DLRK 2 Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 For the PMDG 737NGX with Winglets, should -800 or -800ERW model be used? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcars 23 Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 The W in the model variant means Winglets, ER is Extended Range Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjansen 7 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 I've repeatedly remarked on this subject already. To my knowledge there is no such thing as a 737-800ER. The aircraft template for the 737-800ERW is actually just a 737-800 winglet version that matches the PMDG NGX 737-800 variant. The bad news is that the PFPX templates for the other 737-variants, for example the 737-700, are less detailed and consequently calculate wrong optimum cruise altitudes. Unfortunately I don't have the data nor knowledge to correct these profiles but this is definately something on my wish-list. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcasclimb 0 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 The bad news is that the PFPX templates for the other 737-variants, for example the 737-700, are less detailed and consequently calculate wrong optimum cruise altitudes. Unfortunately I don't have the data nor knowledge to correct these profiles but this is definately something on my wish-list. Mark I disagree, i took a look at both the B737-700 and the -800ERW aircraft files and both appear to be equally detailed. The problem with the 737-700 is, just as in the case with TOPCAT, Flightsimsoft uses data from the -700 that has the 22K engines, while PMDG's -700 uses the 24K engines which are obviously a little more powerful. You can try to use the Altitude Adjust option in the aircraft editor, that should fix the altitude differences, but the fuel may still be off so use the bias evaluator for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLRK 2 Posted November 9, 2013 Author Share Posted November 9, 2013 I really do not understand why PFPX hasn't been developed to fit the NGX models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 DLRK, the NG PFPX profiles have been developped with accuracy in mind and the profiles are in correlation with real world datas what else are you asking? they may not match any add-ons and then in that case the user needs to taylor it nothing new. with it correct your incorrect statement. all the best. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Doney 6 Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Developing profiles from real world data is easy. It basically amounts to copying data from one table to another. Developing profiles for addons is decidedly more involved, as rather than just copy/pasting data from the performance manual, actual testing is required. What you really mean to say then, I think, is that as with nearly every other planning software released for sim use, it is up to the end user once again to finish the job and make it usable with the popular addons they most likely use. You are quite correct there, as that is certainly nothing new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLRK 2 Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 The issue I'm referring to is that PMDG has modelled the 24k -700, and PFPX has chosen to use the 22k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcasclimb 0 Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 I really do not understand why PFPX hasn't been developed to fit the NGX models. I'm sure it's not entirely by choice, they use whatever data they have available to them at the time. Flightsimsoft happened to have data for the 22k engines, pmdg for whatever reason modeled the 700 with the 24k engines, and they are not allowed to share that kind of stuff with people. We are lucky FSS put the data in a format where anybody can create aircraft without a lot of hassle. The biggest hassle is finding the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Doney 6 Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 That's entirely the point, though. There is no data to "find". The best profiles that have been made over the years, for whatever planning software, be it FSBuild or otherwise, aren't made by just copying data from tables. They are made by actually testing and profiling the addon in question. The rub there being that nobody wants to do that work. Easier to just copy data from a manual, regardless of how useful, or useless, said data is for sim use. I am sure all of the zero real world airlines that are using PFPX are thrilled that someone found an FPPM and made a profile, but as just a lowly simmer I'm not sure what use that is to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLRK 2 Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 Brian, Most of the good add-on developers base their add-ons on the real thing. PMDG, for example, collaborates with Boeing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Doney 6 Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Well certainly, but none of them are 100% accurate, and even if they were, that's not really the point I have been trying to make. I guess what it boils down to for me, is that I don't at all find it unreasonable to expect the half dozen or so high profile addons to have accurately tailored profiles made, based on data from the simulator/addon itself if need be. If you want to include a bunch of profiles based on real world aircraft/variants that do not exist for the sim in addition, hey be my guest, but I'd really prefer a few that were properly profiled for the addons so many of us use. I guess the finger pointing at the manuals and then back and forth between developers just irritates me since it is the users that have paid both sides that have to pay yet again with time invested fixing the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLRK 2 Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 Brian, I 100% agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 Developing profiles from real world data is easy. It basically amounts to copying data from one table to another. Developing profiles for addons is decidedly more involved, as rather than just copy/pasting data from the performance manual, actual testing is required. What you really mean to say then, I think, is that as with nearly every other planning software released for sim use, it is up to the end user once again to finish the job and make it usable with the popular addons they most likely use. You are quite correct there, as that is certainly nothing new. hello, you re right. i ve been involved in Fsbuild 2.0 and FOC 2003 development before PFPX and it is always the same problem. differences between any FS add-ons and any flightplanning and it happens than more than once that add-ons developper are not matching real world datas for different reasons. that doesnt mean final users cant fix that problem. i personnaly dont use FSX so it will mean i wont publish any add-ons including the next to come the FSL SST Concorde because i cant check what is happening in the sim. if you want the -24 datas i can provide you the FFPM and you ll see how easy it is to create a profile. then you ll see the differences between real datas and PMDg results even if they re working with BOCO ,,, more than working it s a license paid by PMDG to use some of Boeing infos and datas ... in the beginning of the 2000s it was 10000 usd to get that license ... the subtile difference of a frame combo with a kind of engine it s not most of the time seen by the lambda simmer. ie PMDG up to now used only one kind of engine the GE for all of them including the F version. at the end a correction can be made to any profile to match any sim add on available or in the future by the BIAS not a big deal and hope it will help any siimers. all the best. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.