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

Disappointed to say the least (777-200ER expansion)

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

    Disappointed to say the least (777-200ER expansion)

    Hello all,

    I've been looking forward to picking up the 777-200ER expansion since the day it was teased, and this morning I did. Sadly, I am severely disappointed. I've been a long time supporter of PMDG, and have always loved their goal of creating complete and incredible products, however, I feel the 777-200ER was highly rushed, overlooked and incomplete.

    Sounds:

    The new GE, PW and RR all seem to have extremely similar sounds above 85% thrust. They all have this high-pitched whining sound, and I'm unable to differentiate the sounds at this thrust % between the PW and RR.

    It is quite obvious that sounds were recycled from other products, including the 747-8, which I recognized GE engine sounds on the climb out.

    When starting up and shutting down the RRs, GE sounds seem to play.

    The engine sounds also sound extremely muted in the cockpit vs. the previous 777 versions.

    To sum up, in actuality, this is a stark contrast to what was advertised for this product on February 10th:

    "PMDG's custom sound engine, a completely overhauled sound set that includes sound randomization, engine character capability and improved overall sound quality."

    Textures:

    In my opinion, this is the most overlooked and rushed portion of the product.

    The inner part of the PW engines is left completely untextured:
    unknown (1).png unknown (2).png image_10521.png

    The GE90-94Bs have the GE90-115B textures with curved fan blades, even though the 94s do not have curved fan blades in real life. It is clear these were just recycled from the -LR variant further adding to the impression that this was a rushed element of the product, further contradicting advertised statements:

    "an engirely new set of external models that include PBR surfaces and new texture properties"

    Albeit, attempts were made, the execution of this element is poor.

    unknown (3).png 1280px-SVGE90.png 1024px-GE90_B777-200LR.png

    Furthermore, the engine spinner textures are extremely low quality, to the point that it looks like an AI model texture.

    The glareshield leaves much to be desired. As you can see below, it is not evenly textured, there are different colours and light reflection even though they are the same material in real life:

    Screenshot 2021-02-27 154802.png unnamed.jpg

    The specular maps have 737-style window shapes, so they do not match the modelled windows of the 777. This causes a black outline in the sim around all windows when up close:

    Screenshot 2021-02-27 160016.png

    There are other minor issues plastered throughout this product, however, I do not have time to find the appropriate evidence to provide constructive feedback nor should I really have to raise this for an expansion of such an exorbitant price.

    Overall, I am pretty disappointed with the quality of this expansion. PMDG are known for their high-quality, however, this feels like a rushed product with major flaws in the quality assurance.

    It is a shame to see PMDG no longer being the leader in innovation within the flight simulation sector. I am looking forward to potential updates and hope my criticism is taken on board to take this addon to the normal PMDG standard we all expect and love.

    Until then, this addon will be parked in my hangar for the foreseeable.

    - Mike Jones
    Last edited by Cpt_Mike; 27Feb2021, 22:25.
    - Mike Jones

    #2
    I think most people agree with you. I bought the 200ER addition today. I was curious about the EFB and it's value to the product. I must admit I do not know much about programming and simulation design. I am just a long time loyal costumer.
    I installed the B777 today knowing the cockpit textures would sadly remain unchanged. I was hoping for an enhanced product though. Lots of hype on various Facebook groups etc. I was exited about the new update/product.
    Bottom line, nothing has really changed. It is the same thing to the average costumer. The sounds are bit better, ground handling slightly enhanced and the addition of the EFB.
    In a way it is a bit frustrating, as I really want PMDG to excel. I really want them to do better and build on their past accomplishments. I am just disappointed. I honestly feel they lost focus on what the costumer really want and expect.




    Christian Fretland
    Last edited by Eurosky; 27Feb2021, 23:17.

    Comment


      #3
      Hi Mike,

      could you raise those issues in a support ticket please? I'm sure PMDG will check them out and fix them with the coming updates!

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Eurosky View Post
        I think most people agree with you. I bought the 200ER addition today. I was curious about the EFB and it's value to the product. I must admit do not know anything about programming and simulation design. I am just a long time loyal costumer.
        I installed the B777 today knowing the cockpit textures would remain unchanged. I was hoping for an enhanced product though. Lots of hype on various Facebook groups etc. I was exited about the new update/product.
        Bottom line, nothing has really changed. It is the same thing to the average consumer. The sounds are bit better, ground handling slightly enhanced and the EFB.
        In a way it is a bit frustrating, as I really want PMDG to excel. I really want them to do better and build on their past accomplishments. I am just disappointed. I honestly feel they lost focus on what the costumer really wants.
        (What the costumer want is new and improved cockpit textures, accurate and precise navigation tracking and a functional Acars system with CPDLC, ATIS and weather uplinks etc).



        Christian Fretland
        Hi Christian,

        the rough contents of the update were outlined by RSR in several preview topics before release. I believe it was well communicated what is - and what isn't - part of the update.

        I can not agree though that "nothing has really changed". I do not know about your personal way of simming and your real life aviation experience, but from my own point of view I can only say that a LOT of stuff has changed.
        Be it the engines which are reacting a lot closer to how a real engine reacts, the ground physics beind a lot better, the manual handling of the aircraft that's more natural (even though with room for improvement) and a lot more.
        I had to smile at your last statement. And somewhat have to agree. The customer always wants what the developer does not provide
        You'll be glad to hear though that any of those three things is being worked on. A new VC is in the making, a big magenta line update as well and ACARS/CPDLC are under development within the scope of Global Flight Operations.
        This update does *not* aim to include any of these. It's aiming at different things and those, in my humble opinion, have been improved a LOT.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Emi View Post

          Hi Christian,

          the rough contents of the update were outlined by RSR in several preview topics before release. I believe it was well communicated what is - and what isn't - part of the update.

          I can not agree though that "nothing has really changed". I do not know about your personal way of simming and your real life aviation experience, but from my own point of view I can only say that a LOT of stuff has changed.
          Be it the engines which are reacting a lot closer to how a real engine reacts, the ground physics beind a lot better, the manual handling of the aircraft that's more natural (even though with room for improvement) and a lot more.
          I had to smile at your last statement. And somewhat have to agree. The customer always wants what the developer does not provide
          You'll be glad to hear though that any of those three things is being worked on. A new VC is in the making, a big magenta line update as well and ACARS/CPDLC are under development within the scope of Global Flight Operations.
          This update does *not* aim to include any of these. It's aiming at different things and those, in my humble opinion, have been improved a LOT.
          You are absolutely right in the fact that PMDG have improved in several areas with their 777 product, and with that I applaud them. However, with that being said, charging $78 for an expansion with these levels of faults is rather unacceptable. I won't be purchasing it until I see either community or PMDG-issued fixes for these problems which are rather disappointing. If a "completely overhauled" and new sound engine as well as "an entirely new set of external models that include PBR surfaces and new texture properties" is going to be advertised and teased, then the customer can and should be rightfully upset if those promises are not met. Other developers would and do receive criticism for having faults like these and whilst I am a big fan of PMDG, they should not be immune from constructive criticism as well.

          I still eagerly await other PMDG products but do wish that they take their time and ensure bugs and issues like we're seeing do not continue to occur. Just a few years ago PMDG was rather untouchable in regards to innovation and excelled in quality; but, and in agreeance with Cpt_Mike and Christian, it seems they've lost their stride temporarily. Hopefully this is a one-time event
          Jordan Davison | Livery Painter | Southwest fanatic

          Comment


          • rsrandazzo
            rsrandazzo commented
            Editing a comment
            Jordan- I notice you have a strong point to make that you don't like the pricing of the 200ER. Perhaps you might also consider that nearly a year of work, tens of thousands of hours of development time were invested in the free update process for both the base package and the 300ER. Most developers would have repacked this as v2.0, but we felt that the economic circumstances created by Covid warranted some special handling in this instance. We easily forwent a full year of revenue earnings in order to provide to the community all of the benefits of our work. Please don't forget to factor that into your equation- as I don't think any developer in the history of simming has walked away from potential earnings in the seven figure range in order to benefit our own community. - RSR

          • Jviation
            Jviation commented
            Editing a comment
            Robert- Ultimately it boils down to the fact that things were advertised and issues fell through the cracks. I understand a lot of work has gone into the product and I do appreciate your hard efforts. However, if a company such as McDonnell Douglas advertises a product with promises that customers cannot actually achieve then said customers can be rightfully upset. With our current simulators on the market, visual models are very important to some customers who either want to repaint, take pictures or sightsee. I respectfully stand by my original comment and the others in this forum and will not purchase this product until I at the least see some improvements. At the bare minimum, LNAV, sounds, and some other bugs should be a top priority. Do correct me if I'm wrong but as the original comment pointed out , shouldn't the 777-200ER GE90-94 fanblades be straight and not curved like on the later generation GE90s? It appears only a texture has been applied rather haphazardly instead of actual individual changes. This normally isn't a big deal; however, you explicitly said and I quote " new exterior models" but that didn't happen.

          • Ephedrin
            Ephedrin commented
            Editing a comment
            Jordan, just a little heads up regarding LNAV in case you don't know this, absolutely no argument though: The PMDG LNAV tracking works as a module that is used and adjusted for every aircraft they release(d). Currently every addon, 737 NGX, NGXu, 744/8 and 777 suffer from a nearly 20 years old code that is simply not efficient anymore and not capable of modern RNP requirements. Yesterday I saw my 77L overshoot a localizer that was intercepted with a 20 degrees angle. But this happens with the 737 and the 747 too. The thing is that this module is being worked on and Robert and other devs have stated several times in the forum that it definitely DOES have a high priority. While no official "release" statement has been made the regulars in this forum expect it to come around this summer. Let it be autumn. It won't be perfect initially, it will require fixes and improvements but like the very early and difficult release of the new ground handling PMDG has always worked on it and improved their products. It does take time, you can't fix everything immediately but eventually all these things have become really good. What might feel rushed is a step (public release) of a product that will receive further development. I think we can rest assured of that.

          #6
          Jordan for reference I have just done a -300 flight. No issues, very happy with the upgrade

          Am going YSSY-KSFO in a 744 then plan to do a 772 flight back to Heathrow

          For now, the -300 upgrade is great

          All the best

          Adrian Howe
          Adrian Howe

          Comment


            #7
            I have been a loyal PMDG costumer from the beginning. I have enjoyed may hours behind the monitor flying the B737, B747 and B777. I have nothing but praise for PMDG. I do however see a trend in the production and the development.
            The market is evolving, expectations are changing and competition is increasing. I compare PMDG to the market. The market is currently producing products that are superior to the PMDG product.



            Christian
            Last edited by Eurosky; 28Feb2021, 07:14.

            Comment


              #8
              I really don't understand these posts. I know PMDG will take this as constructive criticism and build up it on future versions (a new VC model is in the works, so it'll be an artistic update). But I really don't understand how people use this high study level sims to be honest. I spent the whole afternoon doing some extreme malfunctions working with the QRH, to compare it to what I know from my IRL airline experience and to be honest, I couldn't have cared less if the thing didn't even have an external model at all. I just don't look at the external model. I know it's there, like I know it's there in a real airplane, but as a pilot I don't need it. All I need is my instruments. I'm amazed by how PMDG managed to develop 3 airplanes that match level-d sim behavior to the point that real world type rated people can take advantage of them, and some people are looking at textures inside the engines that aren't even visible unless you move the camera there. I respect your opinion but I simply don't get it, not gonna lie. This is the highest level of simulation you can get in your personal computer and it's just a dream for someone who started with FS5 and thought LevelD's 767 on FS2004 it was as good as it'd ever get systems-wise.

              I apologize if my opinion offends anyone.
              Last edited by Aeromar; 27Feb2021, 23:53.
              Omar Josef
              737 FO
              757/767 rated
              Spain

              Comment


              • Ausflight
                Ausflight commented
                Editing a comment
                Totally agree with you Dan this never bothered me in the past and it won’t now.Excellent aircraft my opinion.

              • Amayo
                Amayo commented
                Editing a comment
                You have hit the nail on the head, people focusing on the wrong things. Imagine if we complained about the visuals used for ‘generic’ airports when doing our OPC/LPCs .....those who know know

              • MicharBreems
                MicharBreems commented
                Editing a comment
                I feel it is a bit too easy to say that others are just focusing on the wrong details. People have different uses for this simulation. Some, like yourself as a pilot, focus on the fidelity and depth of the simulation. Others care more about the visual appearance and the reliable behavior for an ‘average’ point AtoB vatsim flight. Would be a bit silly to disqualify this usage, seeing as this product is bought by many customers who aren’t in the aviation profession and the update is marketed with some emphasis also on visual elements.

              #9
              Originally posted by Jviation View Post

              You are absolutely right in the fact that PMDG have improved in several areas with their 777 product, and with that I applaud them. However, with that being said, charging $78 for an expansion with these levels of faults is rather unacceptable. I won't be purchasing it until I see either community or PMDG-issued fixes for these problems which are rather disappointing. If a "completely overhauled" and new sound engine as well as "an entirely new set of external models that include PBR surfaces and new texture properties" is going to be advertised and teased, then the customer can and should be rightfully upset if those promises are not met. Other developers would and do receive criticism for having faults like these and whilst I am a big fan of PMDG, they should not be immune from constructive criticism as well.

              I still eagerly await other PMDG products but do wish that they take their time and ensure bugs and issues like we're seeing do not continue to occur. Just a few years ago PMDG was rather untouchable in regards to innovation and excelled in quality; but, and in agreeance with Cpt_Mike and Christian, it seems they've lost their stride temporarily. Hopefully this is a one-time event
              I can and will not engage in a discussion about pricing, what I can comment about though is the experience of flying the -200ER.
              I'm flying it right now and have flown it for about 300 hours during testing.
              And I stand with my previous comments which I made pre-release. The sounds are excellent. The PBR textures are very nice.
              There are some, in my eyes, minor things that can and will be fixed with coming updates, but I personally do simply not see anything major in the -200ER that would have been a reason to hold the release. That's my personal opinion after flying this thing for more than 300 hours.

              Regarding the sounds, what you hear during cruise mainly is the wind and avionic sound. Of course those are the same, regardless of the engine installed. In situations where the engine noise prevails you can hear clear differences in the sounds.
              I know many developers make the enignes far too loud during cruise and the wind far to quiet. Maybe this leads to different expectations from customers? I don't know. In my ears there's simply nothing major wrong.
              Again, personal perception.

              Comment


                #10
                Originally posted by Aeromar View Post
                I really don't understand these posts. I know PMDG will take this as constructive criticism and build up it on future versions (a new VC model is in the works, so it'll be an artistic update). But I really don't understand how people use this high study level sims to be honest. I spent the whole afternoon doing some extreme malfunctions working with the QRH, to compare it to what I know from my IRL airline experience and to be honest, I couldn't have cared less if the thing didn't even have an external model at all. I just don't look at the external model. I know it's there, like I know it's there in a real airplane, but as a pilot I don't need it. All I need is my instruments. I'm amazed by how PMDG managed to develop 3 airplanes that match level-d sim behavior to the point that real world type rated people can take advantage of them, and some people are looking at textures inside the engines that aren't even visible unless you move the camera there. I wonder if the interior wall of the wheel rubber is texturized... I respect your opinion but I simply don't get it, not gonna lie. This is the highest level of simulation you can get in your personal computer and it's just a dream for someone who started with FS5 and thought LevelD's 767 on FS2004 it was as good as it'd ever get systems-wise.

                I apologize if my opinion offends anyone.
                I can appreciate this response.

                It is really heart-wrenching to see that we fussed about getting the product. And rather than appreciating the hard work we find certain areas to nit-pick that really has no bearing.

                Yes! your opinion does matter and it does count as Omar said. However, why do we have to be so hard-and-fast about certain things that really doesn't affect the a/c and the way it functions.

                I sat and read through most of the intro of this document and believe me the number of things that I learned (that I thought I knew from flying this plane for the years it's been out) just floors me.

                Be constructive; but, in your posits, be very mindful of the tone and how it comes off - sort of condescending and ungrateful
                Regards,

                Comment


                  #11
                  Wow Mike,
                  I guess your expectations are well above mine. I absolutely love the PMDG 777. The previous version taught me everything I needed to jump into a full motion LevelD simulator and do complete flights under severe weather conditions. By flying the PMDG 777 for so long and jumping into a real cockpit (on the full motion sim) I was right at home and extremely prepared to take on the 17 million dollar sim.
                  Paul Gugliotta

                  Comment


                    #12
                    Hi Mike,

                    Sorry to hear about the issues you are experiencing - but let me see if I can answer some of your concerns.....


                    - "The new GE, PW and RR all seem to have extremely similar sounds above 85% thrust. They all have this high-pitched whining sound, and I'm unable to differentiate the sounds at this thrust % between the PW and RR".

                    The engine whines are similar in that range - we try our best to mimic the actual sound of the engine types. Did you consider that the real aircraft may actually sound like that in real life?


                    - "It is quite obvious that sounds were recycled from other products"

                    We recycle some sounds because they are consistent in all aircraft audio experiences - we blend from a pool of sounds that are new sounds and old in order to achieve the effect of realism compared to the real thing. When you paint a picture, you don't necessarily buy new colours unless it is absolutely necessary, and where it is necessary, we do. I suggest you compare the simulator sounds to real aircraft youtube videos and you may be surprised to hear that they are pretty similar to our sim.


                    - "including the 747-8, which I recognized GE engine sounds on the climb out".

                    This is an incorrect statement - you are mistaken.


                    - "When starting up and shutting down the RRs, GE sounds seem to play".

                    All three engine types have different startup sounds, you are mistaken if you think they sound the same. The sound of the shutdown of all the models are very similar. Can you tell me from your personal experience which shutdown is not sounding like the real aircraft?


                    - "The engine sounds also sound extremely muted in the cockpit vs. the previous 777 versions".

                    This suggests to me that you have either a problem with your sounds, soundcard, or you have not setup the correctly recommended volume settings in order to achieve the most realistic audio experience. BTW - The 200ER engine sounds were mixed to be slightly louder than the "previous 777 versions" - I suggest you check the sound volumes in P3D - the engines should be set to 50 there. And also check the FMC PMDG sound option and make sure that engines and master volumes are also set to 50.


                    - "To sum up, in actuality, this is a stark contrast to what was advertised for this product on February 10th".

                    I strongly disagree with this statement - I think if you check the settings above and make sure you are playing the sounds through a reasonably good system, you should experience the best soundsets we have ever made bar none.
                    Last edited by Reynolds Number; 28Feb2021, 00:35.
                    Armen Cholakian
                    PMDG Sound Engineer

                    Comment


                      #13
                      Originally posted by Eurosky
                      Omar, I see and respect your point of view. No offence taken at all. Glad you are speaking up. Remember most people do not fly for a living. Flight Sim is a hobby. It is my hobby. I speak up because I care. I am old school, better to speak up than not saying anything.
                      It was also my hobby from age 14 to well into my 30s when I got my first airline gig. Even when it was my hobby, the eyecandy was good and all, but I realized that 90% of the developers do just that, good looking models. None of them had the actual resources to develop something at which a real world pilot wouldn't go "yeah, that's not how the real airplane does it". And then PMDG showed up and it finally became a thing that I could sit on my computer to study the things that I was required to know for work. Of course, avoiding the threat of negative training and using it only to complement the real training tht I was receiving.

                      As Emi said, I wonder if all these people who look at textures as if flight simulators were some sort of model building hobby on a screen, I wonder if all these people realize that there's malfunctions in there. Just do them. Learn to deal with them. Read the FCOM and the QRH and if you prefer a novel, read the FCTM. It's all there for under 100 bucks it's insane! People just don't realize what they're getting. A real world training organization would be charged several thousand dollars for something that does half what these addons do. Not talking about FNPTs and flow tigers and fixed base sims, the cheap ones are in the millions, I mean CBT trainers like the ones most of us real pilots have used, that are absolute shite and cost thousands of dollars and are outdated even to the airline's own fleet and they used them just for FMC preflight practice...

                      This is a simulator. If you couldn't become a pilot for whatever reason, this is your chance to prove yourself that you could do it. Put yourself in real scenarios. Don't do a boring flight from A to B (nobody's paying you). Do the fun stuff. Do abnormals, fail both engines, relight, leak all your hydraulic fluid, make it to the ground safely. Read the manuals. They are REAL LICENSED Boeing manuals!
                      Last edited by Aeromar; 28Feb2021, 01:22.
                      Omar Josef
                      737 FO
                      757/767 rated
                      Spain

                      Comment


                        #14
                        Originally posted by Aeromar View Post

                        It was also my hobby from age 14 to well into my 30s when I got my first airline gig. Even when it was my hobby, the eyecandy was good and all, but I realized that 90% of the developers do just that, good looking models. None of them had the actual resources to develop something at which a real world pilot wouldn't go "yeah, that's not how the real airplane does it". And then PMDG showed up and it finally became a thing that I could sit on my computer to study the things that I was required to know for work. Of course, avoiding the threat of negative training and using it only to complement the real training tht I was receiving.

                        As Emi said, I wonder if all these people who look at textures as if flight simulators were some sort of model building hobby on a screen, I wonder if all these people realize that there's malfunctions in there. Just do them. Learn to deal with them. Read the FCOM and the QRH and if you prever a novel, read the FCTM. It's all there, for under 100 bucks! People just don't realize that they're getting. A real world training organization would be charged several thousand dollars for something that does half what these addons do. Not talking about FNTP and procedure trainers, those are in the millions, I mean CBT trainers like the ones most of us real pilots have used, that are absolute shite and cost thousands of dollars and are outdated even to the airline's own fleet.

                        This is a simulator. If you couldn't become a pilot for whatever reason, this is your chance to prove yourseld that you could have learned what we had to learn. Put yourself in real scenarios. Don't do a boring flight from A to B (nobody's paying you). Do the fun stuff. Do abnormals, fail both engines, relight, leak all your hydraulic fluid, make it to the ground safely. Read the manuals. They are REAL LICENSESD Boeing manuals!
                        Omar, this must have been the very best post I read on the internet for at least the past weeks!

                        Comment


                          #15
                          Originally posted by Emi View Post

                          Be it the engines which are reacting a lot closer to how a real engine reacts, the ground physics beind a lot better, the manual handling of the aircraft that's more natural (even though with room for improvement) and a lot more.
                          With all due respect Emi, I have been an airline pilot for 33 years, I have had the PMDG from the beginning and in my opinion this model is the worst in hand flying. I had the opportunity to fly this plane in 2001 (real), as far I remember it was sweet to fly, very much in tune with the first 777 models from PMDG. This model is very unstable in pitch, I did a test with all the automation off (A / P & A / T), terrible. And I´ll raise these issue in a support ticket with a video included.

                          Hamilton Müller

                          Comment


                          • rsrandazzo
                            rsrandazzo commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Nameless- (please sign your posts in this forum- we require it.) If you think *this* is the worst model we have ever created- I should get you a copy of our original 777... That was so bad as to be unflyable for anyone who has actually flown a modern transport category airplane. Just to put it all into a bit of actual perspective... -RSR

                          • WN737
                            WN737 commented
                            Editing a comment
                            I applaud the effort and your experience, but I've found they don't actually want input from real world pilots on the forum that are able to back up fact with data. I stopped trying and just accept it, but hey, good on you to keep trying.

                          • Aeromar
                            Aeromar commented
                            Editing a comment
                            WN737 I don't think that's true. Most of the people here are interested in that which PMDG puts the most hours in, which is making an airplane that makes real pilots go "yep, that's exactly how it works".

                          #16
                          Originally posted by Hamilton View Post

                          With all due respect Emi, I have been an airline pilot for 33 years, I have had the PMDG from the beginning and in my opinion this model is the worst in hand flying. I had the opportunity to fly this plane in 2001 (real), as far I remember it was sweet to fly, very much in tune with the first 777 models from PMDG. This model is very unstable in pitch, I did a test with all the automation off (A / P & A / T), terrible. And I´ll raise these issue in a support ticket with a video included.
                          Please do raise this in the ticket as you said! I fully agree the pitch characteristics still need some improvement and that the other PMDG aircraft currently handfly nicer. However it is quite a bit better than the previous 777 version!
                          You can be rest assured that the version of the fly by wire you see right now is not the final version though, there's a lot of input going on in the beta team about further enhancements and smoothing out.
                          Any input from anybody with experience on type is absolutely welcome so please go ahead and do raise that ticket!

                          Comment


                          • Eurosky
                            Eurosky commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Emi, sorry for asking. Do you work for PMDG? Mind sharing some of your background and your role ?
                            I did offer some help a few years ago. I have around 10000 hours on the B777. Never heard a word....I do open my mouth on here from time to time. Think that made a difference.
                            Last edited by Eurosky; 28Feb2021, 00:47.

                          • Emi
                            Emi commented
                            Editing a comment
                            I don't work for PMDG, I am not on their payroll and not in any way affiliated with PMDG as a company or employee.
                            I am a voluntary beta tester for the 777 and tech advisor for the 737. I previously worked a couple of years in another flight simulation company in both customer support as well as development. Overall I've been simming for about the past eleven years and betatesting products since 2012 for different companies.
                            Outside of flight simulation I'm a pilot with a european airline flying the 737.

                            I don't have any "role" in particular in this whole release, however I do like helping people so I try to answer as many topics as I can with the knowledge I geathered previously in flight simming and my previous tasks in the developers world.
                            Comments like the one you commented on originate from a lot of effort I put into the enhancement of the FBW during the beta, where I've been pretty active in terms of improvement to the manual flight. That's why I asked Hamilton to share his experience directly with PMDG in the ticket as well: While I have some thousand hours on the 737 I do NOT have 777 flight experience (but have several friends who fly the 777, one of them previously even flew the 737 as well). Thus anybody having experience on type is very welcome to help the overall course of improving the FBW.

                            I hope this answers your question?

                          #17
                          Someone put together a nice comparison video on the different sounds from all the different engines, interior and exterior. .
                          https://youtu.be/BprWgIGFxB8
                          Dan Moore

                          Comment


                            #18
                            As in all newly release products there are bugs and issues. There was 2 micro updates shortly after the NGXu release and now its a great products. Same with other developer products, and community feedback is awesome so the developers can hit 99% with the give or take 1% for things that slip through or simulator limitations. Im sure the dev team is taking into consideration what you said. In due time the product will be on its way to be one of the best like the 747 and NGXu.
                            Alex Kulak
                            PMDG Studier and flyer

                            Comment


                              #19
                              Gents,

                              One of the things that I always find interesting in discussions such as this, is how differently people will approach a complex piece of software such as ours. Some users are very focused on the detail of realism, without any regard for visual fidelity. Other users are very interested in visual detail without any regard for the impact it might have on performance, and still others are far more interested in a balance of all of these things and feel that users on both ends of the spectrum are being pedantic.

                              The difficulty in running PMDG is to decide which details are worth time investment, and which are will simply become unused/unobserved details that function primarily as a wasted of developer time and/or computer resources.

                              In spite of the observation of a few in this thread, these debates are not new, and they do not indicate some earth-changing shift in the marketplace. In 2003 I was told quite firmly that PMDG would never survive in the market because we did not provide a 2D view to simulate looking out over the wing. In 2010 I was told to find a new job because PMDG would never survive since we don't provide a high fidelity model of the cabin. As recently as last year (while working on this product update cylce) I was excoriated by some fellow because "PMDG abandoned the 777 and all 777 customers and thus will fail as a business!"

                              Through it all, we continue to make exceptionally high quality products that provide you with far more detail than most users can absorb. Nuances of the electrical systems, hydraulics, flight controls, navigation systems, communication processes, data management, displays, performance and operation of the airplane right down to delays in the messaging system data bus are included that most users simply don't appreciate because they don't understand them- but they don't **need** to understand them to appreciate the feel of quality that they bring to the finished product.

                              So yes, some users will point to a detail here, or an item there. Are they missing the point? No, not necessarily.

                              If you are able to focus on the the fact that we elected not to texture the interior of an engine that isn't reasonably visible to the user, then you are being well served by the quality of the rest of the product because you are poking around for high-order things to offer as criticism, rather than finding that the systems are "emulated" not "simulated" or that the airplane is a shell based upon a default airplane that offers hardly any simulation value.

                              We don't mind criticism- we never have. We read criticism and we collect it because that is how we find ways to improve our products. Sometimes we act on criticism, sometimes we discard it simply because the criticism isn't something we consider to be worthy of development time and effort.

                              At a personal level I don't particularly like it much when someone like the OP in this thread makes categorical comments which are actually just opinions- because when you spend tens of thousands of man hours working on these sorts of things- you tend to know quite a bit about where the sound sources came from and how much the equipment cost and how difficult it is to get the recording environment correct on a busy airport... So you know the poster doesn't know what he is talking about, but is instead offering an opinion.

                              I won't fault someone for offering an opinion- and I hope none of the rest of you will either. But it is always good to stick to facts. It is always good to recognize that different users have different expectations.

                              Most importantly- keep in mind that all of us are here for the same reason (a love of airplanes) and PMDG will never satisfy everyone.
                              Robert S. Randazzo
                              PMDG Simulations
                              http://www.pmdg.com


                              Comment


                              • rsrandazzo
                                rsrandazzo commented
                                Editing a comment
                                Christian - The members of my team would laugh out loud to hear me characterized as being happy with anything related to our performance. If you think that I am, you a) don't know me well at all and b) wouldn't survive on this team.

                                If you work for me you become quite accustomed to the fact that I am *never* satisfied with how we are doing. I am constantly driving for improvement, and my criticism of our own work (mine included) can be tough because my expectations are very high. We have four active product lines with twelve total releases covering a timeline from 2013 to present that we continue to improve, advance and expand upon without charging our customers for the continual improvement. Most developers are unwilling to support product lines with continual updates beyond a few months and even fewer will do so for as long as we have.

                                I am justifiably proud of our accomplishments, and I am even more proud of the work this team puts into the finished product. Do I think we are top-dog-in-all-things? No. Only a fool would take such a position. There are many talents out there in the marketplace that I am quite fond of- and many products that I think are absolutely fantastic. If you spend time here doing something other than creating arguments- you will frequently see me promote the work of other developers as noteworthy because I believe in supporting others in this line of work.

                                Many of those folks are our friends and we speak with them and share ideas and techniques and concepts.

                                Reading through your smattering of posts tonight it is quite obvious you are itching to get into a scrap with someone in order to be able to beat your chest and point to me, or PMDG or some member of our team as 'the bad guy.' It is too late for that, Christian. There are far more important things for all of us to be focused on, Christian. Including you. - RSR

                              #20
                              I've been very happy with PMDG products over the years. You've certainly raised the bar over the years for add-on aircraft in FSX, P3D and hopefully soon MSFS 2020. What I liked about the MSFS 2020 introduction to the community was a transparent roadmap. It seems some of us have had different expectations vs. what has been delivered in latest release, e.g. working textures for engines on release. Its that simple, its our (my) expectations vs. what PMDG has delivered. Maybe a transparent roadmap going forward?

                              EIWT, Ireland,
                              Simming since Solo Flight C64
                              FAA PPL ASEL

                              Comment


                                #21
                                Originally posted by Reynolds Number View Post
                                The engine whines are similar in that range - we try our best to mimic the actual sound of the engine types. Did you consider that the real aircraft may actually sound like that in real life?
                                I just strung this video together real fast, so take it for what it's worth.

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls_lJVs2dtA

                                The PW4090 didn't have the pitch drop on power-up that I'm used to hearing, though I don't know if that's a simulator limitation. As for the engine pitch, it appears it can go higher than what is depicted in the simulator at the upper limits. As for the Trent 895, didn't hear the high-pitched whine on power-up that I'm used to hearing. As for the engine pitch, it appears it can go higher than what is depicted in the simulator at the upper limits. That's just my observation, anyway, bearing in mind I'm not an expert on the matter.
                                Captain Kevin

                                Kevin Yang

                                Comment


                                  #22
                                  The fan blades don’t look recycled to me

                                  Comment


                                    #23
                                    Originally posted by rsrandazzo View Post
                                    Gents,

                                    At a personal level I don't particularly like it much when someone like the OP in this thread makes categorical comments which are actually just opinions- because when you spend tens of thousands of man hours working on these sorts of things- you tend to know quite a bit about where the sound sources came from and how much the equipment cost and how difficult it is to get the recording environment correct on a busy airport... So you know the poster doesn't know what he is talking about, but is instead offering an opinion.

                                    I won't fault someone for offering an opinion- and I hope none of the rest of you will either. But it is always good to stick to facts. It is always good to recognize that different users have different expectations.
                                    Robert,

                                    I do appreciate your comments and insight on the matter. You're absolutely right in saying that we do not know everything that goes on behind the scenes and I can appreciate that.

                                    However, I fundamentally disagree with you calling some points opinions. For example, the GE90-94Bs. They do not have curved fan blades in real life, however, on the PMDG, they are curved (the -200LR texture). This isn't an opinion, it is a fact. It may be a small point, but is still something that for an expansion where the engines are one of the biggest changes, I would've expected it to be done correctly.

                                    Furthermore, your point about the PWs, I would agree this is an opinion, however, I don't agree that this is something small that one is simply "poking around for high-order things to offer as criticism". See below, when the engine isn't running it is quite clearly visible, but alas.

                                    Screenshot 2021-02-27 193315.png

                                    There are plenty of in-depth and well-simulated items in the 777, however, my main point is that for an expansion of such a price, that focuses mostly on visual changes (yes, I fully understand there are system changes too), it is evident that there was a lack of care in some areas.
                                    - Mike Jones

                                    Comment


                                      #24
                                      Mike-

                                      Jason saw your post- and what you found turned out to be a problem with a texture mapping, not a "lack of texture." I didn't have a chance to speak with him directly, but my understanding is that there is a misapplied texture normal (or words to that effect) causing what you are seeing.

                                      Should be a simple thing to update.

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


                                      Comment


                                        #25
                                        Originally posted by Wise87 View Post
                                        Someone put together a nice comparison video on the different sounds from all the different engines, interior and exterior. .
                                        https://youtu.be/BprWgIGFxB8
                                        Reynolds Number This video, in my opinion, does a fairly good job at demonstrating the point I was trying to make. Internally, you can most definitely hear the difference between the engines at full thrust, however, externally, they sound extremely similar across the three.

                                        As for the other points, I will personally check my sound settings and sound card. Thank you for your comments.
                                        - Mike Jones

                                        Comment


                                          #26
                                          Does anyone think the new version of the 777 has a strange aerodynamics? Is the real 777 the same?
                                          Jiekeng Luo

                                          Comment


                                            #27
                                            Originally posted by ljk811 View Post
                                            Does anyone think the new version of the 777 has a strange aerodynamics? Is the real 777 the same?
                                            It is a bit wobbly in pitch. I'll see if it's something I can fix with controller sensitivity. I could totally be wrong but I doubt a 777 is more lively than a 737, which is what I'm used to (it being so much more nimble than the little I remember from the 757). I'm sure they'll work on it as many real 777 pilots who are not on the beta team comment on it.
                                            Omar Josef
                                            737 FO
                                            757/767 rated
                                            Spain

                                            Comment


                                              #28
                                              Originally posted by Cpt_Mike View Post
                                              Sounds:

                                              The new GE, PW and RR all seem to have extremely similar sounds above 85% thrust. They all have this high-pitched whining sound, and I'm unable to differentiate the sounds at this thrust % between the PW and RR.

                                              It is quite obvious that sounds were recycled from other products, including the 747-8, which I recognized GE engine sounds on the climb out.

                                              When starting up and shutting down the RRs, GE sounds seem to play.

                                              The engine sounds also sound extremely muted in the cockpit vs. the previous 777 versions.

                                              To sum up, in actuality, this is a stark contrast to what was advertised for this product on February 10th:

                                              "PMDG's custom sound engine, a completely overhauled sound set that includes sound randomization, engine character capability and improved overall sound quality."
                                              I'm kinda glad someone else mentioend this, I was expecting what they said and instead it does just seem like a bunch of sounds were used in all 3 sets with slight changes, but nothing near what they made it sound like they promised. I think it's a big draw on the plane because of the famous sound, but I'm still working through the rest of it to see, but 100% agree the soundset was very much a let down given the hype.
                                              Herb Barrett-King

                                              Comment


                                                #29
                                                Originally posted by Aeromar View Post

                                                It is a bit wobbly in pitch. I'll see if it's something I can fix with controller sensitivity. I could totally be wrong but I doubt a 777 is more lively than a 737, which is what I'm used to (it being so much more nimble than the little I remember from the 757).
                                                Hi Omar, in the same way that I suggested to Mr Robert, I invite you to do a visual traffic pattern with the PMDG B772.
                                                Conditions: Sky clear (no) weather, A/P and A/T OFF, mantain Rwy heading up to 1000ft AGL, left turn to downwind, level at 1500ft AGL, mantaining Flaps 5.
                                                Passing the opposite threshold, time 40 seconds, before turning base,extend the landing gear, select flaps 20, arm the speedbrake, and slow to flaps 20 and flaps on schedule and land. Please, try this in your PC and tell me if this model is OK in pitch, (remember No Autopilot/No Autothrottle). We used to do 5 circuits like that (back 2001), after the sim checkride phase.

                                                Regards,

                                                Hamilton Müller
                                                Hamilton Müller

                                                Comment


                                                • rsrandazzo
                                                  rsrandazzo commented
                                                  Editing a comment
                                                  Hamilton- Dr. Vaos would be the first to tell you that he has gotten sick of hearing me describe to him "that 777 is the easiest airplane in the world to fly." In fact, my experience with the 777 is that it flies very much like our 747-8 flies, and conversely our 747-400 is too easy on the user because it lacks appropriate pitch coupling to engine thrust. All of that being said- the latest version of the 777 is a FAR cry from the version that we have had on the market since 2013, and the fly-by-wire methodology continues to improve with additional changes and improvements being pushed to our beta team. Over time I will be interested to see if your opinion evolves. - RSR

                                                • Aeromar
                                                  Aeromar commented
                                                  Editing a comment
                                                  Yeah. I did that already and then did a whole afternoon of abnormals. It's true that it has a narrow band around the pitch trimmed state where it almost feels neutrally stable before it hits a wall of stability, so it can wobble around +-5º around trimmed state. Something like that is not sim breaking for me. A simulator being harder to fly than the real airplane is not something I hate, haha. They have real 777 experience at PMDG so I'm sure this is something that they'll keep tuning. Remember how long it took developers to make a proper FWB for an airbus. For many years it felt like it wasn't doable and even today there's about 1 developer that got just close. The only thing that I think needs real work is LNAV, LEG constraints and ARINC legs compatibility. but I know that development will be carried to all their Boeing products so it's just about being patient. Once one PMDG product gets the FCC/FMC update, the rest will follow. For now, just accept a few path deviations. There are no noise sensors in the P3D world.
                                                  Last edited by Aeromar; 28Feb2021, 11:00.

                                                #30
                                                Have to accept with the topic owner that:

                                                + the "new" Sound on this 777 ER Expansion is really disappointed, in the RR it still sounds like an GE when spooling up / shutting down.

                                                + GE engine spinner looks "low" quality, it was much better in the good old PMDG 777 LR

                                                + Steering Tiller is somehow broken in the new update, wonder why noone in beta tester team saw that ? 😫

                                                Hope the team brings back the "PMDG Quality" that we used to have.
                                                Many thanks,
                                                Alexis Nguyen

                                                Comment


                                                • rsrandazzo
                                                  rsrandazzo commented
                                                  Editing a comment
                                                  Alexis- Oh that is a bit dramatic, I think. I encourage you to download the first version of the 737NGX or the original 777 release from 2013. Every product release is an improvement over the last, and every product has it hitches and hiccups that get ironed out. Pretending otherwise is quite revisionist. - RSR
                                              Working...
                                              X