FlyBoyMike

I have the FF 777 as well as the PMDG 777, yes I do agree that systems accuracy between them varies a bit but the FF comes very close. Keep in mind this was their first release of a complex systems airliner and they did simplify in a few areas, for example you only really really have control over the captain's side and the displays will all show the same thing on either side, they only modeled a single FMC so it's similar to LDS 767 or Aerosoft AXE in that sense. PMDG seemed to go to great lengths to model everything exactly as in the real thing down to the creaking noises while rolling down a taxiway, another example would be the time it takes to start the APU, the self-test sequence when powering the aircraft, time taken to pressurise hydraulics etc. I did find however that after having exposure to the FF 777 there wasn't really much else new to learn with the PMDG 777. With the 757 they now have everything separate, so separate left/right displays and two independent FMC's. I was also able to go through the Normal Procedures in the manual which is taken from a real FCOM and all systems worked as described in the book.

That's right! You're in Toowoomba? Might actually be better idea to set FL100 in my case since that is our transition altitude, FL050 would be better for Europe where I also tend to fly. I found the other night while on approach with the 757 that I didn't get accurate METAR data from the ATIS until I got below the FL050 transition so altimeters aren't always set correctly. The grey-out happened once on approach to EPWA in Poland with NOAA plugin running, couldn't see the ground till I broke through about FL080. I should really get a turboprop sometime. The Saab 340 looks really nice.

You have a GTX 670, you'll be fine! I have a 560ti also with 2GB and I can still have HDR turned on with most settings at 'high' or 'very high'. Just like Anxu00 said, make sure not to go crazy with the texture res, 'very high' setting works best for me and 'extreme' might be pushing it a bit. XPX has many different settings and there's no way you can simply move all the sliders to the right and expect best results in performance, there is a little tweaking involved of those settings to find the right 'sweet spot' for your hardware, but once you do you just leave it alone and enjoy. Unlike in FSX there's no heavy tweaking of config files or any of that stuff, it's all very smooth and fluid once it's setup properly.

Hey pryoski, would this be the same NOAA weather injector? I've been using this with SkyMAXX Pro for a while now as well but have the METAR kick in at FL050. Are there any benefits of having it as low as FL010? Issue that I observe is the sudden few second pause and interruption in the sim during changeover and when flying jets 1000ft is normally around the climb thrust/acceleration level so can't have any disturbances to my aircraft during that critical time. Also, have you ever had a strange problem where the entire sky turns grey and sort of 'disappears'? As in no clouds or sky colour, just heavy blanket of grey. I read in another post that this might be related to the weather plugin.

This is interesting as I also sometimes get conditions where the sky is completely grey; no clouds, no blue, nothing. It seems as if the entire sky has disappeared and it can happen when I load up an aircraft on the ground at an airport. At first I thought this was related to SkyMAXX Pro but remember that I had this problem prior to getting that. Might have to disable the plugin and revert back to default XP weather updates. Shame though as the NOAA plugin still does a better job with upper air winds and temps (-61C OAT at FL360 every time doesn't seem too realistic).

I personally wouldn't fly X-Plane without SkyMAXX Pro anymore. It really has made the experience that much more immersive for me. What are the issues people are noticing with the NOAA plugin at 10.25? I still use it and apart from the few second pauses I have to put up with, seems to work. The transitions between FL and METAR are fairly rough though.

Never tried Opus myself but remember a lot of people jumping on it when it came out claiming that it fixed numerous issues that have been plaguing FSX, then it sort of began to drop off the radar after a while. I stuck with AS2012 at the time as apparently wind prediction was still more accurate which mattered to me most. Hmmmm....I might have to think about ASN as I can't really budget for it this year. Also need to weigh up how much more I'm willing to still invest into FSX since I'm using it less now, seems to be the sim that just never says die. I really hope they stay true to that claim. Having an engine such as that for X-Plane would be revolutionary.

Ses, here's a few shots of me just finishing up a turnaround flight from YMML to YSSY. De-boarding is complete, shutdown & secure procedure complete, left the aircraft powered on GPU for the ground crew....and now I'm off to get finally some sleep B) This truly is a magnificent bird. Never thought I'd get into the 757 this much, I haven't been this excited about a new aircraft since I first got the NGX.

I find that it's weather depiction is really good especially IMC conditions, much better than AS2012 which is why I decided to switch. I also really like the way it depicts cloud layers and fronts in particular. I'm all for that as well but I'm not really the sort of person who has to have the exact same looking weather that's outside my window and I don't really mind if clouds aren't placed in the exact same location as in real life. As long as visibility and winds (particularly upper air winds) are accurate and done appropriately for the conditions that's what matters to me most, I think FSGRW does a very good job of this. I do notice though that HiFi may have taken a few ideas from other engines such as FSGRW by focusing more on the weather engine itself and keeping the interface simple rather than having all extras such as textures, flight planning etc which I never really used in AS2012 and are normally done by other programs anyway.

When I got it on Friday first thing I did was load it up cold & dark and open the FCOM Normal Procedures section to follow along with all the normal flows etc. Starting up electrical systems including battery, standby battery, bus ties etc all seemed to operate according to the descriptions and same with hydraulics when powering up before start-up. All as described, no strange quirks/bugs so very impressed there. The air systems are good, there's a nice rumbling sound once you get the packs going via bleed air from the APU. There have been reports of possible minor bugs during descent where it doesn't reduce cabin altitude correctly, I've noticed this myself but hasn't prevented me from completing flights, something they'll get sorted out with a patch I'm sure.There's a nifty menu system they came up with to connect all ground equipment such as GPU, start unit, fuel truck, push truck, passenger bus, chocks, loading etc, all works very well. There's claims of possible VNAV issues but I'm not going to make those claims myself just yet as I may just need to read up a bit and get more familiar with it (this is not a 777 or the NGX hehe). I noticed he said this during one of his recent VLOG's as well. Wouldn't say it's beyond PMDG level but definitely close or at least on par, I watched his most recent live stream yesterday where he did a full flight to EHAM, seemed like he was really having a lot of fun with it! :lol: I feel it's complex enough for me to have some real fun with it too. I think in terms of airliners the 727 and 757 became the real draw cards for me to come back and re-investigate X-Plane. There aren't any simulations of these 2 aircraft that are done as well in FSX as they are in X-Plane. I've never tried the CS 727 but did pick up their 737 for $10 about a year ago and was less than impressed, just didn't feel right and most systems seemed kinda broken, looks nice though. The FlightFactor and FlyJSim planes are nothing like that though, completely different league.

Correct. Was meant to say they modeled it on the FMC they had access to in a real 757 from a time in early 1980's before FMC's became more sophisticated. So it's in no way simplified, just what they had at the time. The FCOM also covers both versions including the one in later 767's like Level-D so you can compare between the two.

Hi jcomm, I've been using the FSGRW engine for a while now and that was ultimately an upgrade from AS2012 for me. At the moment I find that FSGRW seems to already have a lot of features that ASN has so based on your experience (not sure if you've used FSGRW) what would be the compelling reason for me to upgrade to ASN? I've also been spending more time with X-Plane lately since getting SkyMAXX and the FF 757, so not really up for buying (yet ANOTHER) weather engine for FSX considering I've only had FSGRW for a few months. My pockets aren't that deep unfortunately :(

I'd say it's right on par with the Level-D 767. If you have experience flying that then you won't find the learning curve to be too much. They include an annoying flight attendant who buzzes you from the cabin and complains about hot and cold temps just like in the LDS 767. Apparently they've modeled it with the more basic FMC and not the Pegasus one that the 767 has so looks slightly different and doesn't have a section in the PERF page to calculate stab trim based on CG for example. You sorta have to use the manuals to work it out yourself, same with the takeoff speeds, you can turn on auto calculated ref speeds but only for flaps 15 takeoff. For anything else eg. flaps 5 takeoff, you'll need to look them up in the FCOM. Flight model also feels super super smooth, a real joy to hand fly! The EADI is also the more basic variant from early 757's, no speed tape just analog etc, but should still be able to work things out if you're familiar with Boeing. I've found myself delving into the FCOM a bit lately particularly to try and get my head around some of the VNAV quirks especially descent profiles as ops are slightly different from the later Boeings.

I'm finding it VERY difficult to use FSX and my PMDG airliners at the moment with all the new and shiny, awesome things that have come out for X-Plane. Funnily enough this was not the case a while back as every time I used XPX for a while I'd always eventually have the urge to go back to FSX, guess it's really starting to show it's age now... GA flying I've always found far more interesting in XP than FSX, but it's only recently that the tables have started to turn in terms of heavies. As for the the visibility blurries at high altitude, you could always just fly at night B)

I also exclusively use FSX only for PMDG and this is one of the reasons I never switched to P3D. The thing is I've finally decided to break my strange 'love affair' with all things PMDG and come to accept that there are other very talented devs out there who are also constantly pushing boundaries and coming out with really amazing products. FlightFactor have released such an amazing 757 based on what they learned while developing the 777 as that was their first release of a complex airliner, they're next release can only get better. The IXEG 737 will also be ground-breaking as we all know, you could say that companies like PMDG are the catalyst and possibly an inspiration to other devs, Janov who is the RW pilot involved with the development and testing of IXEG 737 even said so himself in another post that PMDG are their inspiration for what they do. I also notice that the development cycles for complex airliners in X-Plane are shorter than for ones released in FSX so products are released more frequently. Wonder if this has anything to do with X-Plane being an easier platform to work with code-wise?

I haven't actually used the PMDG 777 for a while now and am finding myself less inclined to use FSX in general these days. It's not that I no longer like PMDG products, it's just that I'm finding the FSX platform in general feels quite dated (even with nice add-ons) and the allure of P3D v2.0 hasn't really had an effect on me. Over the past month or so X-Plane seems to really have had a bit of a major breakthrough in terms of quality add-ons (payware and freeware) and it's great to see it's finally starting to happen! In terms of systems depth, the 757 really is on par with anything that PMDG has released. With the way things are heading in the X-Plane world I think PMDG might have a bit of competition on their hands.

So I ended up taking the plunge and got this. I'm fairly confident now this bird will keep me very occupied in X-Plane for quite some time! Anyone still on the fence about this one should definitely consider getting it, actually really glad I chose this instead of the 747-8i.

This is one thing I'm a little concerned about as well since I notice the system requirements are higher than for the 777. I currently use a GTX 560ti and 8GB system RAM so hopefully that's OK. That's a really good point. Seems like they only really focused on the external model as that's what stands out the most. Also just checked their support forum and saw the following post from one of the devs. 1. There is no load editor at this time, just the standard X-Plane menus 2. For pushback you need an external plug-in. There are several on the ORG for download. I have "cheated" in the past by using reverse thrust, which is illegal and dangerous but this is a sim! Of course that means you have to start the engines at the gate. For $60 I don't think that's acceptable at all considering all the custom menus for loading, push-back and ground ops you get with the 757. Definitely staying away from this one!

I tried the X-FMC with the A380 and also found it didn't quite work out for me in the end due to the Boeing vs Airbus logic. I tried setting this up once and couldn't get it to work properly for some reason.

Thanks for all the feedback. I'll definitely be looking into the 757 then, never tried one before but panel layout looks very similar to a 767 and I used to fly the Level-D one in FSX. Yes been keeping close watch on this one as well. Those cockpit prep videos are amazing! Love the NGX as well but feel I've really kind of flown it to death now, flying something like a 737CL series would be good for something a bit different, a lot of airlines in Eastern Europe still seem to fly them today. I think it's the unique shape that I've always liked about them. SSG seem to have done a really good job on the external model, but aside from that there isn't much else that stands out about it when you compare to all the other tubes on offer at the moment.

I'm a bit unsure whether to get this 747, been reading up on their support forum and notice there are quite a few bugs particularly to do with FMC programming but the dev team seems to be working quickly to resolve these. The screenshots I've seen don't look too bad, the external model looks quite good, however the VC could probably look a bit better. Also haven't really seen any reviews or feedback about this aircraft other than the one on ASN (which doesn't really convince me). Would really like to get a decently modeled 747 for X-Plane as their one of my favourite tubes around so am wondering if anyone has actually purchased it yet? On the other hand, I've also been eyeing the FF 757. I have their 777 and feel the 757 is probably a bit of a step up from that in terms of visual quality and systems detail. I also have a feeling that from what I've seen for the $60 price even the FF 777 might be better than this 747-8i.

I've got the Qantas A380 with RR engines which I purchased earlier this year but haven't flown it in a long time. I should probably give it another go as I found flying it manually extremely enjoyable and the limited systems that are modeled work really well. Flying it is so enjoyable that I never actually turn on the AP till I reach CRZ ALT. The lack of more sophisticated systems and FMCG functionality is a bit of a bummer and this always made the actual route planning portion a bit of a hassle if you actually wanted to do more with the plane than just fly circuits. I think that if you have a program such as PFPX you might be able to export your route to X-Plane format and load it into the FMCG that way. I'll have to give this a try myself as I've done it with FJSim 727 by importing a route into the CIVA INS and this worked quite well.

This is the whole problem IMO. MS have changed something fundamentally with Win 8, but LM now own the FSX/ESP code and have full ability to modify it, expand on it etc. MS will not do anything about it because they no longer support it so LM should make this one of their top priorities to get it fixed once and for all. Win 8 has now been out for over a year, LM would definitely be aware of this issue and should have included this in their dev process for P3D 2.0. Hopefully this will become part of their dev road-map which includes 64-bit. As for XP10 I don't think I've ever once had controllers drop out whenever I've used it in Win 8 (maybe only once, but it was barely noticeable and didn't have to restart the sim). I actually like Win 8.1 and think it has a lot of benefits over Win 7 but am sticking to Win 7 for now due to these issues. In future I think I'll be moving more and more towards X-Plane as I don't want to be stuck on an older OS, unless of course LM are able to get it fixed.

Can anyone confirm if there are still joystick dropouts in P3D v2.0?

I also have 2GB of VRAM and found that turning down texture res from 'extreme' to 'very high' helped reduce the VRAM usage to around 600-700mb. The difference in visual quality is barely noticeable and allows for the card to use VRAM for other stuff. Also, are you running default XP clouds/sky? If so, then I'd turn down the number of cloud puffs from 100% to around 60%. This is what I used prior to getting SkyMAXX Pro and found this helped with FPS a lot. Anti-aliasing looks like it could be a bit high, I normally run no higher than 4x if HDR is turned off and still get really good results. I use a GTX 560ti though so you might get away with sticking to 8x.