nrunning24

Yes its now listed in 2024 addons. Version 1.3.2. No trick required.

Not sure how its disrespectful to point out that your blanket statement is just false, and that because you were in contact with real ATC controllers 10 years ago during RC4 development doesn't make you any kind of authority on anything ATC related. Yes there is a world outside US.... But there also is USA air travel as well. BATC actually handles the USA vs world differences in many respects. If you actually used MSFS you would know that when airports have SIDs like in the UK, the BATC controller will clear you via the SID, and only does the vectors at airports that require it..... Its much more advanced than anything RC4 ever did.

Correct he didn't, but my issue is that you made a blanket statement about what real world ATC does on departure that just isn't true..... You said "No real-world AT Control would issue those instructions. You fly the SID unless otherwise instructed." backpedal all you want. Major US airports do not have SIDs and all departures are vectored to their first waypoint. I get you were a beta tester on RC4 all those years ago, you constantly tell us that as well. I just don't understand how someone who was working on a software program with some real ATC people 10 years ago, and doesn't even use MSFS, is on these forums commenting like some expert when they make obviously wrong statements.

Ray not sure why you constantly comment in the MSFS forums, as you have told us over and over you are still only in P3D and happy. But also this comment is so wrong... Some large US airports do not have published SIDs and all aircraft are basically given vectors to their first waypoint. KORD being the first main example that jumps in my head. Would they issue multiple incremental vector changes like in the example? No but they definitely issue an initial vector with TO clearance, and then sometimes 1 subsequent one after departure before giving a DTO.

Not sure you are the authority on what is a "waste of money" that's a very personal decision, and depends on lots of factors. For you maybe it is, but for many it is very much not. You must not be flying into airports that you have been to in real life, because for me at least the immersion breaking of seeing a default airport somewhere I've been before makes me not even want to sim. Let alone the ground textures, markings, default terminal textures etc. I find to be not even worth flying there.

The idea that you need to keep an email for years that has an expired download link for the possible future scenario of a free upgrade to a simulator that didn't even exist when you bought the original product because "why not" just does not fly.... Literally EVERY single other dev has figured out how to make this as painless as possible. Then what happens when Reno, Seoul, Cleveland etc. get released.... Same thing? Its embarrassing.

Sure it takes 30 seconds if you have the original 2020 download link email.... The whole idea that you need to find a random email from 4 years ago and respond to that then you get the upgrade for free is absolutely way more work than should be required..... They could send out an email to everyone who bought 2020 version informing them and making it easy to upgrade but they dont. Which to me says they want to make it difficult so some people just say whatever I'll just buy it again... Its the only reason to make an upgrade this user unfriendly.

I will say, as someone who only flies airlines once the PMDG 737 got released I went from only 2020 to only 2024.... Mostly because I could see the writing on the wall for future 2020 updates and releases.... I will say as someone who got a pretty good system back in 2020 which is now outdated I was very surprised at the 2024 performance. Ultra settings on 2020 I needed Lossless Scaling to have anything close to a smooth experience... On 2024 I'm one down from Ultra (forget what its called, maybe high) and no need for lossless scaling, its very smooth. I could use more VRAM. I have 11GB, but outside of that its a good experience (PMDG, Fenix, ini A350, w/ Beyond ATC with AIG models for Traffic)

PMDG really brings all the interesting comments out..... Its not even worth $5? you can't be serious. Is it worth $30? Depends on how much you value $30 and how much use you get out of it..... But the idea that updating an airplane to a new sim should be free even though there are obvious updates is crazy to me. is it great that other devs do it, sure! But I'm never going to judge anyone for charging for new work outside the scope of the previously released project. I've only flown it a couple times in FS2024 but its frame rate friendly, and solid with good systems depth. The idea that we should expect developers to work for free to bring things to a new sim is so crazy to me. I hope that some of these people asking for a free upgrade have no problems working for free themselves.

Just did my first flight, takeoff with a crosswind was so refreshing. Just felt so much better was able to easily track centerline with consistent rudder input vs previously varying between over and under correcting. New sounds are great too, Love the color correction on the displays, feels so much better.

Is it realistic to have a airline safety video sound on my speakers during pushback and engine start? Of course not. But neither are "wing views" and spot views. What a weird thing to get hung up on. For some of us it ties in our real flight experience with the sim. Do you have a 2nd pilot at your computer? Run every checklist? I'm sure you are doing something in your sim that isn't "real" also.

This wasn't even a solar farm though... If you cant figure out what it is how is the AI supposed to render it correctly?

Are we really posting an almost 50 yo vid of a 737-200 or -100 to make some point??? In an ideal world should these farming structures present correctly? Sure! But the only way to have a desktop sim for $50 is that they need to use AI for vast swaths of the world to make believable looking autogen. Otherwise you need to use Landclass biased products like P3D. This is the only way forward for sat images. There may be some local issues but in general it works really well. Complaining about this makes me think people don't understand the decision making around trying to cover the world in realistic sat ground images with corresponding correct autogen. Complaining about local anomalies while the first posters on this thread couldn't even figure out what it was either only makes this more hilarious.

These arnt server side issues. Its impossible to make sure every inch of the world has the correct buildings. They made the decision to use AI to scan the images and select realistic buildings. It works 99% of the time really well. Are there issues for random specific spots (like these farms which have building like structures on them to prevent animals from getting to the berries). If there is actually that much demand to go in a correct these issues in rural UK then a 3rd party can come and do it. Otherwise its a waste of resources.

So let me get this straight your flying a 737 into a grass strip but your immersion is broken not by that but by the fact that the AI is trying to find a correct building biased off a photo that leaves it somewhat ambiguous.

I mean sure but multiple people have done the math and you still come out ahead with this model vs the P3D one.... I think its more mental, paying 70 more $ for something you already spent $70 on feels wrong, meanwhile spending $30 on something you already spent $130 on feels better even if the math is worse.

To me, PMDG went from the best of the best to still really dang good, but maybe not so innovative anymore. 737 and 777 in MSFS are still some of the best planes out there, only Fenix can confidently beat them head to head. PMDG hate still seems drastically overdone. Are there faults, sure, its still better than 90% of the competition. I think there could be some discount pricing for multiple purchases of the same models and would likely increase their overall sales but that's a small issue in the grand scheme of things.

For me it flies great, but my issue is getting it loaded per Simbrief is a hassle. Wish the tablet could just load the fuel/ZFW from the simbrief flight plan in one click. I dont want to have to determine how many #s of bags need to be in each cargo bay to meet the ZFW while staying within a reasonable CG.

My point is I've had multiple situations where multiple runways are possible and it will default to your Simbrief choice and you may find every other AI is using a different one (which is the more preferred runway according to BATC). So as long as the Simbreif RWY is possible in the wind conditions they will usually assign it even if they dont put AI on the same runway. Obviously when the wind changes you will get re-assigned.

This isn't totally correct. in low wind conditions or favorable wind conditions it will prioritize your SB runway. But if the wind conditions dont meet the local config that would support that runway as being active they will change it.

This topic seems so confusing to me. You're interested in trying something new, but yet dont seem to have an ounce of desire to learn a slightly different way of doing things to operate said new thing. Why not just stay with the 737? Why do you need to clear the discontinuity? Depending on SIDs and STARs its very possible to have 2 discontinuity on every flight that is perfectly normal. Any SID that requires radar vectors to a point will have one and any STAR that ends with a heading for vectors to approach will have one. You can and should operate the plane with those in the flight plan.

I used to be someone who never had pedals, and then I did a couple real world flights and completely changed my position and bought some the next day for my sim setup. Could never go back.

Craziest part about this is if he didn't relentlessly continue his vendetta against Flightbeam and instead developed KATL, LFPG, KDFW we would likely have no idea since it seems Mir was the first domino to fall, which allowed everything else to follow.

Ok but PMDG released frequent updates almost monthly after release while Fenix mostly did nothing for over a year. Its a big community feature request I don't think its horrible for them to highlight it. Same with Fenix Block2. You can bet that Fenix will hype the sharklets update and again no issue with it. Just seems like a weird way to hate on them when you reference a competitor who basically did the same thing last time they had a huge patch.

Lol Fenix hyped Block 2 (or V2 whatever it was they called it) like crazy for months.... Cant win if your PMDG. People just blatantly use factually false examples to hate now.