Announcement

Collapse

PMDG Forum Rules

1) SIGN YOUR POSTS. Since 1997, we have asked users to sign their real name, first and last, to all posts in the PMDG forum. We do this in order to keep conversations personal and familiar. You took the time to be here, we want to get to know you. This is one of the few rigid rules that we enforce regularly. We do so because we feel that forums in which users must engage one another personally are generally warmer, more collegial and friendly. Posts that are unsigned will be quietly removed without comment by the moderators, so to make your life easy- we recommend enabling your forum signature so that you never need to remember. Do this by clicking the username pull-down at the top right, then selecting "User Settings." You will find the signature editor on the ACCOUNT tab, about half way down the page. Look for "Edit Post Signature." Be sure to click the "Show Signatures" box.

2) BE NICE. We are all simmers here and no matter our differences of opinion, we share a common love of aviation, computing and simulation. Treat everyone else in the forum with respect even when you disagree. If someone frustrates you, walk away from the conversation or ask for a moderator to get involved. Speaking of Moderators, they prefer not to be treated as "The Thought Police" but if any behavior infringes on the enjoyment of another user or is otherwise considered to be unacceptable in the moderator's judgment, it will be addressed in keeping with our view of ensuring that this forum remains a healthy environment for all simmers.

3) BE LAWFUL: Any behavior that infringes upon the law, such as discussion or solicitation of piracy, threats, intimidation or abuse will be handled unsympathetically by the moderators. Threats and intimidation may, at the moderator's discretion, be provided to law enforcement for handling.

4) BE FACTUAL: When you post, always be factual. Moderators will remove posts that are determined not to be factually accurate.

5) RESPECT COPYRIGHTS: Posting of copyrighted material such as flight manuals owned by Boeing or various airlines is not allowed in this forum. If you have questions related to copyrighted material, please contact a forum moderator for clarification.

6) RESPECT PMDG: We love to hear what you like about our products. We also like to hear what you think can be improved, or what isn't working. Please do tell us and we will always treat your feedback with value. Just be sure to treat the team respectfully, as they do put a significant amount of effort into building and maintaining these great simulation products for you.

7) RESPECT PMDG DEVELOPERS: All of the developers will spend some time here. Given the ratio of developers-to-users, it simply isn't possible for us to answer every post and private message individually. Please know that we do try to read everything, but developer workload is simply too high to manage personal contact with tens-of-thousands of users simultaneously. In most cases, members of the development team will stick to conversations in the forum and will not answer private messages.

8) RESPECT OTHER DEVELOPERS: PMDG has always advocated for a strong development community and we have many friends within this community. Every developer offers something unique that helps to make the simming community larger and more vibrant. We insist that you treat our friends respectfully.

9) RESPECT MODERATORS: Moderators have a tough job, and none of them enjoy having to stomp out negativity. If a moderator has to weigh in to keep a thread peaceful, please respect that effort and refrain from giving the moderator any grief.

10) If you require official support for any of our products please open a support ticket through the support portal, https://support.precisionmanuals.com

11) This forum is designed primarily as a vehicle for the PMDG development team to interact with our customers, and for customers to interact with one another in a manner that is positive, supportive and assists in the general advancement of understanding the simulation and helping to make this and future simulations better. Any other use of this forum is not permitted, including but not limited to discussion of pricing policies, business practices, forum moderating policies, advertising of non-PMDG products, promotion of events, services or products that are not approved in advance by PMDG or any other topic deemed unacceptable by any forum administrator

12) HAVE FUN: This is the whole point of it all.
See more
See less

[06MAR21] Your Weekend Update

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    [06MAR21] Your Weekend Update

    Captains,

    Late Friday night, I handed off a new set of changes to our beta team for their review. These changes are not terribly invasive, but given that we were still working on two items until around midnight Friday night, I elected not to simply toss them in the "immediately release on Saturday Morning" bin, just in case we had any issues that hadn't cropped up with in-house testing during the week. Our plan is to let them work with these new updates through the weekend and then roll them out to you on Monday or Tuesday depending upon what they think.

    The change list (subject to change) for this update includes the following items:

    0009557: [General - Suggested/Missing Features] PVD should be available for landing operation, unlike 747 (rsrandazzo)
    0009564: [General - Flight Model] 200ER : Max landing weight and Max Takeoff Weight Options in OPTIONS/EQUIPMENT (emvaos)
    0009558: [Systems - Fuel] AUX fuel fails to transfer. (rsrandazzo)
    0009549: [General - Flight Model] Ground Effect for 200LR/F and 300ER revisited (emvaos)
    0009560: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] VC gap near the EFB area on both Captain and F/O sides (vscimone)
    0009554: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] P3Dv4 Landing Light switches much darker than in previous release (vscimone)
    0009555: [EFB - Performance and Computational] EFB Landign performance OAT error message when Anti Ice OFF is selected logic (emvaos)
    0009544: [External Model - Geometry] P3Dv5 300ER small gaps at the fuselage at the Cargo hold (jbrown)
    0009526: [External Model - Geometry] 300ER TailSkid see through texture and piston length (jbrown)
    0009458: [External Model - Geometry] Engine Animation issues with engine shudown on air (jbrown)
    0009548: [FMS - Setup/Options Pages] Captain/FO Sync Baro option does not sync the EFIS switch Position (abashkatov)
    0009538: [Main Panel - Aural/Visual Warning Systems] Low speed buffet smoothing in turbulence (emvaos)
    0009537: [AFDS - Thrust Modes] A/T thrust reduction rate during flare [30' or below] (emvaos)
    0009545: [EFB - Performance and Computational] EFB : Printout rounding provision for limit weights in OPT (emvaos)
    0009513: [Virtual Cockpit - Geometry/Textures] Small VC gap at captains window, hook area (vscimone)
    0009524: [Sounds - External] Specific engine sounds not playing (acholakian)
    0009494: [External Model - Liveries] Request: Add engine type to aircraft thumbnail (psterling)

    You can see that this update round is focused mostly on cleaning up small details and adding in a few more operational options in order to allow VAs to accurately simulate the 200ER options of their chosen carriers. The weight options can be saved, making them specific to the airframe, which is nice for anyone simulating fleets...

    We are currently at work with a number of technical experts to smooth out a few rough edges in the flight model that we think would benefit from additional attention. I expect that the next update *after* the one detailed above will focus primarily on flight model. It may also take one or two update rounds to implement the changes we are looking at- as they are extremely invasive and require quite a bit of testing to ensure that things pan out as desired.

    In the background of all of this, we have a massive update to our Navdata handling, LNAV and flight director modeling coming. This is close to going into beta testing with the 747 and once finalized it will be rolled out to each fleet type, finally completing a major upgrade process that we have been at work on for a few years now. I'll give you more show-and-tell on that when we have gotten a bit of testing under our belt and we are comfortable that it is indeed ready for use.

    Also pending we have PMDG Global Flight Operations, which hasn't gotten much face-time here in updates primarily because we are being a bit guarded in sharing precisely what it does in order to give us the latitude to change/grown/modify the capabilities as we develop and work with the technology layer that it represents. I think you'll be intrigued by what we have done with it- and that will start to play out for you a little later this year.

    I don't have any guidance change on the 737 moving to MSFS yet- but I am likely going to show you a progress update there in... two months or so? Timeline is a bit spongy- but the 737 is taking longer than anticipated. The folks at Asobo are champions and they take time out of every working day to engage with us, offer suggestions and map out changes/fixes that we need in order to move PMDG products into the MSFS platform. I cannot speak highly enough of the Asobo team- and once we clear a few more hurdles I hope to be able to show you what their input has meant to PMDG's version of the future simming. 737 for MSFS is still a long way out- but...

    Now that 777 has been updated, you can expect small updates for both the 747 and 737 product lines as we unify a few items we changed/fixed/corrected during 777 work that are common across the fleet types. Nothing earth-shaking, but various functionality improvements within VNAV and some system function fixes that we found along the way. Those micro-updates will roll out in the coming weeks.

    I think that is all from here today- we hope you are enjoying your weekend!



    Robert S. Randazzo
    PMDG Simulations
    http://www.pmdg.com



    #2
    So by "a little later this year", would it be just after Spring or perhaps mid-Summer? Because a lot of us are keen on having GFO in our hands, and we've been waiting for it for so long, as much as we'd like to think that all the time is being invested on perfecting it and making sure it doesn't give us grief from the onset.

    Keep up the good work, Captain and team!
    Craig Norman

    Comment


    • CANorm91
      CANorm91 commented
      Editing a comment
      I see. If it definitely exceeds what Hoppie can do, then it'll be worth it. Especially since it can't do single logons for split sectors within a given FIR or even a single national logon for multiple FIRs like KUSA, GFO would definitely make logging on to a single FIR or national CPDLC logon more realistic.
      Last edited by CANorm91; 06Mar2021, 22:13.

    • RichardMcDonaldWoods
      RichardMcDonaldWoods commented
      Editing a comment
      Craig - I would also hope that (in the fullness of time) we could have an AI CPDLC where, in the absence of online ATC in a FIR or sector, GFO would perform as a virtual controller. Examples could include climb instructions where the FP indicates a step climb, and automatic responses to pilot requests.
      Analyzing the CPDLC messages specified in Appendix 5 of the ICAO Doc 4444 (Officially “PANS-ATM, or Procedures for Navigation Services – Air Traffic Management) I know it would be possible to provide this service for almost all interactions to greatly improve the immersion.
      Last edited by RichardMcDonaldWoods; 07Mar2021, 09:16.

    • CANorm91
      CANorm91 commented
      Editing a comment
      I was thinking the same thing too. AI-driven CPDLC and ACARS for offline flying would definitely be great, since it'll give me practice for when I'm ready to do more VATSIM flying.

    #3
    Will the "Navdata/LNAV/VNAV/FD module update" also enable PMDG aircraft to finally handle RNP procedures containing RF legs correctly?

    Also, would it be possible to simulate the struggles that real-world airlines are experiencing with the limited storage size of the onboard nav db? It is kind of unrealistic to have the entire world available to us with full procedures.
    Henk de Vries

    Comment


    • AngelofAttack
      AngelofAttack commented
      Editing a comment
      But we simmer fly globally.. I can't see the point of limiting that...

    • CoyoteLoco
      CoyoteLoco commented
      Editing a comment
      The 777-200LR IS called a "Worldliner".

    #4
    Originally posted by rsrandazzo View Post
    0009564: [General - Flight Model] 200ER : Max landing weight and Max Takeoff Weight Options in OPTIONS/EQUIPMENT (emvaos)
    Does this mean we finally get 656k lbs as an option?
    Last edited by spauls121; 06Mar2021, 21:04.
    Sterling Paulsen

    Comment


    • snsb789
      snsb789 commented
      Editing a comment
      Nope, but I have anyways artificially boosted it in the aircraft.cfg to 656000lbs, haven't seen any negative effect yet. Also one rarely ever gets to go as high as that. In reality I have clocked on average about 550-580000lbs of TOW in normal ops. Even my EWR-HKG flight still remained fairly on the lower side, reaching 628000lbs. Probably because of the payload uplift I guess.

    #5
    I noticed when we turn the PNL/flood glareshield with the right mouse button or with the scroll.
    The arrival of light freezes the simulation (this was already in the old versions)
    Cédrice Rive P3D4.5
    747, MD11, 737, 777

    Comment


    • Yoshua
      Yoshua commented
      Editing a comment
      Thought I was the only one since my post about that was ignored.

    • cedrice.rive@yahoo.fr
      [email protected] commented
      Editing a comment
      We can translate that silence means that it must be a limitation.
      There is no DL in the cockpit.
      Last edited by [email protected]; 07Mar2021, 20:21.

    #6
    Hi Robert
    Thanks for the changelist.

    When you say we can save MTOW, Landing weight etc.

    This does not increase those values to say 656,000 LBS correct and more so you can limit those below the current limits?
    Mark Roberts

    Comment


    • Captain Kevin
      Captain Kevin commented
      Editing a comment
      Looking at the Boeing ACAPS sheet, there's a 590,000-pound option and a 580,000-pound option. There were airlines that went that low on a -200ER?

    • Guest's Avatar
      Guest commented
      Editing a comment
      SIA had a derated 200ER fleet that basically turned them into standard 777-200s, certified with lower MTOWs too for regional flights in SE Asia. They could be re-rated and re-certified to higher MTOWs for long haul flights to Europe.

    • snsb789
      snsb789 commented
      Editing a comment
      Captain Kevin yes many carriers did operate aircraft at those weights, IIRC, Vietnam Airlines used to fly a mixed fleet of 297556kg MTOW GE90-94B Aircraft and a PW4084 subfleet restricted to 263300kg MTOW

    #7
    rsrandazzo Amazing update! Can't wait for that PVD action too.

    In response to your new update with MTOW and MLW, I was wonder if it was possible to also add an option to change seating configs or being able to change the max passengers in each config too? That would add extra perfection for aircraft configs! *Chefs kiss*
    Anthony Eyre, B789 F/A.
    Windows 10 Home 64Bit, Intel i9-10900K @ 3.7GHz, Asus ROG STRIX Z490-E, NZXT KRAKEN Z73, Corsair Vengeance DDR4 34GB, ASUS GTX 1080Ti ROG Strix 11GB, Corsair TX850M Semi-Modular.
    Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 & Prepar3D V4.5 HF3

    Comment


      #8
      Hello,
      Can we expect any development on the flight characteristics of the 777 on final approach in the update dropping next week, where we're experiencing twitchiness in the pitch axis and extreme nose down/up oscillations that always have to be 'fought'? The airplane handles extremely well in all other phases of flight but seems to completely lose pitch calibration on final approach in landing config. Great job up until now!
      Chirag Abichandani

      Comment


      • JWarner32
        JWarner32 commented
        Editing a comment
        This^ Fly by wire needs a little fix.... -200ER is especially hard to handle. So much so that it's nearly impossible to fly...seemingly... It's a great plane, but it's nearly unflyable by hand.

      #9
      Originally posted by spauls121 View Post

      Does this mean we finally get 656k lbs as an option?
      I saw that also. I thought they said no way on this option. I hope so, this would be great.
      Dan Moore

      Comment


      • 737freak
        737freak commented
        Editing a comment
        Hope they also enable this for the 737 and 747. And also for the engine thrust ratings (For example, a B738 with 24k instead of the default 26k, where you have to select TO1 derate in order to get 24k to accurately simulate an airline which has 24k).

      #10
      Originally posted by SteamingSpoon View Post
      Hello,
      Can we expect any development on the flight characteristics of the 777 on final approach in the update dropping next week, where we're experiencing twitchiness in the pitch axis and extreme nose down/up oscillations that always have to be 'fought'? The airplane handles extremely well in all other phases of flight but seems to completely lose pitch calibration on final approach in landing config. Great job up until now!
      I’d recommend reading Robert’s post again. He specifically mentions the flight model. I would assume this relates specifically to the handling of the aircraft.
      Robert Sutherland

      Comment


        #11
        Sounds very good team! Well done in the effort you put into this. Looking forward to the update!
        Johnno Roskam
        Proud PMDG pilot
        KLM Ramp agent

        Comment


          #12
          Originally posted by RoDuSu View Post

          I’d recommend reading Robert’s post again. He specifically mentions the flight model. I would assume this relates specifically to the handling of the aircraft.
          I did indeed, just thought that there was a degree of ambiguity in the description of the invasive flight characteristics problems that are expected to be tackled later - especially when the changelog mentions changes to landing characteristics, i.e. changed ground effect and A/T thrust reduction rate.
          Chirag Abichandani

          Comment


            #13
            Previews for GFO later this year? really?
            Jordan Collins

            Comment


            • rsrandazzo
              rsrandazzo commented
              Editing a comment
              Jordan- Well I can't give them to you LAST year, so yes- later this year it is. :-) - RSR

            • CoyoteLoco
              CoyoteLoco commented
              Editing a comment
              RTFL Robert!!!

            #14
            Now that the 777 is updated, you may announce finally a 787!
            Timm Rehberg
            Twitch Stream | V1 Simulations Blog

            Comment


              #15
              Originally posted by xTiMm_ View Post
              Now that the 777 is updated, you may announce finally a 787!
              There is already the QW on the market. Not the best, but ok. So, no 787 from PMDG, I think. More important and way nicer for simmers would be the 75/76, but this will lso not happen, I think...
              Sebastian Hassert / EDDM

              Comment


              • CANorm91
                CANorm91 commented
                Editing a comment
                We don't know for certain. Anything can happen between now and before then.

              • Anton Vind
                Anton Vind commented
                Editing a comment
                787 is way more likely than 757/767.

              #16
              Thank you very much.

              0009537: [AFDS - Thrust Modes] A/T thrust reduction rate during flare [30' or below] (emvaos)
              The actual reduction rate is way lower?
              Josef Kolb

              PMDG B737-600 to -900/747-400/747-8/777-200LR/777-300ER

              Comment


              • EMV
                EMV commented
                Editing a comment
                Retuned based on specific video. From 30' to 15' reduction rate is really slow. Then at 15' it will really move the throttles.

                Vangelis

              • Cocobellomann
                Cocobellomann commented
                Editing a comment
                Thanks, that’s what I thought.

              #17
              God bless you Robert, and thanks for the attention. please, dont forget the pitch problem...abs maybe some look on variation on fps.

              thanks!!

              Leandro Manducci - SBSP Prepar3D v5

              Comment


                #18
                Soo DC-6 news? Will we see the v5 update for it or is it just going to be left?
                Jacob Buchanan

                Comment


                • Mickel
                  Mickel commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Check the DC-6 forum.

                #19
                Yes ... A revision of the cockpit view and the problem of the FPS drop is really necessary.

                Today I had the opportunity to experience a drastic drop in FPS from 25-28 to even 3fps along with stuttering during the descent into Denver using P3DV5.1 with default scenery and terrain (never happened to me with 737 or 747 series and neither with the old version of 777).

                I could see that it basically happens when the plane makes turns.

                It really is something very uncomfortable but we know that they will solve it in a satisfactory way.

                PMDG is a great Team.
                Last edited by yvjjflores; 07Mar2021, 03:05.
                Jose J Flores - SVZM FIR - PDV5.1. Win 10 Pro, GPU AMD RX480 8 Gb VRam, 16 MB RAM, AMD Phenom II BE, 3.6 Mhz.

                Comment


                  #20
                  Gents,

                  We'll give you an update on DC-6 work in the not-to-distant future. We ARE a bit focused on 777 at the moment, so.... patience.

                  Robert S. Randazzo
                  PMDG Simulations
                  http://www.pmdg.com


                  Comment


                    #21
                    Originally posted by zhaoxuehua
                    Does this update have a windshield effect?
                    No, none of those features are coming until the Virtual cockpit update later this year.
                    Mark Roberts

                    Comment


                      #22
                      Originally posted by CANorm91 View Post
                      So by "a little later this year", would it be just after Spring or perhaps mid-Summer? Because a lot of us are keen on having GFO in our hands, and we've been waiting for it for so long, as much as we'd like to think that all the time is being invested on perfecting it and making sure it doesn't give us grief from the onset.

                      Keep up the good work, Captain and team!
                      In software developer terms a little later this year means in the next decade.
                      Charlie Goulding

                      I9-9900K Clocked to 5.0MHZ, KRAKEN Water Cooled, NVIDIA RTX2080 Super, 32GB DDR4 3200MHz Dual Channel Memory, 2 M2 500GB SSD's, AUROS Z390 Mother Board, 1 x Samsung 860 QVO 2TB Solid State Drive (up to 550MB/s R | 520MB/s W) in a NZKT Frame.

                      Comment


                        #23
                        Cheers for implementing the PVD for landing. Much appreciated gents! Looking forward to the new LNAV/VNAV and FD logic too, when that comes through later down the line.
                        Callum McLoughlin

                        Comment


                          #24
                          I'm greatly looking forward to the LNAV/VNAV/FCC update. That's the one thing in PMDG airplanes that is currently not up to par with the quality in the rest of the package. Early turns, bad interceptions, non-continuous descents, incorrect deceleration points, strange VNAV recalculation... that will soon be a thing of the past. On the other hand, how bad PMDG airplanes currently calculate descents has helped me emancipate the magenta.
                          Omar Josef
                          737 FO
                          757/767 rated
                          Spain

                          Comment


                            #25
                            Originally posted by chasgoulding View Post

                            In software developer terms a little later this year means in the next decade.
                            Not really. This isn't Duke Nukem Forever, you know? That literally took forever and ended up being a huge disappointment. GFO is anything but, and given the progress, I'm still anticipating it this year, since updating the 777 took priority.
                            Craig Norman

                            Comment


                              #26
                              Originally posted by 737freak View Post
                              Also, would it be possible to simulate the struggles that real-world airlines are experiencing with the limited storage size of the onboard nav db? It is kind of unrealistic to have the entire world available to us with full procedures.
                              The only problem is in the airline world, you're only flying for one airline, so with the limited storage size they have, they would only have the data for the places that are in their ops specs. With the simulator, a lot of people are flying multiple airlines, so how are you going to account for that. Are you going to sit there and pick out the procedures for the airports you need every time you want to start the simulator.
                              Captain Kevin

                              Kevin Yang

                              Comment


                                #27
                                Thanks for the update on that other sim ,


                                JOHN C!!
                                John C

                                Comment


                                  #28
                                  Originally posted by RoDuSu View Post

                                  I’d recommend reading Robert’s post again. He specifically mentions the flight model. I would assume this relates specifically to the handling of the aircraft.
                                  in fact it was not clear that he will fix this pitch problem ... in the part he says about the model, it seems to me to refer to something else, I really hope that he fixes it ... too much hard and boring to land, I feel like I'm on a roller coaster

                                  Leandro Manducci - SBSP Prepar3D v5

                                  Comment


                                    #29
                                    Originally posted by Aeromar View Post
                                    I'm greatly looking forward to the LNAV/VNAV/FCC update. That's the one thing in PMDG airplanes that is currently not up to par with the quality in the rest of the package. Early turns, bad interceptions, non-continuous descents, incorrect deceleration points, strange VNAV recalculation... that will soon be a thing of the past. On the other hand, how bad PMDG airplanes currently calculate descents has helped me emancipate the magenta.
                                    I couldnt agree more, but I am actually not sure to which degree VNAV will be updated. Robert always talks about Navdata, LNAV and Flight Director only........
                                    Manolo Ruiz Carrió

                                    Comment


                                      #30
                                      Originally posted by Sekkha View Post

                                      I couldnt agree more, but I am actually not sure to which degree VNAV will be updated. Robert always talks about Navdata, LNAV and Flight Director only........
                                      VNAV has been updated in the 777 so it will probably continue to be improved and it will be included in all the other airplanes. I still haven't been able to test it properly. I'll do that now. There's an arrival where the NGXu always levels off when it shouldn't. The real airplane never levels off if VNAV is set up for a continuous descent all the way to GS Capture. I don't know how they're coding it but it's possible that VNAV will never be perfect until LNAV is also perfect and calculates turn radii correctly.
                                      Omar Josef
                                      737 FO
                                      757/767 rated
                                      Spain

                                      Comment


                                      • Sekkha
                                        Sekkha commented
                                        Editing a comment
                                        OK, we will see

                                      • DDowns
                                        DDowns commented
                                        Editing a comment
                                        I've had dialog with the developer on VNAV and that leveling off at constraints and long story short this should get fixed. Not sure when but they have it as an action to take. The Flight Directory, the AFDS, is an intrinsic part of the aircraft's behavior in VNAV so yes improvements are coming Soon(TM).
                                    Working...
                                    X