I think they deserve some criticism lobbied their way regarding communication on exactly what to expect from the EFB, but they have been quite transparent on the when to expect the EFB and it will be continually refined. Their lack of details regarding what features are to be expected at release leads me to believe they don’t want to commit to certain features due to technical hurdles. Experimenting with Asobo is one thing, bringing those features live to SU10 is another. As far as I’m aware, the technical hurdle regarding WASM and internet access still exists in SU10, but perhaps I stand to be corrected.
Fast forward to about 45 minutes in this radio interview from just last night for the latest on the EFB:
tl;dr: the “EFB” won’t be an “EFB” because that has a specified FAA designation and they basically don’t want to be criticized for their product not being FAA compliant. Instead, they’re calling it a “Universal Flight Tablet” and it will be basically the same kind of thing across all their future products and back-ported for use in the DC-6. It will have Navigraph and Simbrief integration, aircraft configuration and performance calculations as part of its functionality. There was a joke (?) about implement “in flight entertainment” functions into it too - might be fun to add streaming music into the cockpit during cruise, lol.
3 Likes
Thanks, I had not seen this before. I was sticking to what was communicated in the biweekly forum updates.
1 Like
Is it normal that GPU (graphic card) is not works to 100% o close to this value?
How do you check what version of the 737 I have?
PMDG Operations Center
1 Like
Bruh if you could actually sync say Apple Music to that that’s a game changer
Hmmm it´s mildly annoying because the 737 can be loaded, refueled, and everthing else in the FMC.
What I hate is the fact that there is no METAR available, how should I add winds and barometric pressure and other weather details, and the most important question is always: what is the QNH of the destination airport? 
(When in doubt 1013 millibar always does the trick, as long as it´s not raining not winter not late autumn, not snowing, not foggy.)
I am a revoluzzer, I dare doing so! There are a few really ugly texture glitches, for example these ugly and complete off-looking textures under the gravity gear extension hatch, when are these going to get fixed?
And no - no please not the standard answer “but this is not needed for standard procedures” and “this cannot be seen anyway when looking straight ahead and out of the window”, I prefer my virtual cockpit as a whole functional and complete unit good-looking and bugfree 
To be quite honest, you deserve to be jumped on. All you had to do was check the forums and you’d realize how pointless your comment was. Your comment was based on made-up imaginary opinion that happens to be quite the opposite of the actual situation, in other words “naysaying”, and that, for just no reason at all. We all already knew the EFB wouldn’t be ready by this time because PMDG informed us well before the 700 was released, about this situation. They also categorically stated the reason for that, a reason which you ignored in your naysaying rant. The said reason being that they’re building a new EFB from the ground up, which will be much better than the one that ships with Boeing, reason being that most airlines are moving toward new tech vs the clunky old EFB. So your comment presents you as willfully ignorant just so you can naysay.
1 Like
Yeah, apparently, you intentionally ignored the golden rule: Thou shalt not intentionally bear false witness against PMDG especially when they have given thee adequate information on the subject on the situation, the witness of which thou hast chosen to bear, be it intentionally or carelessly.
On a more serious note, you could have spent half of the time you spent writing this post on the forum, and you would have got the information you needed (if you really needed it, that is). In fact, you would have been happier even.
Always ready to yell “wolf” (fanbois) when you know you’re not doing right. Your love of PMDG products has nothing to do with your unwillingness to know what’s up, but apparent eagerness to speak boldly and falsely about the same topic which you’ve chosen to be ignorant about.
Some publishers choose to be tight-lipped about their progress, not so with PMDG. They have always given adequate info on progress. Yet a lot of folks come to the forum and just comment falsely, and to add insult to injury, boldly, on the subject, willfully ignorant of the topic. Then they claim victimhood when confronted with facts.
2 Likes
You don’t need to enter the destination QNH in the FMC anyway as the aircraft does not take this into account when calculating the descent path as it should.
1 Like
For METAR info I use Little Navmap but you can usually listen to ATIS at the departure airport and there is also METAR viewer function integrated into the sim, available from the toolbar. With that you don’t have to guess anything for your destination airport when you’re in the air.
1 Like
I use the simbrief OFP for that, which shows the QNH (at the time of generation of course, so may be inaccurate, especially on long flights) atthe destination airport as well as the METAR.
Is that true? What’s your source, as I’ve not seen any mention of that in the various youtube videos I’ve watched, especially 737ng Driver, although I’ve not spent a lot of time on the PMDG forums?
I would also like to know that because after entering data on the forecast page I can see that it recalculates TOD.
Yes, which makes it at least look as if it is taking it into account
For metar you can go to https://metar-taf.com (I don’t know if I can post links here. Please forgive me if it’s forbidden). Search the airport of your interest by ICAO name and there you can see QNH, weather and runway in use in live time in the real airport. Is a very useful web.
1 Like
I highly doubt this is the case. Why would PMDG do something like this? Unless it’s a limitation of the sim I’ve not heard about.
Happy to be corrected though if there’s corroborative information to the contrary.
What is the correct way to solve my CTD issues when using community liveries?
I have already uninstalled the PMDG (-800) however I don’t see a normal way to the Operations Center, right click on the program to uninstall leads to nowhere. I don’t like deleting files but if there’s no other way…
I installed the community livery (Transavia 737-800 but any other results also ina CTD) correctly. There is a orphaned textures repairable ‘message’ but I can’t do anything with it, Repair doesn’t work.
Does anyone know if the documentation is the same for the 700 and 800? Im talking about the tutorial manuals that PMDG provide for each one. I want to print them off but at the moment Ini it own the 700.
I agree, it recalculates something. The difference in descent path between 29.92 and 30.10 inHG, for example, will be so minimal, I doubt it will change the decent path in a noticeable way for most situations. People may be confusing its subtle effect with not being modeled, but I’ll defer to PMDG to answer if it’s correctly modeled.