Click here to access the Helosim website ![]() |
The Web's #1 BBS for all submarine and naval simulations! |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,874
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Funny you should post a B736 in SAS colours. I'm always pleased to see one climbing out of Brussels or Amsterdam - you can always count on the 736 for a good climb rate all the way up to ~FL400, makes it easier for me
![]()
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Sub Test Pilot
|
You want to try the level D 767 now that's a plane and coming out or just been released the PMDG 777 !
ATM im flying the old feel there 737 classics
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond ![]() ![]() ![]() Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Soaring
|
![]() Quote:
In itself a robust package, but by today'S standards very outdated in graphics and system depth. It was one of the early carry-overs from 2004 planes to FSX. Many shops do not even list it as an available jewel case anymore. The 777 is PMDG's new project, but I fear that is still some good time away. Fear, did I say "fear"? Why do I do that. No clue. the 737 is the most complete package one can imagine. If you want a challenge, also try PMDG's Jetstream 4100. That one teaches you prfoper engine management for sure. Also very good. My second best module, second only to the 737. But I do not know how often I have sent those engines smoking. The AP also is a totally different design, different to anything I have seen in Boeings, ATRs and Airbusses.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Sub Test Pilot
|
![]()
Well I belong to a va ba virtual apparently the pmdg 777 is a few months away looking good though but as for level d 767 as far as I was aware its a stand alone add on with no connection to the pic version
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond ![]() ![]() ![]() Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | ||
Soaring
|
![]() Quote:
That it is one and the same simulation line you can see when comparing screenshots of the various versions. The close similarity leaves little argument. And this is from Level-D homepage: Quote:
It was indeed one of the best - and very early, for FS2000: THE BEST - of its kind. The system failure options of the first package set standards at its time, and they made my neck hair raising when I used them. But today, the evel-D 767 simply is graphically outclassed, and the functionality of it is ordinary and wide-spread industry standard for airliner modules now, no more anythign special. That is no criticism, it just accepts that it is many years old. It nevertheless still works reliable and flawless. But the virtual cockpit with its many 2D-switches, the system depth, sound environment and generally the technical realisation of the plane, its appearance and avionics, are left behind by modern modules like the PMDG range of products. I saw the PMDG 747, the Flight1 ATR-72-500 and the Level-D 767 to be en par on the FS2004 platform. But on FSX, new kings have taken over the reign.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Sub Test Pilot
|
![]()
Thanks for the info I didn't actually know that then again I run fs9 but I do like the pmdg range and I do have pmdg 737ng which is the -600 and -700 models I also have the pmdg 747 which is very good and I'm hoping the 777 release will be again very good unfortunTly I don't get time to do research due to work
I would like to pick your brain about the up coming release of the 777 do you think it will be a good investment ? Would you buy the product? What sort of expectations would you hAve with this product as personally previous releases of pmdg have been very good. I am asking your opinion because I'm pretty sure you have a good handle on flight sims and il be trusting your judgement ![]() On another note I did some time ago well many years now buy pss A330/340 pro would you buy any of their products ? I'm mainly asking a comparison pmdg to pss as I would possibly buy pss 777 pro but I don't want to waste my money and if pmdg in your opinion is better il wait Thanks skybird
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond ![]() ![]() ![]() Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |||||||
Soaring
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
PMDG-737NGX is compatible with Prepare3D. Prepa3D is Lockheed Martin's takeover from Microsoft and fuirther developement of FSX. It is described by some users as looking like FSX but performing smoother and faster than FS9. I have set my eyes on it once I do a manual clean system reinstall, not just a back-copy of an image of my HD. Quote:
![]() Quote:
If I were you, I would really consider a different order of priorities now. FSX already is old, FS2004 is even older. Change to Prepare3D. Get a taste of the PMDG 737NGX on it. Then see how that changes your world. Again, the 737NG that you know on FS9 has nothing, really nothing to do with the NGX version for FSX. It is quantum leap ahead in quality and simulation. the NG also has technical issues with the autoflight system and events, and some others minor thinks, I vaguely recall. I never was happy with it, and avoided it soon after getting it. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=201284 http://www.prepar3d.com/ Quote:
![]()
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. |
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|