Any Hope for a 787?

[Swaluver88]

Yes but now with the 777X and the 737 Max the avionics are very similar to the 787. Robert stated that the 737 Max was basically done or something of the sort a while back. We already have a 777 so a future 777X is probably a sure thing in due time. That makes a current 787 a good idea IMO.

yes robert did say the MAX is done but it was having optimization issues in P3D and MSFS probably could only handle it or something along those lines

[Natbrain]

Yes, but with an NDA you can keep things secret until the day it's ready for release in theory. The point is that PMDG could have been working at it for years until they announce it (this is all theoretical). It's not often you see someone announce: "We're gonna be developing this, starting from today." No quite often you see that they have been working on it for some time and then they announce it. Furthermore a 787 wouldn't a project from scratch, in the sense that they have developed planes that have a lot of commonality with the 787. What we also know, which is a fact, is that they have an unannounced airliner project in the background which hasn't been detailed yet for the public, exactly because of an NDA probably.

nothing is confirmed until it’s confirmed officially. Sure, there are NDAs, but it’s all speculation at this point. Until it’s officially confirmed, statistically speaking there is a much greater chance that there isn’t one under development than that there is. The fact that they have an unannounced airliner project doesn’t change that. In fact it could be a MAX. Given the projects PMDG has done, that would be the most logical step. Additionally, even in planes with a lot of commonality I would argue it would still take 2-3 years. One could argue that the 747-8 has more similarity than the 777 - in fact that’s where the -8 comes from. But still, given all that’s on PMDG’s plate, think about how long that could take. Simply updating the existing 777 has PMDG saturated right now with all the other products. Perhaps people won’t like where I’m coming from because it sounds too pessimistic, but I believe I’m being the most objectively realistic about this right now. From a logical standpoint, there’s no basis to believe that a PMDG 787 would be released in any appreciably near future such that it could serve as an upcoming replacement for the QW version, other than pure speculation.

In other words (and perhaps TLDR), if someone were to say “should I get the QW 787 or wait for a possible PMDG 787,” there’s no logical basis other than speculation to believe that a PMDG 787 would release in the near enough future to justify potentially waiting. There’s always a chance, but at this point, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

[Ilari Kousa]

yes robert did say the MAX is done but it was having optimization issues in P3D and MSFS probably could only handle it or something along those lines

...and for the record the MAX has been mentioned in an official capacity on these forums. The way I interpreted it is, it's uncertain at this stage whether we'll see the MAX expansion for the NGXu versus the NG3 only.

[Swaluver88]

Honestly I still have a gut feeling Robert is just waiting to release the MAX for the NGXu series when the actual MAX is back in the air. Which should be like next month the way things are looking for them

[Anton Vind]

They're probably going to cater for P4D and P5D customers as well. Where did he announce the MAX? Have never seen it haha, only hinted on the AVSIM forum.

[Ilari Kousa]

[QUOTE=Anton Vind;n84100]They're probably going to cater for P4D and P5D customers as well. Where did he announce the MAX? Have never seen it haha, only hinted on the AVSIM forum.[/QUOTE

https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-forum/general-discussion-news-and-announcements/25608-07nov19-pmdg-product-trajectory-alignment-what-to-expect-in-the-coming-weeks-months-hours-etc

[Anton Vind]

Ah yes, only a couple of hours until the NGXu was released

[CaptainSkidmark]

I don't have QW 787 but id rather the MD11

[dehowie]

Yes, obviously applies to the 747-8 and 737 MAX as well.

The 787 is completely different under the hood compared to a 777 compared to the differences of a 747-8 and 747-400.
Its remarkable that Boeing managed to get them to be common type ratings.
From a dev point of view Pmdg already have an excellent HUD from the 737, a great ECL from the 777 which woukd be adapted for 787 specifics readily and screens from the Max. All they need now is the comms system for 787 and build the entire pure magic flight control system, the aircraft interface plus the integration etc of advanced RNP navigation for the 787! Lol.
Easier said than done but their is hope for Boeings most advanced jet..

[Anton Vind]

The 787 is completely different under the hood compared to a 777 compared to the differences of a 747-8 and 747-400.
Its remarkable that Boeing managed to get them to be common type ratings.
From a dev point of view Pmdg already have an excellent HUD, a great ECL from the 777 and probably screens from the Max. All they need now is the comms system for 787 and build the entire pure magic flight control system for the 787! Lol.
Easier said than done but their is hope for Boeings most advanced jet..

Yeah that’s some of the things I meant with commonality - they already got the HUD, ECL and probably also the screens since they confirmed the MAX sometime back. Of course there are internal differences in these components, but those will be accounted for. Interesting that the 777/787 share the same type rating now that they’re so different system wise..
Really hope it’s the 787 they’re working on, imagine what PMDG are capable of these days with the newest technology available etc.

Is this picture taken by you? Looks awesome!

[CANorm91]

The 787 is completely different under the hood compared to a 777 compared to the differences of a 747-8 and 747-400.
Its remarkable that Boeing managed to get them to be common type ratings.
From a dev point of view Pmdg already have an excellent HUD from the 737, a great ECL from the 777 which woukd be adapted for 787 specifics readily and screens from the Max. All they need now is the comms system for 787 and build the entire pure magic flight control system, the aircraft interface plus the integration etc of advanced RNP navigation for the 787! Lol.
Easier said than done but their is hope for Boeings most advanced jet..

Not to mention the fact the 787 has a feature where heading/altitude/speed changes and frequency changes can be uplinked by CPDLC, as evident by the XFR buttons on the MCP. The 787 would be perfect for showing off what GFO really can do.

[capnoz]

There is a lot more wrong with the QW 787 than just the terrible lighting.
To me it feels closer to a 767NG than the jet i fly for a living.
It misses the "feel" and theme of the 787 because without modelling many of its truly advanced features either at all or incorrectly you only get to see about 25% of what the jet has to offer.
The big thing missed is integration of all the various approach types and how it all integrates as a package.
IAN, RNAV,LNAV/VNAV,RNP AR,GLS, ILS etc.
Numerous features of those approaches are missing or simply incorrect in implementation and thats very disappointing.
The 787 is the first aircraft truly designed from a pilots view to easily fly every type of new approach which has come into play over the last 20 years. And not only that but to present the information on the status of the aircrafts position etc in an integrated manner thats easy to understand and assimilate rapidly.
The refinement of the HUD to a great tool, the extensive communications suite which is far more accessable for the crew to use is missed entirely as well.
The HUD in the QW 787 is basically unusable as their rendition of the bird ie the FPV jumps around all over the place losing one of its greatest assets. Guarranteed smooth landings, well almost!
Now the QW 787 is still ok but if i continually find myself disappointed when flying in in the sim.
The door remains firmly open for a great 787 to be done by Pmdg we can only hope they decide to walk through so you guys can see what the 787 is really like to fly.

Haha, NOW I really dont want to fly my QW787....

Peter Osborn

[Paulyg123]

Well I absolutely love the QW 787. It is so smooth to fly. But I be 100% for a PMDG 787 and buy on Day 1

[wjh308]

If the systems are not properly modeled on a modern airliner, it is NOT a sim, it is a game with little purpose.

[DavidP]

I'd pay for a PMDG 787 right now if I could.

[CANorm91]

I'd pay for a PMDG 787 right now if I could.

Me too!

Make it so, PMDG!

[mkear]

I'm not a part of the PMDG team so I have no inside knowledge of how they work. However based on being a customer for a long time, I can say they seem to be a conservative risk taker company. By that i mean they do extraordinarily good work - innovative and precise, beautiful even - but they dont take on too many risks at once.

MSFS is a fundamentally different platform. It would be prudent to convert an existing product, and add some innovations that incorporate features that take advantage of the new platform, then launch it to the market and see how it goes. So far nothing from PMDG has been released to the MSFS market - there's a lot they must be doing based on assumptions. Will people be prepared to pay the price they're going to charge? WIll enough people want a new PMDG product to justify the cost of developing it? Will the features they're going to add to the aircraft be enough to persuade enough people to buy it? And all the technical issues. No one knows - it's all assumption. Rather than go to all the trouble of developing a new product, it would be prudent to see how those assumptions work out in real life first, I'd have thought. And I would think, based on their past very sound behaviour, that's what PMDG will think too.

Again - guesses on my part - but I suspect there are a lot of PMDG developers working furiously away on projects on a carefully thought out plan. They have to maintain the existing products in all their versions, and work on new products for MSFS. PMDG must be a busy place right now. I honestly can't see them having time to breathe more than twice a day let alone put in the extraordinary amount of work to build an entirely new aircraft. Not yet.

Cheers
Mike Kear
Windsor, NSW, Australia

[Swaluver88]

I'm not a part of the PMDG team so I have no inside knowledge of how they work. However based on being a customer for a long time, I can say they seem to be a conservative risk taker company. By that i mean they do extraordinarily good work - innovative and precise, beautiful even - but they dont take on too many risks at once.

MSFS is a fundamentally different platform. It would be prudent to convert an existing product, and add some innovations that incorporate features that take advantage of the new platform, then launch it to the market and see how it goes. So far nothing from PMDG has been released to the MSFS market - there's a lot they must be doing based on assumptions. Will people be prepared to pay the price they're going to charge? WIll enough people want a new PMDG product to justify the cost of developing it? Will the features they're going to add to the aircraft be enough to persuade enough people to buy it? And all the technical issues. No one knows - it's all assumption. Rather than go to all the trouble of developing a new product, it would be prudent to see how those assumptions work out in real life first, I'd have thought. And I would think, based on their past very sound behaviour, that's what PMDG will think too.

Again - guesses on my part - but I suspect there are a lot of PMDG developers working furiously away on projects on a carefully thought out plan. They have to maintain the existing products in all their versions, and work on new products for MSFS. PMDG must be a busy place right now. I honestly can't see them having time to breathe more than twice a day let alone put in the extraordinary amount of work to build an entirely new aircraft. Not yet.

Cheers
Mike Kear
Windsor, NSW, Australia

I can tell you this even i myself is even debating if I wana walk away from MSFS currently. The use for it isn't there and to many things dont work hand in or hand and or can be fixed in a more flow able way. Its like having certain things that work but it can be better with extra work being put into those specifics.

[aceridgey]

Why do you have to make an exclusive decision? I use both. Have huge enjoyment flying VFR and light aircraft IFR on MSFS. The immersion is significantly better than P3d in my opinion. I fly the jets in P3d and VFR in MSFS.

Can't wait to get a complex in MSFS.

[Mad_X]

Yeah that’s some of the things I meant with commonality - they already got the HUD, ECL and probably also the screens since they confirmed the MAX sometime back. Of course there are internal differences in these components, but those will be accounted for. Interesting that the 777/787 share the same type rating now that they’re so different system wise..
Really hope it’s the 787 they’re working on, imagine what PMDG are capable of these days with the newest technology available etc.

Is this picture taken by you? Looks awesome!

You know that the MAX has none of these things. The only thing, and I mean the only thing the MAX and the 787 have in common are the rough general layout of the screens. I don’t even know if they have the same size.

But the 737 has no EICAS (one of the reason this plane is so antiquated) no system pages, no lower screen with the FMC etc.

[Anton Vind]

You know that the MAX has none of these things. The only thing, and I mean the only thing the MAX and the 787 have in common are the rough general layout of the screens. I don’t even know if they have the same size.

But the 737 has no EICAS (one of the reason this plane is so antiquated) no system pages, no lower screen with the FMC etc.

You quoted me but didn't seem to read through the quote, so let me quote myself from your quote that quotes me: "Of course there are internal differences in these components, but those will be accounted for." This means that it's the same component with small differences.

In addition to that, PMDG has already done the 747-8 and 777, which also share a level of commonality, so altogether, the 787 wouldn't be that much of a project from scratch, but rather a logical next step.

[Captain Kevin]

I'm not a part of the PMDG team so I have no inside knowledge of how they work. However based on being a customer for a long time, I can say they seem to be a conservative risk taker company. By that i mean they do extraordinarily good work - innovative and precise, beautiful even - but they dont take on too many risks at once.

MSFS is a fundamentally different platform. It would be prudent to convert an existing product, and add some innovations that incorporate features that take advantage of the new platform, then launch it to the market and see how it goes. So far nothing from PMDG has been released to the MSFS market - there's a lot they must be doing based on assumptions. Will people be prepared to pay the price they're going to charge? WIll enough people want a new PMDG product to justify the cost of developing it? Will the features they're going to add to the aircraft be enough to persuade enough people to buy it? And all the technical issues. No one knows - it's all assumption. Rather than go to all the trouble of developing a new product, it would be prudent to see how those assumptions work out in real life first, I'd have thought. And I would think, based on their past very sound behaviour, that's what PMDG will think too.

Again - guesses on my part - but I suspect there are a lot of PMDG developers working furiously away on projects on a carefully thought out plan. They have to maintain the existing products in all their versions, and work on new products for MSFS. PMDG must be a busy place right now. I honestly can't see them having time to breathe more than twice a day let alone put in the extraordinary amount of work to build an entirely new aircraft. Not yet.

You wouldn't even need to guess, either. Just have a look here:

https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-fo...iness-shall-we

They haven't released anything for MSFS because there's a lot of work that needs to be done in MSFS itself before it's able to support a product as complex as PMDG. And it's not even just PMDG, either. Several other developers are also stuck for the same reason.

[aceridgey]

Kevin, that's not strictly true. A lot of it is down to having to learn more modern coding as P3d you have to hack-it a little so to speak to get it to work. MSFS for newcomers and those competent on the coding language, but for current P3d companies, that takes a level of re-education/hiring people.

[FBWFTW]

I do agree. Right now, if I had to give an opinion on PMDG's next steps, I'd say to finish the 777, and bring all their fleet to MSFS, but after that, I think that any new PMDG aircraft will be so much fun to fly.
Honestly, I would like another Boeing, like the 727, 757, 767, or 787, but since there already are some choices of that in the market, probably it's not the most logical step. Anyway, as for now, PMDG has my full trust, and it'll be hard to make it go down, so unless they rip us off with an awful job (very unlikely), I'll still buy anything that comes out of tha house.

75/76 with all variants... Or a classic 727... Those would be my initial votes. I got the CS 76 and I’m not super impressed with it for the price. Took my chances but the FMC/system depth needs work for sure.

[CBT_Phoenix]

75/76 with all variants... Or a classic 727... Those would be my initial votes. I got the CS 76 and I’m not super impressed with it for the price. Took my chances but the FMC/system depth needs work for sure.

Yeah, the market lacks of good high quality 727, 757, and 767. The variants can surely be expansions, but at least the base of one of them would be a great add to the market. Nevertheless, that is to be considered after they're all done with the current projects.

I see the top priorities now (for the community) to bring the NG3 to life, and the 777 to P3Dv5, in addition to GFO.
From the most recent update, I'd assume there will be 7-10 months without any apparent changes, but due to the current situation with all the platforms, in 2021 we'll have a lot more to play with.

[FBWFTW]

Your priorities are backward... V5 needs the T7 first. Then GFO... THEN FS2020 can get worked on.

[Swaluver88]

Yeah, the market lacks of good high quality 727, 757, and 767. The variants can surely be expansions, but at least the base of one of them would be a great add to the market. Nevertheless, that is to be considered after they're all done with the current projects.

I see the top priorities now (for the community) to bring the NG3 to life, and the 777 to P3Dv5, in addition to GFO.
From the most recent update, I'd assume there will be 7-10 months without any apparent changes, but due to the current situation with all the platforms, in 2021 we'll have a lot more to play with.

Actually top should be 777, 737 BBJ, GFO, NG3, UNANNOUNCED PROJECT. That would be the order I would go in because the NG3 isn't coming out for a year plus most likely so keep that in the back of the file.cabinet

[Mickel]

Don’t forget the 772ER (assuming you haven’t made your 777 all things 777, not just the LR/F/W update) plus the things with propellers...

When you add it all up, there is a lot on their plate.

[Swaluver88]

Have any pmdg beer?

[Mickel]

Nope, sadly. It tends not to reach the antipodes. Besides, if they’re producing that they’re not focusing on the planes. :-)

[Swaluver88]

Pmdg wood Pegion ipa

[CBT_Phoenix]

Actually top should be 777, 737 BBJ, GFO, NG3, UNANNOUNCED PROJECT. That would be the order I would go in because the NG3 isn't coming out for a year plus most likely so keep that in the back of the file.cabinet

Definitely, for PMDG this would be the most logical order. My sorting was based on the community's (i.e: us) priorities.
Now if you guys all agree, I'd suggest getting back on the Icon A-5 for the next year or so 😁 (unless FSL or QW can get ahead of PMDG...)

[Swaluver88]

Definitely, for PMDG this would be the most logical order. My sorting was based on the community's (i.e: us) priorities.
Now if you guys all agree, I'd suggest getting back on the Icon A-5 for the next year or so 😁 (unless FSL or QW can get ahead of PMDG...)

Robert has the plans for the next 10 years i bet considering a new plane takes anywhere from 2 to 3 years to produce?

[CANorm91]

Robert has the plans for the next 10 years i bet considering a new plane takes anywhere from 2 to 3 years to produce?

It depends on the development tools and whether or not they've evolved enough to simplify certain tasks, not to mention if new platforms introduce new complexities that'll have to result in a change in the modus operandi.

[Minien]

"Technique" will do.

[[email protected]]

I have to say that the QW787 is visually pleasing and I appreciate all of their hard work! However, as a 787 APD (designee), it just doesn't cut it. VNAV, LNAV, etc., are all very inaccurate models and just don't function. By the way someone commented that the 777 and 787 are a common type rating. That is in error. You have to get a separate type rating for the 787, trust me, I issue the type ratings after their checkrides. Fingers crossed for a PMDG 787!!! Cheers~

[ProPilot85140]

AA or UA? You can PM me for privacy reasons if you’d like.

[SK331]

By the way someone commented that the 777 and 787 are a common type rating. That is in error. You have to get a separate type rating for the 787, trust me, I issue the type ratings after their checkrides.

The FAA says otherwise.

2. PILOT TYPE RATING REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Type Rating. The Boeing 787 is designated B-787. In accordance with the provisions of FAA Order 8900.1 and AC 120-53A, the B-777 and B-787 are assigned a common pilot type rating.

6.2 Type Ratings.
6.2.1 Oral and Written Tests. Oral examinations for the B-787 will be conducted prior to the Practical Test. If qualified on the B-777, the B-787 oral examination addresses differences between the two aircraft.

6.2.2 Practical Test. Practical tests may follow standard provisions of the pertinent CFR, or approved Line Operational Evaluation (LOE) provisions of AQP. If AQP LOEs apply, suitable LOEs should be available that are pertinent to the intended operations expected (e.g. oceanic scenarios, etc).

6.2.2.1 If qualified on the B-777, the B-787 practical test is a Differences Check as defined in AC 120-53A, with the purpose of addressing those differences between the two aircraft. The Differences Check is a Partial proficiency check which does not fully satisfy the recency requirements of a full proficiency check as defined in CFR Part 61.58. The elements of the Differences Check are designed to evaluate the differences between the 777 and 787, and are listed in Appendix 10. Operators choosing to reset the recency requirements for proficiency checks may administer a full proficiency check in lieu of the partial proficiency check.

https://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/fsb/b-787_fsb.pdf

[Wrap23]

The airlines may only qualify you in one at a time. However, if you instruct for Boeing, you teach both. I don't instruct for Boeing, but my retired buddy did a telephone interview before deciding he was going to enjoy retirement!

[Paulyg123]

This post is 4 months old with 90 replies. I read everyone just now and not 1 official reply from PMDG. So, I remain hopeful for a PMDG 787, but I am not holding my breath. I still love the QW787, but will buy a PMDG787 in a heartbeat.