1 of the navdata Guess I should check for updates more often even within the validity of a cycle. Updating to rev 3 right now. Will report back.
  13. Hi, since Navigraph cycle 1705, I found that there are a lot of DPs, STARs and approaches coded with INTC pseudo waypoints, which appears to give the NGX a hard time. Example: use ILS 25C into EDDF, e. g. via ROLSO. Check what gets generated on the ND in both NAV and PLAN mode. There is an INTC for the final approach course, and the ND renders a circular path for the intercept, the same for the missed approach from TAU VOR to MTR VOR. I have found almost all procedures with INTC coded into them result in these circular paths. Taking out the INTCs in the FMC straightens the lines again and I can fly without any trouble, but I am wondering why the NGX has a hard time rendering proper paths for these intercepts. Anyone else faces this problem? Thanks
  14. Get them both! I, for my part, prefer the 777 in all variations.
  15. Objection from my side. There are enough third party addons that can do this. PMDG should concentrate their efforts on what they do best: develop first class airplane simulations.
  16. I know exactly what you are talking about. I am using FSUIPC too, but like you I cannot find any difference in behavior with or without it. My experience is that you need to trim slowly. if you keep the trim switch pressed in any direction, it will first appear that nothing is happening. So you keep pressing, and all of a sudden the airplane jerks up or down by a large factor. If you are out of trim, make small adjustments on the trim switch, wait for the changes to settle in, then trim further. It's different compared to the NGX which reacts quicker and more direct, but then in the 777 all inputs need to go through the FBW computers. Nothing to do with controller calibration IMHO.
  17. bpcw001

    777 update?

    Being a huge fan of both the 777 and the NGX, any updates, fixes and improvements for these addons would be deeply appreciated. That said, I have to say that I don't really miss anything in these two addons that would make me sit on the edge of a chair impatiently waiting for any updates.
  18. I'm in for the FSX version of the 747. No P3D for me for the forseeable future since I have sunk quite some $$$ into my current FSX setup with all the addons (aircraft, airports, terrain ...)
  19. Time compression is a very good feature for me since it enables me to safely do somewhat realistic flights with the 777 in the small amount of spare time I usually have after work. No need to beam myself from Dubai to Narita in one minute or less, but those flights become a lot more attainable at a 4x rate.
  20. Is there any possibility to tell the 777 what kind of fuel (Jet A vs Jet A1) is in the tanks, or does the warning come up assuming Jet A (-40°C) regardless of the actual fuel type?
  21. This is pretty much how the time-compression feature is supposed to work. Time compression will switch to a lower rate if the system encounters conditions which make it think that it cannot reliably handle the computing load any more, thus providing a fail-safe mechanism that tries not to overburden your computer. The sim rate should go up again once the computing load reduces again, e. g. when entering smooth air again. Just using the flight sim time acceleration, which never throttles down, and does not take into account increased system loads due to e. g. handling turbulence or in turns, which require the autoflight systems to work harder than in smooth air, might lead to instabilities or even crashes on some systems. Not cool if your are already some hours into a carefully planned long-haul flight.
  22. bpcw001

    Fabulous!

    Well, I can chime in here too as one of those who have absolutely no issues with either PMDG 777 and 737 NGX. Indeed, fabulous addons, and despite of using other high-profile aircraft addons as well, I always find myself returning to the 777 and 737 since they provide a 100% trouble-free simming experience for me.
  23. In FSX or P3D? For FSX, I remember this had been brought up before and the answer was it cannot/won't be done. In P3D I don't know.
  24. ASN user here. Wake turbulence 0 (off), and wind turbulence at 70% for PMDG addons, 30% for FSL A320 I found 70% to be quite realistic for where I usually fly, maybe a bit on the challenging side. 30% for FSL only because their autoflight system cannot handle it otherwise. No updraft/downdrafts.
  25. Because it is relatively minor, very sporadic and tough to find the correct setup for reproduction if you don't know what to look for in the first place. Plus, I don't understand your issue with PMDG support. The NGX is considered mature from a software lifecycle view, and we can count ourselves lucky if we see yet another update to the NGX at all (which I hope we will since it is a very popular addon, simulating a very popular aircraft).
×
×
  • Create New...