Lawyer+Pilot

Yes, people are lazy slobs. Plain and simple. The airlines could fix the situation by prohibiting roller-type bags from being carried on (lazy people love bags with wheels). That, in addition to the size requirement, would do the trick.

 

I also don't care for the temporarily handicapped people. You know the ones I'm talking about. They stroll into the airport on their own two feet then hobble up to the counter to request wheelchair assistance so they can get wheeled on and off the plane ahead of everyone else. I'm willing to bet that the percentage of "handicapped" people is higher at the airport than anywhere else on Earth.

 

Edit: And, no, fat and lazy is NOT a disability.

Must be getting close now.

 

And, what's with the douche-bag "Will Barker" and all of his idiotic troll comments? Sounds like another prepubescent loser wannabe pilot got on the computer without his mommy's permission again.

Very cool, I'll have to check GEX out if there is a performance improvement over default textures. I wonder if there is a performance increase as well with FTXG?

Yes indeed. Improved performance AND better textures (than default, of course, and GEX). FTX Global is the new king.

We pilots are a very serious bunch, aren't we?

 

Pick up a copy of Jeppesen's Instrument/Commercial Manual.

 

http://www.mypilotstore.com/mypilotstore/sep/1270

 

Or get your hands on a copy of the FAA's Instrument Flying Handbook.

 

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/

 

Both are great intros.

I don't think PMDG would do that to us. I feel they would do like Majestic does with the Dash 8 and sell different version ie one for home use and one for commercial. PMDG has shown they are loyal to this community and I don't think that will ever change! They might move forward to bigger and better things but PMDG doesn't seem like a company who will forget its roots.

That's the problem with going public. The current owners and management team and their loyalties become irrelevant. The public shareholders (the ones who bought the company) go on to determine the direction.

It's all good Rich.  It makes a great conversation piece and is well deserved.  Now maybe PMDG will be listed on the New York Stock Exchange one day :smile:

Interesting thought. But I highly doubt PMDG (or any flight sim addon developer) will have a snowball's chance of going public so long as the development of the platform itself is in question.

 

FSX is as good as written off, unless someone can convince ($) Microsoft to part with the rights to the code.

 

 

P3D would be an option--although, with Lockheed Martin in the picture, we can count on it moving toward a dedicated commercial market/defense application. That might be a lucrative option for PMDG, but expect the prices of their aircraft simulations to skyrocket to match that market. Think Elite.

In Nick's (AoA) informative video on YouTube, after takeoff, the pitch model changes from TOGA to ALT at 1,300 ft, with the MCP altitude set at 3,000 ft.  the ALT annunciation has a green box around it, as it should (1:04:05 in the video).  Then, when the aircraft actually captures the 3,000 ft altitude, the ALT annunciation gets another green box around it, even though there is no change in the displayed mode (1:05:04 in video).

 

My understanding is that the green box only appears when there is a change in the mode.  Since the box appeared without a change in the mode, I was wondering if this was perhaps a minor bug.

 

Rushad E.

Accidental double post.  Sorry.

 

Rushad E.

Uh oh. Here we go with the bug contest.

 

I don't recall, but I believe Alt cap to alt hold may be the "change" that triggers the box. Smartcockpit is a great resource if you're curious:

 

http://www.smartcockpit.com/aircraft-ressources/B777-Automatic_Flight.html

yes but there is no F specific one...realistic weights and all that..

 

luke: you can upload them to the aerosoft forums download section i'd assume...the files are located under C:\Users\Public\Documents\PFPX Data\AircraftTemplates and \Aircraft i think it would be enough if you share the template if its a custom one

Ahhh. Bummer.

I thought I saw

Hello,

 

today I bought PFPX but I can't find any 777F Profile. Does anybody now if there will be an 777F Profile?

 

regards Atr1x

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I saw a template for the PMDG 777. Look under templates.

What's a 777?

I think he means 737. I heard something about an NGX. Stay tuned for the next thread about a thread for new developments.

 

 

Please lock this thread to prevent the masses from griping.

To be honest, this thread wouldn't have bothered me at all if it hadn't been for the whole, "Please lock this thread to prevent the masses from griping" bit. That was a little presumptuous.

I think everyone has read that thread already.

I thought the same thing--and said so soon after this thread popped up. My post seems to have disappeared. Hmmmm

One thing that is really bugging me about PFPX is the Aircraft database. I just spend some time going through my Aircraft.cfg's for my addons to add to PFPX (something by the way that really should be an automatic scan). Here is what I found.

 

- PMDG weight are incorrect....are we supposed to change the DOW in PFPX? If the profile was setup by PFPX specifically for PMDG why are the weights wrong?

- PMDG addon profiles for the -700 and -600 are just not there (although general 737-700 exist, but not with winglets).

- Level D Sim 767 - Does not exist. On the general 767 you only see GE engines. What about my RR British Airways aircraft ?

- Majestic Dash 800 - weights are wrong again.

- Looking at some of the other addon profiles, the PMDG MD-11F and 747-400F missing and in the general tab engine types are limited to GE

- Now in my aircraft list I have built up about 30 aircraft registrations but you can only sort by type & registration, there is no column for livery which would be really helpful in a flight sim environment to quickly get to your proper aircraft.

 

 

Anyway, sorry to moan but this part of an otherwise fantastic program was poorly done in my opinion.

I've been using the Dash 8 template for the Majestic Q400. Of course you have to adjust the DOW, as that varies by individual aircraft based on installed options. Once you enter the DOW showing in the Majestic config panel, you're good to go.

 

I can't speak for the NGX profiles yet, but the same rule applies: DOW varies by individual aircraft. Don't expect that to be correct in the profile. You should make a profile for every aircraft you fly. That's why one of the fields is for the registration number (which, of course, is unique to the aircraft).

I see a $35.00 program here NOT $53.00! Seems like this will add still more time to planning and flight preparation/setup preflight. It already takes long enough to get a flight underway in FSX, leaving less and less time for actual flying.

If that ends up being even remotely true, you're doing something wrong.

 

Most users do not have these problems.

It sounds to me like you're having issues outside of PFPX. And, as you noted, most users aren't having the problems you describe (heck, I didn't even realize people are still using XP). In fact, I haven't heard of anyone else having the problems you describe.

 

Not trying to jump down your throat, but I don't think it's fair to give people the impression that the program is unstable based on what you've described.

I can't say that I would agree 100%. I'm struggling to find things that would be beyond anything that has been done before.

What PFPX does (for me) it's that it combines most of the features that I've had to use multiple tool for in the past (huge time saver). When PFPX becomes more stable and more aircraft profiles are added, then I would suggest GA flyers to have a look.

Until then, it's best for jet pilots (again in my view).

When it becomes more stable? Since when was it unstable? I haven't had any problems whatsoever.

 

Of course, you can always attain PFPX's level of detail and completeness using a dozen other tools, programs and online resources in combination. PFPX surpasses everything currently available because it puts all of this in one place and thus cuts the flight planning time (particularly for transoceanic routes) dramatically.

I guess the title says it all.

Sounds like a complete waste of money. Like installing a sprinkler system in the Amazon rainforest. You could do it, if you love spending money, but why?

I've been considering this, and usually I don't spend a whole lot of time editing flight plans, I usually just auto generate them when I'm flying ga aircraft. A good bit of the time in certain areas I just don't like the auto generated plans and don't know enough about rw planning to aid in fixing the route, is this something I should consider as a different source of flight plans?

I do think it's a phenomenal program. I've used FSBuild, FSC and the various free route generators. PFPX goes far beyond anything currently available. The best thing about it, really, is the seamless user interface. You can generate accurate, complete dispatch paperwork in a matter of minutes. Granted, it's more geared toward people flying commercial ops, but I don't see myself ever putting it down.

And PFPX yesterday. This is a bad couple of months for our wallets.

... or better to say, maybe, some developers want to gain money easily.

 

I will not name any product, but if you look good enough you will see them.

In the last few months I started to pay attention a lot to prices of products released on simmarket. I literally bursted from laughing when I saw prices of some products. Today I saw a mission selling for nearly 11 euros! *******, it is only one mission. Pricing that 11 euros is hilarious. Some soundpacks (actually their sets are the best on the market) sells slightly over 13 euros. It is too bloody much for a soundpack, even when it is top notch quality. Also few months back I saw a grass texture sells for 10 or 11 euros! It is a replacement for one - bloody - texture! Amazing. I'm quite sure there are a lot of products with extreme pricing out there, and I want to ask developers of these products - what in the world you were thinking? Reaching the audience with high prices for a single mission or texture?

I know that bunch of simmers will pull the trigger for 13 euro soundpack for example, it is a pricey hobby they will say. But don't you think that FSX market is completely out of control regarding prices? I still honestly think that developers are taking the pricing way to seriously. They think "yeah it is a hobby, and our products are used in training simulators"... blah blah. Don't give me that excuse, parts for cars used in driving schools don't costs twice as much, don't they?!

 

To put this writting to an end for now, I want to say also that PMDG pricing is spot on, when you consider the detail, quality, generally the whole package is amazing, quite ready for training even. And when one texture or mission costs 20-25% of the PMDG plane price, you must seriously think what is wrong with the market these days.

 

Cheers and spend your money wisely.

I don't see the problem. Supply and demand still applies. If prices are too high for the market, demand will decline. That will force developers to reduce prices or face declining sales. If prices remain high, that's an indication that (despite your or my opinion regarding the suitability of prices) people are willing to pay it--and that what we think is "high" is right for the market.

What traffic program are you using? I use UT2 and simply reset the AI after the weather is done loading. That takes care of it for me.

I think I finally figured out what I missed.

 

I agree the apology was in order. I also understand the desire to defend the OP. That was my initial reaction as well. Just imagine his shock--being from South Africa, where bribery is very much a way of life. To get this kind of a reception at the bear mention of it must be a real culture shock.

 

Moving along...

My question is: What do you do for the folks who will not be getting PFPX but WILL have the 777?

Tell them, "now's the time."

 

Yes, I don't want to say that PMDG should force PFPX on those who don't own it, but maybe a separate section by PMDG, or a PFPX/777 tutorial from an outside source would be very beneficial to the flightsim community. It's still early, but the program has all the makings of becoming the "real as it gets" flight planner that flight simmers so desperately needed for years. I can't imagine any die hard tube liner lover not owning or wanting to own PFPX.

+1

 

And, even if people aren't using PFPX, I don't see the discussion of the OFP being an issue for them. Hey, Angle of Attack incorporated PFPX into their very first NGX Flightwork flight some months ago, LOOOONG before anyone had access to it. It was a mistake, in my opinion (clearly AoA had no idea how unreliable FlightSimSoft were with their development schedule). Nonetheless, the lessons were very informative and useful. I'll probably go back and use those lessons to familiarize myself with PFPX, but I don't see the harm in having seen the tutorial without PFPX in hand.

Currently I have demo version of EFB (Aviasoft) and am starting to wonder about PFPX and their differences.

Aivlasoft EFB's "planning" function is incredibly basic compared to PFPX. The only thing you get with Aivlasoft that you might miss if you pass on buying the license is the moving map. That can be quite useful. To be honest, though, I've always looked at the moving map as a bit of a crutch. We're better pilots for flying without it.

Well, they are kinda right. What do you think, does my flight school own flight planning software, and do all dispatch for me? No, I just open skyvector, build route on my own, from waypoint to waypoint, confirm that with paper chart; build my own nav log, calculate performance, weight and balance, file a flight plan and send it via email, and then I get route confirm as reply. Does this makes me a bad pilot? Don't get me wrong, PFPX is great software, I'm probably gonna buy it, but there is nothing wrong, nor unrealistic with manual flight planning (like CTRL + E )

Well, that's the distinction. Of course there are no dispatch papers when you're flying out of your local FBO. PFPX is meant to replicate the papers used by commercial carriers who are doing something a little more complicated than taking your 172 out for a spin.

What does that mean?

It was tongue in cheek, really.

 

People keep questioning the need for PFPX, saying that we can easily pull a route string off of Flightaware to "plan" a flight. That's a bit like saying that you can start the engines by pressing Ctrl-E, so why bother with memorizing a bunch of flows?

 

To each their own, but this program is the creme de la creme for real-as-it-gets FSX flight planning.