Magellan

According to Jason from PMDG, the ground manoeuvring camera system lighting is simulated: You can read more about those lights in this thread.

In the end, it doesn't really matter how many passengers are in the passenger cabin. I know at least one airline doesn't divide it into zones for weight and balance. What needs to be separated for weight and balance is mainly the total passenger/crew weight, forward cargo, aft cargo, and bulk hold weight. As cargo and luggage is easier to take exact weights of, each container is factored into the balance and arranged accordingly. As determined by this (http://forum.avsim.net/topic/415238-question-for-the-beta´s-how-much-passengers-can-the-pmdg-777lr-carry/) thread from the time of the 777's release, weight is just weight and the balance of that weight is not as significant compared to that of smaller aircraft. It was suggested that some airlines don't take weight of passengers vs cargo in dispatching as all that really mattered was the ZFW/GW. Let me know if I made any errors in my understanding and I will be happy to edit my post.

Though I can not attest to the actual engineering of the MCP unit, we might be reminded that there are various brightness settings for the displays and that cameras have different shutter speeds, apertures, etc. for different photographs. This can make photographs look more vivid or dull than what the eye sees. Good examples are shots taken with long shutter speeds at night, where light seems to glow from the source. This could be what we see in the photographs we see online.

Usually depends on airline policy / airport policy for environmental efficiency and aircraft security. It's safe to say that if the aircraft is attended (there are people on it or working on it) the plane will be warm and if it will be left unattended, be cold and dark.

Hello Mr. Callan, http://support.precisionmanuals.com/Main/Default.aspx is the link to PMDG support. They're usually quite quick to respond from my experience.

Offsets can be useful to visualize on the ND where your ATC clearance for WX avoidance ends.

Though weight is indeed weight, what about balancing the weight? I think that is the primary concern that they have. I'm not exactly sure as to how sensitive the 777 is in terms of weight and balance but the change of weight distribution in the cargo bins (forward, aft, bulk) and passenger cabins (A, B, C, etc.) could be minute.

Thank you. Excellent photographs and videos by the way; definitely shows how much data the aircraft collects and how well it cuts it down to be presented on the primary screens for ease of access and "readability".

I'm not 737fandm20 (need your name as per PMDG rules, sir) but I'll still go ahead and guess VHHH (Hong Kong International Airport / Chek Lap Kok Airport). Its roof is a give-a-way.

To add, cargo is also very important on long-haul sectors for urgent deliveries. I don't know what Johannesburg or Atlanta has but here in Canada we've got a lot of fresh produce and fish heading over to Asia. I stand corrected. Sorry about that. My average is no longer valid. Refer to Ryan's average of 270; I didn't account for the low cost or other high-density operators with only 1-2 frames of the aircraft.

As reference, here are the real-world configurations. Data may be incorrect or outdated and only serve as a guideline to get the 'bigger picture.' Air Austral 14-32-316 Total: 362 Air Canada 44-228 Total: 270 Air India 8-35-195 Total: 238 Delta 45-36-188 Total: 269 Emirates 8-42-216 Total: 266 Ethiopian Airlines 8-287 Total: 321 Pakistan International Airlines 5-275 Total: 310 Qatar 42-217 Total: 259 Average = 298 *Emphasis added. Delta's BusinessElite is industry-standard Business Class, not First Class; just like how Air Canada's ExecutiveFirst or United's BusinessFirst is still Business Class even though it has the word "First" in it. Just marketing hype.

Technically you can link to the photograph if you conform to the "Photo Usage Requirements" set forth by the website that hosts a wealth of aviation photography. AVSIM does not allow links to that website, as I've just tried to link to its photo usage page, but you can access it by clicking "Photo Usage Requirements" under the "Photos" drop down. As links are not permitted, basically all photographs from that website are unable to be shared/reposted here.

Looks like the forums are redirecting back to the home page now. I guess they are working on it quickly considering the minor errors in English.

On a Flight Sim related note; KTVU just used a clip of the PMDG 737NGX landing on 28L @ KSFO as an example of a "normal landing." KTVU: http://www.ktvu.com/videos/news/ktvu-live-news/vtSfR/?updated

Thanks for the consolidation of photographs! Here are a few preview pictures that were missed from the opening posts. They were from the fundraiser for Tony Radmilovich.

*Edit* Skywolf beat me to the last one. Last one! ~

Next screenshot! Yipee!

They did a superb job with adding the Flight Simulator X windowed mode overlay in addition to the parking brake indicator to a real life photograph. B)

Thank you Robert and the donators!!

EVA Airways (BR) and Asiana Airlines (OZ) both also operate the Combi variant of the -400. They are however in the process of slowly getting them converted to the -400BCF/BDSFs. Edward Hou