LRBS

https://flightsim.to/file/20546/new-york-city-landmarks

Just a quick correction: I meant to say "no wind conditions," but I wrote something else. My apologies. When I think back, a few of us, the real pilots mentioned the obvious issues, and many people here said that the 737 is perfect in this respect; no issues can be observed. Now, almost the same people changed their tone: The 737 has issues. This time, the 777 doesn't have any problems that can be seen, exactly the same rhetoric as it was with the 737. Well, it's a complete waste of time. Let me be completely direct: both have issues in many aspects that many don't see, don't know, refuse to accept reality, and love to be argumentative. When I criticized something, I wanted people to realize that this product could be improved and raised above the average compared to other developers.

I do appreciate the lesson about how "every PPL student learns and practices during ground reference maneuvers such as turns about a point or S turns across a road. A heavy 777 traveling at 250 knots won’t be affected the same way as a C152 traveling at 70 knots, but the same laws of aerodynamics apply." I also wish you had noticed when I mentioned" no wind conditions". I would also like to share with you that even in a 737 with wind variations up to 10 KTS, bank angles are constant and smooth in these kinds of winds, more so in a 777. Above those approximate values in turbulent conditions, you will see some variations. Something else worth mentioning is that those RF approaches start at FAP with the airplane fully configured at Vref between 160 to 130 KTS based on the flaps setting and weight. Usually, the bank angle is steady, with no variations, somewhere between 10 to 20 degrees, steady and dead on the magenta line with no errors of any kind. It is really interesting to see these arguments from people (no disrespect intended) who do not fly these airplanes for a living. It's like pilots giving instructions to avionics engineers on how to do their job. Anyhow, I'll be home in a few days and have access to my desktop. If you are interested, I can find some examples for you and perhaps discover stuff that you didn't notice. I agree with everybody that it's outstanding software for $77, but the discussion is not about that, and PMDG could do a better job.

Unfortunately, while you are so preoccupied with arguments and playing the "personal attack card," you didn't notice when I said, "First, they introduced these RF legs," and then when I outlined about the same bugs brought from the 737 to the 777. Granted, not to such a degree, but still there and completely wrong A/C behaviour. Unfortunately, you cannot accept anything, I wish you all the best.

Honestly, something is very wrong. You can't accept anything that PMDG has got wrong or can improve. I fully understand that you don't know, that you have an issue with what I say, but can you give it a brake? It's getting ridiculous already. This situation is becoming untenable. Show some respect for others' opinions.

I just got delayed, and here is my assessment. It will be very difficult to find common ground if you are not a real pilot (there is nothing wrong with that, by any means). I'll do my best to explain just a few issues that are real problems for someone who was previously qualified in these airplanes. First, they introduced these RF legs, but they are still not entirely correct. In normal wx conditions, the airplanes are rock solid and have constant bank angles during turns. Not in PMDG, where there is a constant back and force left/right banking. Before or after wpt the airplane will turn momentarily L/R of course (as a pilot, if I notice this kind of behavior, I will instantly disconnect the A/P, we cannot allow the airplane to wonder in turns like that), turns should be precise and smooth not for the pilot to wonder what is she gonna do next. It's always predictable and precise. The airplanes are smooth and steady as silk and don't wander off the magenta line. Even if not being a pilot and having Fenix or the Maddog, you will observe how these two fly so smoothly and steadily and play nicely with the magenta line. The above issues were previously reported in regards to the 737, never attended and brought to the new 777. Now, on the 777, we have that trim speed future, quite a different idea compared to other airplanes, and a slightly different flight characteristic; there is a lot of information on the net about it that you can research. Now, their emulation of the system needs more tuning. Hand-flying the airplane is smooth and stable. Not quite realistic in the PMDG 777. For some reason, when you disconnect the A/P, a pitch-up-down tendency and lack of pitch stability can be observed. In the real airplane, after the A/P disconnect, the airplane will fly like an arrow, completely trimmed for that attitude or mode; PFCs are commanding control surface movement to maintain your trim, pitch, and bank and suppress gusts. During the approach, the small corrections that you would normally apply in a directly controlled airplane, like the 744 or 737, are corrections that the ACEs are already applying automatically. We only correct for the larger deviations, and even then the corrections are very small. So, in my opinion, they need to fix the interface between the A/P and FD during LNAV operation and brush up on this FBW situation. Again, for someone not familiar with the real airplane would not know (no disrespect intended). The bottom line is that these 2 products are very nice, and lots of effort was put into their development. So, if they would spend more time and be willing to fix those issues, they would be at a higher standard and in line with what is available on the market.

If interested, I can send you a private email. I'm on the road flying the line, and it's quite difficult to connect while at hotels. Also, sending a private email will help avoid any misunderstandings. Feel free to reach out to me via private email if you'd like. Additionally, you can find some related discussions on their forum.

I agree that you might find some small variations between the panels. Even looking at the ones on Airliners.net, I can't see panels rubbing against each other like this 777. Again, it's not a show-stopper; it just doesn't look right. Also, as I mentioned, below the MCP panel, the placeholder is not to scale, not a show-stopper either. It's just something that I don't see on these airplanes. As I mentioned, I'm not current on 737 or 777 anymore, but I jump seating a few times a month on these airplanes and I don't see that, even in the "brand new 737s." I'm not dismissing your statement, but is quite difficult to understand. On our fleet, the old (clunkers) like 747 or 380 don't find these big variations like this. So please allow me to be skeptical. As I mentioned, this is nothing compared to other issues lingering on these products. I appreciate that we may not always see eye to eye, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Such is life.

It just started with "PMDG 777, another update." Some elaborated on sounds, performance, and cockpit displays, covering a variety of topics. I still believe that we should express and respect our opinions. If you don't like our opinions, you will definitely find all the good stuff in the PMDG forum. Directing people to another topic because it is not what you want to hear is not appropriate.

Just a friendly reminder that there are no changes to the mentioned three items related to the cockpit.

Unfortunately, it all started as usual from @Bobsk8's statement. For some unknown reason, he often comes across in a way that is not desirable to many. @Sethos nailed it with his remarks, 'Just stop the asinine, cryptic, and dismissive one-liner posts and use your actual words to add something of value to the discussion of why it may or may not be an issue.' My disagreement is about a minor issue. It concerns the fact that on the CAPT side, the PFD and ND have no spacing between them. I didn't notice that on any airplane while operating the 777 or other aircraft. Although many of you use Airliners.net as a reference, and I also looked there, I couldn't find any picture where PFD and ND are rubbing against each other. Perhaps I'm wrong, not the first or the last time. Also, as I mentioned, not to be a show stopper, below the MCP, you can notice that there's a "place-holder" where some keep the RSVM charts, a hard copy of the normal checklist, or the clipboard, etc., which is not scaled correctly. These little issues are totally insignificant compared to the real bugs PMDG has brought from the 737 to the 777 right now. Apart from the people who can't see things straight when others are critical of the product, I think that we're good.

Unfortunately, you're mistaken if you think there are no issues here. Some of you, without proper knowledge about a product, can't understand that actually bringing up discrepancies/bugs leads to improvement. As a previously qualified pilot in 777, I assure you that you're also mistaken if you believe they don't align perfectly when replacing those screens. I understand that PMDG claims to use any laser imaging, and I will not go there to dispute that statement. However, regardless of laser imaging, there are some visible discrepancies.

I don't want to argue and arrive at anything unproductive. Looking at only those two pictures, the first one, the CPT side has no gap between the screens (PFD and ND) while the FO side has it. On the second picture from the Airliners.net, there is a definitive gap between them, CPT or FO side. Do you see it? Now, I wonder if you also noticed the difference below the MCP panel, there is a placeholder where we keep certain documentation (RVSM chart, a copy of the normal checklist. etc). It's also not to scale. As I mentioned, those are minor details compared to the other issues they have with the 737 and 777.

The reason the whole town jumped on him is a reflection of how he interacts with people. When somebody has an issue, he almost always negates the problem. During my time flying the line and picking up 777s from the factory (about 2 years), I did not encounter such a wide gap between the units. For sure I notice from time to time on the 747 some gap between the units due to some being CRT or LCD screens. It is common to see this screen swap on the 747 and 777. I still believe that what we see on this 777 is not right. But it is such a small issue compared to others.

This needs more clarification: What does "you never worked on Avionics" have to do with fixing a bug?