ksta

A 737-300 for X-Plane. Very nice sound and simulation quality.

It's no problem. I am not asking for you to find a picture of the DC-3, I am asking you if you were the person that took the DC-3 picture that you posted at the beginning of the thread. All that I am looking for is a simple "yes" or "no" response to my question. Thanks.

737guy, will you please answer my question?

That's awesome. Did you end up taking the DC-3 picture?

I understand where you're coming from. It's about personal preference. However, the PMDG team have mentioned that they greatly appreciate any feedback, so I figured that I would try to provide as much feedback as I can because I really appreciate the amount of quality that they incorporate into their products. I understand where you're coming from, here, as well. It's about perception, though. You perceive my posts to be like a game, but no one is playing a game because some people perceive errors differently than others. I don't deliberately search for errors; it's the combination of my appreciation for how airplanes look and my attention to detail that allows me to perceive errors better, I suppose. If I happen to find one, then I will try to bring it to the attention of PMDG. It's as simple as that. I understand, but it is still a matter of personal preference. This doesn't need to be a contentious issue, though; it's the forum users that choose to make it contentious. Again, it's about personal preference. My posts shouldn't have an effect on your enjoyment of the product. I would be careful to not equate "picking at a product" with "providing feedback." I understand that there will be errors, but why not try to correct them if you can? As I've mentioned before, PMDG values the feedback that they receive, so I am willing to provide some. There's no game behind it; it's simple suggestions from people who appreciate the work that PMDG does.

He actually may be correct that the window sizes differ. I agree that the viewing angle would influence the relative sizes of the windows, but, when you compare how the window parts align with each other (since they are located on the same surface), you can see, in the following attachments, that the viewing angle would probably have little influence. Further review of different pictures and angles would confirm my statement. Another thing that you can notice, using the same attachments, is that the metal panels on the surface of the NGX fuselage don't line up with the metal panels on the real NG 737 (when comparing the position of the lines with the cockpit windows), but I think that this is more of a texture issue rather than an exterior-model issue. The purpose of this thread is to try to help improve a product. To read posts where people equate "trying to help" with "flaming" suggests the presence of some kind of "anti-help" or "anti-improvement" mentality. When you combine this mentality with underlying anger and frustration (which arise out of personal issues that have little to do with this forum, believe it or not), the result is posts with a rather strong disapproval of the intentions behind threads like this one. Clearly, there are people that are content with the product as it is. For others, however, there may be areas where they'd like to see improvement. The one thing that both of these groups of individuals have in common is that they appreciate the work that PMDG does. The time and effort that is being spent on arguing would be better spent on trying to maintain a harmonious relationship within the forum.

I understand where you're coming from, but "important" and "miniscule" are relative terms. I would rather try to help the team to improve their products as much as possible. The people that are "always nitpicking" are the people want to try to make improvements. Sometimes they're wrong, sometimes they're right. At least they tried to help. There is no need to get frustrated over this. Your first two pictures show the 1L door. The handles on the 1L doors are higher than on the 1R doors. Your third picture shows the handle in the same position as the handle in my second picture, so the handle on the NGX is still at a lower position.

The handle and the window are, more or less, located on the same geometric plane, so the viewing angle, in this case, will not affect the relative distance bewteen the handle and the window. If the handle were sitcking out one foot away from the door (i.e., the geometric planes of the handle and the window are one foot apart), then, depending on the viewing angle, it may look like the handle is located above the fuselage or below the fuselage or covering the cockpit windows, etc. This is why there are people like me that want to help and improve. Some people strive for improvement; this is not a groundbreaking concept. If this is true, then this is rather disappointing. It appears as though that PMDG put in a lot of work to make this product as good as it is. Why not try to help them to make it a little better?

Hi. I've noticed that the 1R-door handle on the NGX appears to be located on a lower position when compared to the 1R-door-handle position on an actual NG 737. In the following attatchments, I've used a green line to compare the door-handle positions with the passenger windows. I would like to know if this is an actual error because the displacement seems pretty obvious. Like before, this is not an argument thread, a flame thread, a "nitpicking" thread, or a "rivet-counting" thread; this is a thread meant for the sole purpose of pointing out a potential external-model error and discussing it in the hopes of determining whether or not it is an actual error that can be fixed for the next service pack. Thank you.

If these factors are correct, then it would be nice to know how each factor leads to the distortion. I don't understand why things need to be classified as being "too technical." There are many inquisitive minds out there. Being a "basic" aeronautical forum does not mean that its users aspire to having "basic" aeronautical knowledge.

As I've mentioned earlier, different people like different things. The exterior of the airplane is modeled because there are people that like to see and enjoy an accurate, digital replica of the exterior. I'd really like to, but my desktop broke in December. Reference my first paragraph. :(

This seems to make a fairly good amount of sense. Thanks. :(

True, but I don't see why they wouldn't take the time to fix it since they're already making updates unless, of course, the "error" was intentional, so they had a good reason for making it look the way it does.

I refuse to accept them because, even though you think they are full of "sarcasm and heavy-handed writing," it looks like an attempt to take frustration out on me (true feelings and intentions are difficult to convey via the forums).Why is it so diffucult to have a simple discussion that doesn't involve people talking about other people? Talk about the topic, not about how much of a "nitpicker" I am. I want to learn, and I cannot do that when I keep having to defend myself against your type of posts. I believe that I am here to help. This thread would have been a great opportunity for people with advanced knowledge to shed insight into why certian visual inconsistencies exist. What this would have done is it would have helped other people better understand the issues so that they wouldn't have to keep posting about them since they already know. You're absolutely right; however, like I mentioned earlier, it would have been nice to also have a good discussion so that other people can learn something from it. Well, if a tutorial already existed, and I came along and started this thread before I saw it, all that someone like you would have to do is simply direct me to the tutorial. Then, a moderator would simply be able to remove the thread since it is cleary irrelevant. I don't know exactly how much you're looking for out of me, but I know nothing about these visual issues, so I started the thread mostly because I figured that there could be a good discussion about it and that I (and other people) would be able to learn something.

This post also adds nothing to the discussion.Also, I am unable to locate the post that you are referencing. The time and effort that you spent to write your response would have been better spent to post a link to Ryan's post.