Werner747

I am referring to the engine types in general, not one particular engine. It would be pretty stupid to indicate that one engine type could produce such a large difference in thrust. You will note that at NO POINT did I say that -110 or 115 gives this big a difference in thrust. The idea was to give as broad an answer as possible, as these engines are fitted to various airframes. As for thae data I referenced different sites. Also, there is a big difference between engine diameter and fan diameter sir I am sure my English is not that bad, the difference should be obvious. You can find many miniscule diferences depending on the sites you use as reference. For example your reference to 74000 as opposed to 75000, good grief brother! Or hey you know, those four onches you are off is goong to make the world stop! I see yoir point aboit the 77L reference to the lower thrust engines, my mistake, that's life, it happens! I think the biggest issue these days are whenver someone makes a comment even in broad terms twenty people tells him that he doesn't know what the heck he is talking about. The op asked a broad question I gave a broad answer, nothing to it. This is the sort of thing that puts newcomers off. If you wanna correct a post be my guest, but please don't tear the post apart in a way that wants to make someone look like an idiot, that's bad taste mate. No further comment, I am done here,nthe floor is yours.

Also if you want to correctly calculate fuel quantities, use simbrief.com, discovered it few days ago, excellent, very realistix. Kind regards

+1. The 77L only uses the GE90 engine variant whereas the -200 has different engine types that it can use. Likewise for the -300 series. This would have meant a far longer delay possibly due to the fact that the various different engine models and their different performances had to be researched and properly programmed. Kind regards.

:LMAO: Kind regards.

The GENx engines should be quieter with the scalloped engine nacelles (which are actually called chevrons btw). The engines use some of the technology that is actually used by the GE90 engines. It seems that the 787's engines produce between 53 000 and 75 000 lbs of thrust, although I stand to be corrected. The GE90's on the 77L, generate between 74 000 and 115 000 lbs of thrust, which makes them slightly more powerful LOL! The overall diameter of the GE90 engine is 132 inches (roughly the size of a 737's fuselage if I'm not mistaken). The 787's GENx engines are 144 inches in diameter. So overall I think that the GENx engines will be quieter, they are slightly larger, but a touch less powerful maybe. If you look at the MTOW of the 77L, it is 766 000 lbs whereas for the 787 it is around 502 500 lbs (for the 787-8). I'm not sure about the thrust to weight ratios, but from the above, the 77L is bigger and heavier and needs the extra power. Hope that helps! Kind regards.

Not sure if you were referring to me when asking about experience with the A or B team's equipment, but if you are, let me put it this way. The problem with assumption is that it is usually incorrect. On the newer aircraft of the Boeing series, that is the 747-400 and later models, I have tons of experience. On the 747-400 alone I have in excess of 7 000 flying hours, I know the systems inside and out, I know what makes it tick. I have put in quite a few hours with the NGX and are currently laughing all the way to the VA bank with my 777 hours being logged. Yes, many of the other simmers here have got way more experience than that, but point is I know the systems. Let us look at the A320 accident at the airshow demonstration. The aircraft had decided it was landing, and that was that. When the pilot tried to pull up, the elevators would have none of it and pitch the nose down instead of up. Now, had this been a Boeing, even the 777, the pilot would easily have climbed away from those trees because with the flip of one switch, the pilot is back in control and the aircraft won't decide for him that he does not have the authority to do something like that. That is what Boeing's philosophy has always been, and that is what I mean when referring to the differences between the two. I fully agree with one post here that says that under the hood, they are very much the same, that is exactly my point about PMDG not spending extra time on more complex aircraft - the 777 and the NGX are incredibly complex simulations! That is also why I say that the Airbus makes many critical decisions FOR the pilot, whereas in the Boeing, if the pilot doesn't like what he says, he flips the A/P off, and says bye-bye to what it is that he doesn't like. That's it, my last word on it, I'm out of here now! :Peace: Kind regards

The protection system is very advanced, I have experimented with it. To give you one example: on take off after a short turn around I got an EICAS message telling me that the auto throttle system was not engaged. I had a look at the MCP, my switches were both armed, what??? What is this aircraft talking about??? So, I engaged my LNAV & VNAV and off I go into the blue yonder. I kept getting the EICAS message, but hey, the aircraft is operating normally, so what the heck right? At around FL200 I took a close look at the airspeed indicator, as this aircraft was not climbing as fast as I had become accustomed to, and that is when I realised that the airspeed was just a knot or two inside the overspeed! Yes, the auto thrust system was disengaged, but because of the over speed protection, I didn't even realise it, because the aircraft prevent it from over speeding anyhow! This is obviously just one example. You have to be careful to say that the Airbus is more advanced - it simply has a different autopilot logic to the Boeing aircraft. Honest opinion? Couldn't care less about an Airbus, the pilot is largely reduced to a systems monitor whereas the Boeing philosophy has ALWAYS been that the pilot controls the aircraft not the computers. The same level of protection is available to the pilot, the philosophy behind the software that drives it just works differently. Kind regards.

Oh dear, so the 77L has hydraulic systems then? Oh no, here I was thinking that the 77L has FBW systems, much like the ones you find on the Airbus, apart from the A/P logic though :LMAO: I'm shocked at the fact that PMDG refuses to spend at that extra time and effort! What have they been doing then leading up to the NGX and the 777? Mmmm... :LMAO: Please, like some of the posts here say it, first do the research before making "statements" like those. Kind regards.

After installing FSX it literally takes 5 mins to tweak - I only use the Venetubo tweak and off I go, no worries! Kind regards.

Where is that horse, where is that horse!!! :t0152: LOL!!! Kind regards.

Wow this is one of the best sort of "physics" explanations I have heard in a long, long time mate :LMAO: Kind regards.

Just about 50 mins remain to complete the grount turn and I really enjoy watching this refueling happening! Then it is back to VHHH for CPA 807. Kind regards

14h17mins, descensing for KORD now, flawless long haul.:-) I will now check out the ground services for my retun flight to VHHH. I love it more and more! Kind regards.

Goodie,early Friday evening here and I am on my way feom VHHH to KORD, just on 14 hours apparently. Mimicking CX806, 1h55mins into the flight. This a fantastic aircraft, loving every minute of it. I have a rather heavy payload, and I should use only around 240 000lbs of fuel which is incredible, since this is in excess of 7 000nm! Ooohhhhhh, the possobilities that suddenly opened up :-) Kind regards.

Well said Ryan! :Applause: Kind regards.

Protection to PMDG I believe with the licensing issues! But to be fair, PMDG NEVER said that it would work (even with "cheating" the P3D setup), so buying that is like hoping that it would work in FS9, not good idea unless the developer CONFIRMS it. Kind regards.

Dillon, although I understand what you are saying, you must just look carefully at what PMDG have said, they didn't say it WON'T run, they just say that due to the fact that Win 8 is not so widely accepted, they didn't TEST it. As you can see here, mostly no issues! :Peace: Kind regards

At the moment I am not concerned. In a way one can say that the OP's question can be seen as "what if the sky was to fall on our heads today?". He raises some valid points, but I agree with everyone else here that FSX has many years left still. Also remember that I was using Win XP for about 9 years before I had to switch to Win 7 due to DEP issues with my newer hardware. So what am I saying? When I upgrade my hardware from time to time as the need be, and Win 7 does not give me issues with it, I WILL STICK WITH WIN 7. It is stable, I like it and it has proven it's worth. As for Windows 8, I couldn't be bothered less really - not on the day they released it or now when we are many months and debates down the line! I think the industry (read MS) has this tendency to expect that people will simply buy something new because THEY released it. I think that is an expensive mistake they may have realised by now that they had made! This buying something new simply because it is new mentality may have worked in the past, but due to the state the world economy is in forcing people to be more conspicuous about how they spend their hard earned cash, and spending more on necessity rather than what you want, people will have more of a tendency to cling on to what they have if it does not NEED a change. I transitioned to FSX only in early 2011 folks, that's right, before that I flew the faithful old FS9 until I realised that almost ALL the really cool add-ons were being designed for FSX. That forced the move, and I have not looked back since! I had my eyes on the NGX and I realised that PMDG was leaving FS9 behind. With the right tweaks and the right hardware, FSX is running very well even with the NGX and the 777X. I am not interested in massively realistically looking scenery, so I don't buy that either, I use AFCAD's. Visually, what goes on outside the aircraft doesn't really bother me, it is what is going on inside the cockpit that concerns me! This being the case, I have NEVER fell victim to the OOM issues that many others have reported, not ONCE have I been kicked out of FSX for lack of memory issues. That being said, I think we all realise that FSX has it's obvious limitations, but the fact that developers are working around this, should give you some indication as to how well developers have come to terms with the platform. I believe it was PMDG themselves who indicated to us how astronomically difficult it was to transition from FS9 to FSX, liking it to passing a kidney stone! They have mastered it though if one look at what they are bringing to the market! I have never tried XP, not interested in the least. LM P3D? Dude, I only found out a few months ago that there was something like that on the market and then I found out about all the licensing issues etc. I have to agree that I don't think that is going to be the wide platform that FSX is today. It is military ain't it??? Soooooo... Moral of the story? I will ONLY leave FSX behind in the event that a developer like PMDG leaves them behind. How long will this take? Who knows! Could be 2 years, could be twenty years or more, we don't know! For the moment, I am loving the 777X, I am loving the NGX, and I am anticipating the 744 v2 and the -8i expansion, those will keep me busy until the day I die! So I spend less time worrying about what MIGHT happen and more time ENJOYING the lovely things that the likes of PMDG are bestowing upon us! If you don't necessarily like the setup, feel free to get a copy of FSX, which by the way, is selling rather cheaply. You might find it is not as bad and it kind of grows on you! Which brings me to the last item on my checklist - activation. MS cannot simply stop providing that, they will have to keep it going or provide a legal work-around. If they don't they would most likely be breaching the agreement between themselves and us, the end users of the product and they could open themselves to the very least huge criticism, the very worst case scenario, legal action. Trust me, they are not idiots so to speak, or they would not be the software giants they are today! Kind regards

Did emptu delivery fligjt from KPAE-KORD an then put it to work feom there to KDEN and back to KORD. Until our va liveru comes through I will be using the Cathay Pacific livery. Cannpt believe it is back to word to work now, looking forward to weekend, lots of nice flying to do :-) Kind regards.

All this automation is where the the complexity is. It is not so much what ypu can see what is so amazing but it is what you cannot see that makes this simulation what it is, a fully simulated 777, 90 bucks is exaxtly what I bargained for and yes, worth every penny! Kind regards.

Well said Kyle! I just sent them a ticket, which I suppose wasn't even mecesary and I received my link and e mail few hours later. Those servers took a pounding! Kind regards

Lovely video, I really like the part with the fighter escort near the end! The MD-11 will always be one of my favourite aircraft. Funny thing is I didn't even know of it's existence before PMDG designed one for us! Kind regards

This one had me laughing for a good long time :LMAO: . Ahhhhh... The craziness around release times eh? Kind regards.

Hahahahahahaha, goodness me Tom, that is way too long in between smack downs! I suspect that the trolls are going soft here :LMAO: :LMAO: Kind regards.

I have a feeling the big announcement os hours away now, certainly a lot of activity going on! Kind regards.