doylie22

I may have found the issue, it may have been the airline texture I was using was covering up the lights. The default paint appears to be working on problem.

That’s just the default scenario. The lights physically illuminating the ground is not the issue, it’s the actual light source that seems to be missing. Notice how you cannot physically see the Nav or landing lights?

Hey Guys, Just installed the NGX after a new computer build and I'm having some issues with the exterior lights. Kind of strange, everything is illuminating the ground as it is suppose to however I can't actually see the light effect itself. It's possible I am missing something in the P3D settings but everything lighting wise is the same as my old build. Can anyone help? Thanks, Sean Doyle

Hi guys, Well I'm doing my first paint and I've tried to do everything on my own but I'm starting to get stuck. I'm having an issue getting the textures to wrap correctly on the fuselage. Picture attached, please forgive the Alaskan tail as I borrowed that as my base file and haven't painted the tail yet. Makes ZERO sense to me why the center of the vertical stabilizer is NOT the center of the paint area. I know about the gap between the white and grey stripe, that's on me not the wrapping. Any tips on how to get this thing mirrored correctly? I figured out the trick with setting up the lines correctly on between fuselage sections 2 and 3... Correct side: Incorrect Alignment: Thank you! Sean

Just need to find some like minded individuals. I've successfully completed many CFD flights with members of my Vatsim ARTCC. That and my college roommate got into flight sim once he saw me doing it. Eventually we were CFD sitting next to each other. Incredible stuff. This is probably the ONLY think PMDG is not going in their products that they could be investing worthy time in. Imagine a shared cockpit 777 flight? Incredible.

I already think that's too much. I hate everytime I switch to an exterior view that is the first thing I see while the rest of the model loads.

At this point wouldn't this just warrant its own pinned thread

So wait are you saying it's a bug because it's too accurate? I'm confused how you could have made a mistake aligning the IRS if you're getting better ANP?

Both the 777 and 737 have seen updates so all three aircraft need to be uninstalled and reinstalled including the 777, -300 expansion, and the 737. If you only want the update to the 777 family it's not a requisite to uninstall the 737 and vise versa. When the 600/700 is you're going to want to have the latest version of the 800/900 for sure. I would just uninstall, re-download, and reinstall all 3 as PMDG suggests.

When I tried to update through the ops center a pop up notepad opened saying that updates were available and that they could be downloaded from the website. Not seeing an issue here...

My only complaint about having to reinstall every time is that in my haste to reinstall all the aircraft I accidentally install the bing bar on one of them!

Do we have to reinstall the 300 expansion as well? EDIT: Nevermind, Chris' comment on the other thread confirmed.

I was running 4xMSAA already and seeing only 15-20 FPS with DL turned on LAX with FSDT's LAX and Orbx SoCal in the 777 but 25-30 FPS with it off. I'm only running a GTX 960 so I fear its more of a hardware limitation than anything. Going to try and tinker with the settings. Thank you for your help, Chris.

Ah gotcha. Honestly not the end of the world. I'm not running anything stellar in terms of computer hardware so I'll take no ooms and 4K textures at 30fps over being able to see the lights illuminate the ground. Thank you.

I'm having an issue in P3D v4 with the 777 where the landing lights are not illuminating the ground with Dynamic lighting turned off. I have no issues with Dynamic lighting on but my frames are not high enough to have DL turned on. Is anyone else noticing this issue? Any solutions? Thought I'd try here first before opening a ticket. Sean

Yes. Read the first page. Pages 2-6. Or literally two posts above yours. This question has been answered 10 separate times. Unless of course you don't want the update, that's your prerogative.

Well judging how you're doing Mach .863 with a 153 knot tail wind I would say yes what you're seeing is possible. By far the highest I've ever seen, I don't think I've ever gotten better than a 109KT tail wind. I was doing 605 over the ground on that flight.

Sadly I would probably still buy it

As promised in the 023JUNE17 thread it looks like they'll hit their window. If I remember on the 777 it was two days after the module appeared but in any case it's exciting!

I had a rebuild about a year ago and ran into this issue. They will be very quick and responsive to issue you new codes. This is to protect them from code sharing and everyone offloading their hard work to their friends.

I agree whole heartedly. Especially where it is not going to be brought to the 64-bit platform and it continues to be a major part of commercial air service. This is good conversation but PMDG will do what is best for their company.

This question feels like it has been asked two or three times a day for the last year and a half since v3 came out. Doesn't anyone use the search function?

Only if LM was able to resolve the issue PMDG was seeing

Any time I've had this issue it was rectified by updating my nvidia drivers. Check your GPU for driver updates.

Robert, I did not mean any disrespect in my original post. My information was from your locked post here on the forums for the "Most Current Information on P3Dv4 Availability": "PMDG 737NGX: This product is still being prepared for testing. This product is expected to enter testing concurrent with release of the 777-300ER to customers. The current expectation is to release before the end of June." I (maybe wrongfully) understood that to mean that release of the 777-300ER would begin work of the NGX. I guess the key here is the first line about being prepared for testing. I would never take the word of a non-PMDG employee over that of your team. I was quite satisfied with the answer that it is being worked on but the older code is making it a longer process. Sorry for any confusion, Sean