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

Why I moved from flying the PMDG 737 NGXu to Fslabs A320

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Why I moved from flying the PMDG 737 NGXu to Fslabs A320

    I have been thinking about writing this for a while.

    Please note that this depicts my personal experience and only my own.

    I would love to get people’s opinions and feedback as well.

    I have been flying for the last 6 years and flying with the PMDG 737 NGX for the last 5 years.

    During these 5 years I would argue with everyone that it was the best depiction of the 737 (still is) and was what we called a fanboy as the 737 was the plane I would fly for 95% of the time (A2A cessna being the other one)

    The Fslabs A320 was released a couple years ago, I bought it but was not convinced. Performance was sluggish and the whole experience did not win me over.

    This is until I got back to it at the end of last year and now I only fly the PMDG 737 around once in a while to not lose the Boeing touch.

    Why so quick to abandon the PMDG 737? A plane that I have been flying for the past 5 years? I have put down below the reasons why I moved from one to the other.

    Ground services implementation:
    Fslabs has nailed this one, this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation and leveraging GSX which does it very well. The integration to simbrief is great as well to manage payload and fuel.

    The PMDG NGXu tries to do a good job but is clunky. PMDG why trying to create your own ground services instead of integrating with GSX?

    Performance:
    I mainly fly in VR for the PMDG, the 737 NGX was a joy in P3D v4. Moving to the 737 NGXu in P3D v5, I was pretty excited since there was an expectation of VR running better and on the new platform. Reality is the performance is worse for me in VR with P3D v5 which put me off.

    The Fslabs A320 performance is amazing in P3D v5 and looks great.

    Descent:
    The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.

    Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.

    Plane handling and approach:
    For context, I currently use a Saitek X52 and always disconnect AP at around 1nm from the runway

    Handling the Fslabs A320 is smooth like butter. The amount of precision this plane gives in handling is insane! The plane lands beautifully everytime.

    With the PMDG, I was only able to get the landing right 90% of the time (and thats in VR). Its only after using the A320 that I realised that the PMDG handling is actually not as precise as I thought. The plane reacts too quickly and lacks this gradual smoothness that the A320 has. What about this floating on the runway??? People that bring the nose too quickly when landing will recognize this. This never happens on the A320. Is this how the 737 responds in real life?

    I would love to get the community feedback on the above.

    Vincent Guerandel
    Last edited by vincent guerandel; 24Oct2020, 00:54. Reason: Forgot to sign

    #2
    First I have both and both are great study level aircraft. Fly what makes you happy

    For me there are several reasons that in order I prefer. PMDG (NGXu/QOTS II), Majestic Q400, FSL A319/320

    Most of it is a Boeing vs Airbus issue. Bottom line I prefer Boeing. (You fly a Boeing you program an Airbus) That is why I like the Majestic Q400 The sim gives me more of feeling that I'm flying the aircraft. The 737 and the A320 are apples and oranges. Real pilots that I know have told me they keep their hands on the Yoke and throttles flying a Boeing so they have feedback from the control movement on what the aircraft is doing before returning to hand flying the aircraft. That doesn't happen with a Airbus since nothing moves. In a Boeing I can at least look at the throttles and yoke to see what's happening before I take over. I can't in the A319/320

    As far as GSX the more I deal with it the less I like it. One of the things I like about my third party airports is they knocks out GSX's control of jetways. So the less said about GSX the better.

    Big one for me is ANY post by Emi on how to fly the NGXu. This is a real line 737 pilot giving you information on how to operate the 737. Plus having his insight in the Beta team is huge as we implement new features.

    Global Flight Operations This is the big one. PMDG has GFO FSL does not. Almost all of my sim time is in GFO now. 637 actual hours as of today. It's the main reason I have not been in a FSL aircraft in months. GFO has change my approach to simming. I'm under a NDA so I won't go into detail but it will evolve flight simulation.

    But I will say this: After GFO goes public if an aircraft is not GFO capable I won't buy it.
    Charles Harris KRTS The Valley of Speed
    ASUS ROG Strix B450-F, Ryzen 3700X, 1TB 970 Neo M2,1TB SSD, RX 5700XT 8GB, 32GB DDR4 3200

    Comment


    • Julian Speer
      Julian Speer commented
      Editing a comment
      Ditto with your opinion of the Majestic Q400. Any simmer who craves study-level simulation and ultra high fidelity flight dynamics owes it to themself to own the Q400. A uncompromised masterpiece and arguably the only aircraft add-on for either FSX or P3D that has ever properly simulated a turboprop (no pun intended).

    #3
    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
    I have been thinking about writing this for a while.

    Please note that this depicts my personal experience and only my own.

    I would love to get people’s opinions and feedback as well.

    I have been flying for the last 6 years and flying with the PMDG 737 NGX for the last 5 years.

    During these 5 years I would argue with everyone that it was the best depiction of the 737 (still is) and was what we called a fanboy as the 737 was the plane I would fly for 95% of the time (A2A cessna being the other one)

    The Fslabs A320 was released a couple years ago, I bought it but was not convinced. Performance was sluggish and the whole experience did not win me over.

    This is until I got back to it at the end of last year and now I only fly the PMDG 737 around once in a while to not lose the Boeing touch.

    Why so quick to abandon the PMDG 737? A plane that I have been flying for the past 5 years? I have put down below the reasons why I moved from one to the other.

    Ground services implementation:
    Fslabs has nailed this one, this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation and leveraging GSX which does it very well. The integration to simbrief is great as well to manage payload and fuel.

    The PMDG NGXu tries to do a good job but is clunky. PMDG why trying to create your own ground services instead of integrating with GSX?

    Performance:
    I mainly fly in VR for the PMDG, the 737 NGX was a joy in P3D v4. Moving to the 737 NGXu in P3D v5, I was pretty excited since there was an expectation of VR running better and on the new platform. Reality is the performance is worse for me in VR with P3D v5 which put me off.

    The Fslabs A320 performance is amazing in P3D v5 and looks great.

    Descent:
    The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.

    Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.

    Plane handling and approach:
    For context, I currently use a Saitek X52 and always disconnect AP at around 1nm from the runway

    Handling the Fslabs A320 is smooth like butter. The amount of precision this plane gives in handling is insane! The plane lands beautifully everytime.

    With the PMDG, I was only able to get the landing right 90% of the time (and thats in VR). Its only after using the A320 that I realised that the PMDG handling is actually not as precise as I thought. The plane reacts too quickly and lacks this gradual smoothness that the A320 has. What about this floating on the runway??? People that bring the nose too quickly when landing will recognize this. This never happens on the A320. Is this how the 737 responds in real life?

    I would love to get the community feedback on the above.

    Vincent Guerandel
    The buses just offer so much more at the moment until gfo comes out lnav module update there’s loads of room for improvement pmdg got great pbr,great efb,greatmodeling, fs labs it’s way above in the rest of the departments specially in the immersion and simulation side of things sounds are amazing lights icing effects rain etc etc the aircraft actually flys proper lnav and vnab it’s not perfect far from it and there’s loads of features missing in the mcdu and improvement specially in the model but I do believe the sharklets expansion with the efb will be another game changer one thing I don’t agree with you is the way it flies you can’t compare a Boeing and a bus they don’t fly and dont feel the same way but they both have positives and negatives the maddog it’s an incredible bird from leonardo right up there if not the best at the moment specially the faults module even the battery in the efb it’s simulated if you have not tried it you should the flight envelope it’s just amazing the dash 400 love it as well but the development it’s like they have stopped in the time it needs updates to bring it up to scratch ASAP but this is just my opinion
    Duarte Vieira

    Comment


      #4
      Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
      Descent:
      The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.

      Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.

      Vincent Guerandel
      Just my two cents on this since it seems to be taboo among flight simmers to use speedbrakes on a jet, even though they're built into the airframe for the reason to dump lift.
      Modern wings are very efficient, so the tool called 'speedbrakes' were built into the wing to help spoil that efficient wing.
      Why would a pilot not use a tool at his/her disposal?
      I believe this is more a Flight Simmer thing that has become the 'norm' and not based on any real world data.

      I fly quite frequently (at least until COVID-19 reared it's ugly head) for work, travelling about 50-70 flights per year...I average a round trip every two weeks.
      I can say that speedbrakes are used in almost every flight...both in Boeing and Airbus aircraft. It's rare when speedbrakes are not used in my experience.

      I'm not a airline pilot (I do fly private aircraft).
      In reality, the real world isn't perfect like a simulator world, but I would venture the following reasons why speedbrakes are used frequently:
      Traffic - ATC keeps you high for traffic
      Fuel Savings - stay high longer (not sure on this one)
      Weather...

      Maybe some of our airline pilot friends on the forum will chime in on this?
      Last edited by netshadoe; 24Oct2020, 03:09.
      Devin Pollock
      CYOW

      Comment


        #5
        Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
        I have been thinking about writing this for a while.

        Please note that this depicts my personal experience and only my own.

        I would love to get people’s opinions and feedback as well.

        I have been flying for the last 6 years and flying with the PMDG 737 NGX for the last 5 years.

        During these 5 years I would argue with everyone that it was the best depiction of the 737 (still is) and was what we called a fanboy as the 737 was the plane I would fly for 95% of the time (A2A cessna being the other one)

        The Fslabs A320 was released a couple years ago, I bought it but was not convinced. Performance was sluggish and the whole experience did not win me over.

        This is until I got back to it at the end of last year and now I only fly the PMDG 737 around once in a while to not lose the Boeing touch.

        Why so quick to abandon the PMDG 737? A plane that I have been flying for the past 5 years? I have put down below the reasons why I moved from one to the other.

        Ground services implementation:
        Fslabs has nailed this one, this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation and leveraging GSX which does it very well. The integration to simbrief is great as well to manage payload and fuel.

        The PMDG NGXu tries to do a good job but is clunky. PMDG why trying to create your own ground services instead of integrating with GSX?

        Performance:
        I mainly fly in VR for the PMDG, the 737 NGX was a joy in P3D v4. Moving to the 737 NGXu in P3D v5, I was pretty excited since there was an expectation of VR running better and on the new platform. Reality is the performance is worse for me in VR with P3D v5 which put me off.

        The Fslabs A320 performance is amazing in P3D v5 and looks great.

        Descent:
        The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.

        Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.

        Plane handling and approach:
        For context, I currently use a Saitek X52 and always disconnect AP at around 1nm from the runway

        Handling the Fslabs A320 is smooth like butter. The amount of precision this plane gives in handling is insane! The plane lands beautifully everytime.

        With the PMDG, I was only able to get the landing right 90% of the time (and thats in VR). Its only after using the A320 that I realised that the PMDG handling is actually not as precise as I thought. The plane reacts too quickly and lacks this gradual smoothness that the A320 has. What about this floating on the runway??? People that bring the nose too quickly when landing will recognize this. This never happens on the A320. Is this how the 737 responds in real life?

        I would love to get the community feedback on the above.

        Vincent Guerandel
        You can’t compare a 320 and 737 they behave completely different in real world. The 320 is a fly by wire airplane the 737 isn’t. The 737 is a much more slippery aircraft they use the speed brakes more in the real world with it.
        Weston Hall

        Comment


        • Ralgh
          Ralgh commented
          Editing a comment
          I have 21 years experience flyting between the 737-800 and the A320 family of aircraft. They are both very slippery and I'd even say the Airbus is a bit more than the 737.

        #6
        Thanks everyone for your responses and being respectful in your answers. They are very insightful to say the least.

        It seems that even though I have been flying for the last 6 years, I still have a lot to learn.

        I will definitely check out the Majestic Q400, Global Flight Operations and these famous Emi posts.

        Finally any advice on how I could take my experience with flying the 737 further?


        Vincent Guerandel

        Comment


        • Snowfalcon
          Snowfalcon commented
          Editing a comment
          Turboprop Airliners are fun into small regional airfields. IMHO the Majestic Q400 is the best one out there. There are places 737/A319 should just not go. KTEX comes to mind. I'm sure Dan has a list of other locations.

        #7
        Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post

        Finally any advice on how I could take my experience with flying the 737 further?


        Vincent Guerandel
        One simple advice: disconnect AP above 1000' AFE on final
        ZHU Hai
        B737 Ground instructor

        Comment


          #8
          Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
          Thanks everyone for your responses and being respectful in your answers. They are very insightful to say the least.

          Finally any advice on how I could take my experience with flying the 737 further?


          Vincent Guerandel
          If you want a challenge, don't use LNAV or VNAV and fly a route using good only VOR/ADF/DME navigation. In other words, don't fly the magenta line (switch off of map on the ND and onto VOR).

          Once you get comfortable with that, stop using the autopilot at all and start hand flying the entire route.

          I do old fashioned navigation completely hand flown from time to time. It's great fun.
          James Ward

          Comment


            #9
            One other thing!!!

            There is NO substitute for proper planning and knowing your aircraft. Remember the "P"s

            Previous
            Proper
            Planning
            Prevents
            Poor
            Performance

            Doesn't matter what you fly. As an example I have learned to look at the distances and altitudes between waypoints on my approaches after I load the plan from SimBrief. Especially in the 737-800/900 with any kind of load on. That Airframe does NOT want to slow down. Waypoints that are close in distance with large gaps in altitude are red flags. I try always give myself time to slow the aircraft down. If I have to I adjust speed at waypoints the time is just after it's loaded into the FMC. If needed request ATC to start the descent early.

            And as discussed in another thread trying to grease the landing with the softest touchdown is asking for disaster. There is a reason there is a "Flight Detent" on the speedbrake. Don't be afraid to use it.
            Charles Harris KRTS The Valley of Speed
            ASUS ROG Strix B450-F, Ryzen 3700X, 1TB 970 Neo M2,1TB SSD, RX 5700XT 8GB, 32GB DDR4 3200

            Comment


              #10
              The 737-800 SSW is extremely slippery. Even with ACARS uplinked winds aloft and QNH entered in the descent planning, the AC tends to run hot and speed brakes might have to be used. Every once in a while you’ll nail a perfect idle descent profile and be idle all the way from TOD to 1500” AGL but in real life you’ll get a short cut, ATC vector, early descent or crossing that will force you to use the SB. Perfectly normal. Actually I much prefer the way the NG handles VNAV descent than the Airbus product and I think it’s just due to the complexity of the system and not every pilot even on the line truly understands it.

              Eric Blais

              Comment


                #11
                Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.

                Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.
                Having flown on the A320 and the 737 before, I can't say I have ever seen an instance when the speed brakes were NOT used on either aircraft.
                Captain Kevin

                Kevin Yang

                Comment


                  #12
                  I completely understand what you mean! I also have both products, and like flying both, and like both for their realism feel or lack of one. My wishes about this one having what the other one has, or vice versa are just that, wishes. Let's wait and see what will both teams bring in the future. Take care and stay safe
                  Ivan Majetic

                  Comment


                    #13
                    I really don't understand OP's post.

                    I own both, and fly both reasonably equally (though they are by far not the only aircraft I fly) I find they are both the exemplar for their chosen airframe(s).

                    Many of the issues OP has seem to be regarding the flying characteristics of the real aircraft - yes you may not need brakes so often in the bus because the real vnav in an airbus is superior to a 737 - that just means descent planing in the 737 needs more care.

                    I'd note that I have never once been on a real 737 flight where the speed brakes weren't used at some point in the descent - that's what they are for! The 'boards of shame' joke is just playful banter, not poor airmanship. The 738 is a particularly slippery aircraft and demands respect during descent.

                    Enjoy both, and happy flying



                    Mr. James Alexander.

                    Comment


                      #14
                      Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post


                      Ground services implementation:
                      Fslabs has nailed this one, this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation and leveraging GSX which does it very well. The integration to simbrief is great as well to manage payload and fuel.

                      The PMDG NGXu tries to do a good job but is clunky. PMDG why trying to create your own ground services instead of integrating with GSX?


                      Vincent Guerandel
                      I do agree with you on that point. I asked a couple of days ago in the BBJ preview post if there were plans to implement the GSX integration like Fslabs does and the answer was something like: " forget it!"

                      I would also see the implementation of Icing/de-icing simulation as a feature to add to PMDG aircrafts,. And before someone claims that the fslabs icing simulation is unrealistic: it's better than nothing. May be an opportunity for PMDG to do it better!
                      Last edited by VoyagerP3D; 24Oct2020, 16:54.
                      Christian Mbeumo

                      Comment


                        #15
                        Originally posted by Snowfalcon View Post
                        First I have both and both are great study level aircraft. Fly what makes you happy


                        Global Flight Operations This is the big one. PMDG has GFO FSL does not. Almost all of my sim time is in GFO now. 637 actual hours as of today. It's the main reason I have not been in a FSL aircraft in months. GFO has change my approach to simming. I'm under a NDA so I won't go into detail but it will evolve flight simulation.

                        But I will say this: After GFO goes public if an aircraft is not GFO capable I won't buy it.
                        Hoppie acars integration in fslabs is not that bad. Together with GSX automated integration (not the best add-on, but what would be our simmer life without GSX memes ?) the immersion is given
                        Christian Mbeumo

                        Comment


                          #16
                          Thank you for this post! I have loved using the PMDG 737 for years and it remains my 'go to' airliner. After years of Level-D 767 and PMDG flying I find I am very comfortable with the Boeing FMC and I tend to be a creature of habit. I must say though I have been tempted to get the FSL A320 to try it out. I continue to save my loonies. I am not a huge fan of GSX as I find it tends to crash however I do enjoy the push back function as it seems to be very accurate.

                          Based on previews photos and videos of the FSL A320 I find the text hard to read on the displays. Not the case for the PMDG (or Boeings overall?) Maybe I'm getting old

                          All the best,
                          Dan
                          Last edited by Dan Pergau; 24Oct2020, 18:05.
                          Dan Pergau
                          Barrie, Ontario
                          i7-10700K, 32gb-3200mhz - GTX1080 - Dell U3415W

                          Comment


                          • Ephedrin
                            Ephedrin commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Yes, if it wasn't for the pushback I wouldn't use it at all.

                          #17
                          I have purchased many addon airplanes for P3D but I fly very few reguarily. Those are the PMDGs, the FSLs, Leonardo's Maddog (base), the Q400 and A2A's Pipers and the Bonanza and the Milviz Kingair. I'm not really sure though why people constantly praise the Q400's turboprop simulation. It's a FADEC airplane so there isn't much to do at all and regarding the engine simulation itself there are too many issues with low thrust settings and fuel consumption as I would seriously glorify it. The Milviz King Air is a LOT better if you really care about and (want to) understand turboprop engines. Its only issue is the very bad resolution of the currently available multi engine throttle controllers.

                          Ragarding FSL and PMDG, both have their advantages and both appeal different tastes. For ME the GSX implementation goes way too far, many things can only be simulated properly if you use GSX. It works without GSX of course but it's cumbersome. I really really hope FSL will implement GFO instead of GSX (of course as a choice), their ATSU simluation perfectly suits it. Neither PMDG nor FSL comment on questions regarding that but it would really be amazing to fly the Airbuses in the GFO realm. Same for the Leonardo MD-82 etc and the TFDi MD11 once released. But back to "FSL vs PMDG", they simulate completely different airplanes that are only comparable from the passengers' point of view. Regarding performance the A321 runs better on my system than the NGXu but the A320 and A319 don't. The 747 works a lot better than all of them.

                          Nonetheless I love all of the mentioned addons and I fly all of them as much as possible between my private stuff and work And now I finally need to jump into that BBJ and dash her through GFO :P
                          i7-6700k, GTX 1080TI, 32GB DDR4 RAM @2666MHz, 4k
                          Marc Ehnle

                          Comment


                            #18

                            This is my personal opinion but gsx is my last concern i had it in the past but i use it more and i don't mind even not having a connected jetway; I am a former generation simmer or at the time you had to imagine everything in the early 2000's (this must be the reason)

                            The A320 and the 737 are very different and the only thing that have in common is the number of passengers carried their interpretations at FSL and PMDG are the best on mainstream computer.

                            Finally kept things essential and made touch and go while manual (I happen to do it for 1 hour in a row you will see that this is trying and tiring) fly with raw data and made visual approach as soon as you can this is how we learned (it's a simulator, enjoy !!)

                            Cedrice
                            Cedrice Rive

                            Comment


                              #19
                              i love them both.. started with pmdg, still fly mostly pmdg.. i do love that fslabs a320 tho. however i wish they'd do some more pmdg things -- key assignments and service based failures are 2 biggies. also dont like how it doesnt _completely_ save your panel state like a pmdg -- you have to go turn on the transponder every time, etc.


                              Mike Teague - p3dv5 - B736 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748

                              Comment


                                #20
                                While I do agree with fly with whichever makes you happy, I for one am extremely pleased with the NGXu, I for one did not purchase the original NGX in 2011, for the longest time I had always wondered why everyone went crazy and loved the NGX, then I bought the NGXu and realized that wow I had no idea I liked the 737! For many years I had only flown the 777 and 747, but now I really like flying the NGXu!
                                Nafsir Khandaker -Private Pilot working towards Instrument rating.

                                Comment


                                  #21
                                  Originally posted by Dan Pergau View Post
                                  I continue to save my loonies.
                                  Only those who are Canadian or know the Canadian lingo get this one! Just like a Double/Double! lol!!! 😆
                                  Devin Pollock
                                  CYOW

                                  Comment


                                    #22
                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    Ground services implementation:
                                    Fslabs has nailed this one, this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation and leveraging GSX which does it very well. The integration to simbrief is great as well to manage payload and fuel.

                                    The PMDG NGXu tries to do a good job but is clunky. PMDG why trying to create your own ground services instead of integrating with GSX?
                                    I'll be blunt here: Because GSX is simply bullshit. Couldn't be further from real life handling. It has some nice visuals though...
                                    Every time I fly the FSL Airbus my turnarounds get at least ten minutes longer than they'd have to be because GSX is not able to handle the sequence of events on the ground properly.
                                    When we come on block in real life the fuel truck is there, the baggage carts are ready and waiting, the busses are there and ready to go.
                                    With GSX it sometimes wasts 3 or more minutes even to get those vehicles to your stand as they're coming from the other side of the airport. I posted all of the following critique points in the GSX forums by the way, but mainly got ignored, beaten around the bush, or just plainly deleted.

                                    Then fueling and loading or baggage: Doesn't happen at the same time in GSX. First one, then the other. Why on earth is that? There's plenty of space around the airplane to do all that simoultaniously.

                                    On to boarding: Again, why do we wait so long for the busses to arrive? Why are they coming from the other side of the airport, drive on taxiways, etc.?
                                    And why is GSX only using a single bus to board 230 people into an A321, with said bus having to drive the tour several times to get you the passengers.

                                    Then on to pushback: Why do they only connect the truck once everything else is done? Why not connect it the moment the jetway/stairs are removed, why doesn't the dispatcher do the walkaround before, so that he's actually ready for pushback when you select it?
                                    Again, wasting time.

                                    Now off we go to the pushback: Once we waited for a year to get the ground checks done we finally start moving. And once we stopped in position it keeps everything connected and waits until both engines are stable, before it even starts removing the equipment. Another minute wasted.
                                    And once everything is disconnected it takes *another* minute until the ground staff is actually clear of everything so that we can start to taxi.
                                    In GSX a typical pushback sequence takes around 5 minutes for a simple face left/right from the moment you press the "request pushback" button for the first time, until you can start to move.
                                    In real life we can do it in 2 minutes.

                                    GSX has about the most inefficient ground handling processes I could imagine.

                                    Using PMDGs ground services I can do the same turnaround with the same manouvers usually in around ten minutes less.

                                    Take note at this point that this is my opinion and I do not speak for PMDG.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    this is the closest to reality by far with the ATSU implementation
                                    I wish we had anything like this in real life in our 737's..... not saying there are no airlines that might have anything like it, but in my airline the only datalink stuff we have is the most basic three CPDLC commands. Nothing else.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    Descent:
                                    The Fslabs A320 nails the descent. Speedbrakes are almost optional and the plane is always on target.
                                    I kindly disagree. A *real* nailed descent would mean you don't need thrust a single time until established on final with the gear down and at final approach speed.
                                    The FSL bus usually puts me level somewhere 5-6NM ahead of the FAF/FAP, decellerates much faster than VNAV anticipates, which leads to a thrust requirement.
                                    That happens ALL the time, on every single approach.
                                    I also often need thrust or drag on normal VNAV descents if there's a noticable greater than 50 knots head or tailwind, despite doing the wind entry correctly.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    Ah PMDG 737... I cant count the amount of time speed brakes are being used or trying to rectify the descent. However I am not sure if this is a Boeing issue. Happy for you guys to confirm.
                                    Welcome to real life. Thermals, unpredicted winds, early speed reductions, anti ice, there are so many things that kill the planned path, you pretty much end up using the ATC lever on about every flight in the 737.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    For context, I currently use a Saitek X52 and always disconnect AP at around 1nm from the runway
                                    That does not exactly give you a lot of experience handflying the aircraft... but nontheless:

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    Handling the Fslabs A320 is smooth like butter.
                                    Welcome to the world of Fly-By-Wire. You have a computer constantly doing small corrections for you. I call that cheating!

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    The amount of precision this plane gives in handling is insane!
                                    At which point is the NGXu any less precise? I can fly it exactly on LOC/GS until 50ft, when you're supposed to change your viewpoint away from the instruments for landing anyway.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    The plane lands beautifully everytime.

                                    With the PMDG, I was only able to get the landing right 90% of the time (and thats in VR). Its only after using the A320 that I realised that the PMDG handling is actually not as precise as I thought. The plane reacts too quickly and lacks this gradual smoothness that the A320 has.
                                    You still don't quite say why the 737 lands worse. It surely handles a bit different than the Airbus, I would hope so with several multi million dollar flight computers less installed, but it can be flown just as precise if you know your pitch/power values. Just like the A320.

                                    Originally posted by vincent guerandel View Post
                                    What about this floating on the runway??? People that bring the nose too quickly when landing will recognize this.
                                    If you follow correct techniques from the Flight Crew Training Manual this is not an issue. Only if you hold the plane off the runway or keep the power on during the flare it tends to float.
                                    If you use the correct way of flying it onto the runway you can perfectly put it on the aiming point at a good rate of descent, without floating.
                                    However, especially with Flap 30 the 737 can float if you try to hold it off the ground. That's realistic behaviour.
                                    At Flap 40 it should have a bit less of a tendency to float than it currently does. But to my understanding that is a flight simulator limitation.
                                    Last edited by Emi; 25Oct2020, 21:55.

                                    Comment


                                      #23
                                      I don't post much here but I just had to login to say Thank you Emi! for the post above.

                                      Comment


                                        #24
                                        Originally posted by Emi View Post
                                        On to boarding: Again, why do we wait so long for the busses to arrive? Why are they coming from the other side of the airport, drive on taxiways, etc.?
                                        This just comes down to the way the AFCAD for that particular airport is set up. If the AFCAD for the scenery has vehicle parking and vehicle paths, the GSX vehicles will use those. If it doesn't, the GSX vehicles don't know they're there, so they end up using the taxiways, or worse, the runways.
                                        Originally posted by Emi View Post
                                        Using PMDGs ground services I can do the same turnaround with the same manouvers usually in around ten minutes less.
                                        That depends on the airplane. In the case of the 737, I agree, PMDG ground services can do it faster. When it comes to the 747, on the other hand, GSX can do it faster, even with all the aforementioned delays that you mentioned. The auto ground turn on the 747 is set up, so you select if you want a short turn or a long turn, followed by how much fuel you want. So you get either a 90-minute turn or a 120-minute turn. With the 737, you enter how many passengers you want to board and how much fuel and cargo you want to load, and it adjusts the time accordingly. I've not used the PMDG ground services on the 777, so I can't comment on that, but I am pretty sure it works the same as it does on the 747.
                                        Captain Kevin

                                        Kevin Yang

                                        Comment


                                          #25
                                          Some great nuggets here... thanks Emi! I'll have to work with the PMDG pushback some more.

                                          Dan
                                          Dan Pergau
                                          Barrie, Ontario
                                          i7-10700K, 32gb-3200mhz - GTX1080 - Dell U3415W

                                          Comment


                                            #26
                                            Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                                            This just comes down to the way the AFCAD for that particular airport is set up. If the AFCAD for the scenery has vehicle parking and vehicle paths, the GSX vehicles will use those. If it doesn't, the GSX vehicles don't know they're there, so they end up using the taxiways, or worse, the runways.
                                            True, but now tell me *any* modern scenery that has those spots.... truth is, simply no developer implements those. Yet GSX keeps insisting on it for years while it's simply not happening.
                                            One would think that if you tried for years and things are not happening you would change your approach and program something different.
                                            Yet it doens't happen.
                                            Now is that the airport developers fault, where hundrets of devs do the same thing, or maybe the GSX developers problem?

                                            Comment


                                            • Captain Kevin
                                              Captain Kevin commented
                                              Editing a comment
                                              The cargo loaders, tug, and if applicable, stairs, are already at the gate when you select a gate. The only ones not at the gate already are the catering trucks and the fuel truck. Are those normally at the gate already when you arrive?

                                            • Emi
                                              Emi commented
                                              Editing a comment
                                              Indeed the fuel truck is normally there as well Kevin. My airline only caters once per day, before the first flight of the day. That's usually long done by the time we arrive at the aircraft.

                                            • Captain Kevin
                                              Captain Kevin commented
                                              Editing a comment
                                              Copy. I guess procedures vary based on where you are. At least in places where I've flown, I've never seen the catering trucks or fuel truck already at the gate. Though to be fair, I think a lot of the larger airports I fly to have underground fueling anyway.

                                            #27
                                            Originally posted by Emi View Post
                                            True, but now tell me *any* modern scenery that has those spots.... truth is, simply no developer implements those.
                                            Flightbeam does this with their KIAD scenery, actually. Go 1:20:11 into this video:

                                            https://www.twitch.tv/videos/756502209
                                            Originally posted by Emi View Post
                                            One would think that if you tried for years and things are not happening you would change your approach and program something different.
                                            Yet it doens't happen.
                                            Now is that the airport developers fault, where hundrets of devs do the same thing, or maybe the GSX developers problem?
                                            That I couldn't tell you, but do you have any better ideas? Other than using the AFCAD, the rest of the airport is just texture files, so I don't know how you'd get it to go based off of texture files. I don't know if the airport developers even take GSX into consideration when they do their airports.
                                            Captain Kevin

                                            Kevin Yang

                                            Comment


                                              #28
                                              Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                                              Flightbeam does this with their KIAD scenery, actually. Go 1:20:11 into this video:
                                              I didn't know FlightBeam actually this, great! This point goes to you then!
                                              They must be the only ones though.

                                              Originally posted by Captain Kevin View Post
                                              That I couldn't tell you, but do you have any better ideas? Other than using the AFCAD, the rest of the airport is just texture files, so I don't know how you'd get it to go based off of texture files. I don't know if the airport developers even take GSX into consideration when they do their airports.
                                              Indeed. First of all: Why spawn the vehicles so far away from the aircraft. Why not just spawn them anywhere nearby, why in fact not make it possible to include roads, spawn locations, etc. in the airport config file?
                                              You're right of course that you can not read anything from texture files, but you *can* make it possible to edit the locations of roads, etc. in the GSX airport config file.
                                              You could also write a tool which is able to read the airports AFCAD and then automatically generate such a config file, if roads, etc. are included in the AFCAD.
                                              Technically that should not be very hard.

                                              Comment


                                              • mglan80
                                                mglan80 commented
                                                Editing a comment
                                                I never understood the spawn rationale either. It takes ages and honestly makes me want to use it less and less. If there's no jetway, I'm not loading the pax via GSX.

                                              #29
                                              Originally posted by Emi View Post
                                              Indeed. First of all: Why spawn the vehicles so far away from the aircraft. Why not just spawn them anywhere nearby, why in fact not make it possible to include roads, spawn locations, etc. in the airport config file?
                                              You're right of course that you can not read anything from texture files, but you *can* make it possible to edit the locations of roads, etc. in the GSX airport config file.
                                              You could also write a tool which is able to read the airports AFCAD and then automatically generate such a config file, if roads, etc. are included in the AFCAD.
                                              Technically that should not be very hard.
                                              It's been hit or miss where they pop up if there's no vehicle parking locations. I've had it happen where they did start from a far away location. Likewise, I have also seen them pop up somewhere nearby right in front of my face, so it really is random at that point. How that gets determined, I have no idea.
                                              Captain Kevin

                                              Kevin Yang

                                              Comment


                                                #30
                                                I'll join discussion here.
                                                There are thousands of things that should be implented/changed in gsx long time ago, but to these days they are not. Simply because at this point the developer is passive when it comes to developing. The only reason this add-on still gets any updates is becuase of competetive fs2crew ground services.
                                                Few examples:
                                                -Two weeks after the release of ugcx, GSX recived big update with new voices from ground crew (something that ugcx has)
                                                - shortly after we recived another big update with quick-pushback (the same fuction as ugcx have)
                                                year has passed and what else we got? Gpu cart? which brining to aircraft takes longer than the turnaround time?

                                                -Why not implent remote de-iceing stands.
                                                -Why not update the cistern fuel truck so we actually woudn't need to fuel 737 only with this truck (forgot the word: https://previews.123rf.com/images/ym...ne-airport.jpg)
                                                -Why not add a line between cones on pax side of the aircraft: (you have to stop video at around 7:11) https://youtu.be/U3T46yWOb28?t=430
                                                -Why GSX can't detect airstairs. ( I have to call for gsx again after I extend airstairs)

                                                Theses are only 4 things that I can recall but obviosuly there are thousands more.
                                                [edit] I see I mentioned only few things for 737 but these are only I can recalll rn)
                                                [edit2]: why only 1 bus with pax and not 2 or 3? Why can't I disable crew boarding...

                                                gsx developer is simply greedy
                                                Last edited by Dzosef; 26Oct2020, 16:47.
                                                Matthew Chalupniczak

                                                Comment

                                                Working...
                                                X