How do you update the 737-700 to 3.0.64? The PMDG operations center showing its pending then below that message it says Will update via MSFS.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
You have to wait until the update gets pushed via the marketplace.
Usually takes a week or two.
This will make console fans happy:
Posted in connection with an update to the DC-6 which will return that product to the XBox with the availability of WASM on that platform.
7 Likes
Had a wonderful flight, KPVD to KDCA today. Real Weather worked flawlessly (something that has been problematic on my machine for the last 6 months or so), the gates at KPVD had the correct type and number of jets at them, appropriate for the time of day I was departing. Beautiful flight down to Reagan National and to cap things off, I nailed the RWY 19 Visual Approach! Late afternoon sun setting over the terminal as I taxied to the gate looked like a postcard. I have to say it, when everything comes together in this sim, it’s really an experience like no other.
2 Likes
Funny…I did the RWY 19 LDA approach to KDCA last night in the 800, which is a 38 degree right turn at about 0.9 mile from the runway. Did NOT nail it. Really should have scrolled my cockpit view to the right, as the center windshield pillar was blocking my view of the runway as I made the turn. Was off to the left, corrected, sorta got it straight, but then did the absolute worst bounce landing I’ve ever done in any aircraft in 3 years of MSFS. Oh well, next time. (I did nail this same landing a few days ago…)
BTW, if you’re ever near Washington DC, go to Gravelly Point Park just north of DCA to watch this very approach, up close and LOUD.
(EDIT: LDA, not LPV approach)
That’s gotta be one of the best spots in the US for commercial aircraft spotting. Love it there. Just too bad that 99% of the traffic consists of 737’s, A32X’s, ERJ’s and CRJ’s.
1 Like
No I am using the MSFS default pushback. It was working OK before the SU12.
in other words, not anytime soon…
its like they are building a spaceship 
Try to give more meters in the FMC
That cracked me up 
. While the plane is a really nice piece of software Robert sure makes everything sound like they are doing basic research on programming languages and once finished deserve a Nobel prize
5 Likes
It’s interesting all of our different “takes”.
I read Robert’s posts differently. I see PMDG as a dedicated group of perfectionists who take a ton of pride in their work. They really aren’t into releasing half-baked products and will hold until something is “right”.
It sounds, to me, that MSFS 2020 has a different approach to building add-ons than previous and other flight simulation software. This is, primarily, due to making sure add-ons are “safe” for the Walled Garden environment that is the Xbox. It also sounds like building modules in WASM may actually work better than with previous methods and requires learning new approaches and even involving Asobo to make changes to the core code of the sim.
It takes time to figure these complexities out, especially when you’re doing something more sophisticated than many other add-on builders.
I’ve got a ton of patience for them, because of the two products I have experienced of theirs — DC-6 & 737-700 — I’m am so blown away by just how good they really are.
11 Likes
You are right. WASM is near-native code execution and this runs faster. But the concept of havin to have an API for it to communicate is not new.
But this thread isn’t about that. I just seconded the notion that it is an EFB that has to transfer data to the plane after said data is calculated on a different platform. And that is surely not a new concept.
Has Robert made any hints as to when we can expect the 737 MAX? Like, in what order their products in development will release? Obviously the 777 will be next, but will they release the MAX after that, before the 747 or after?
What IS new, however, is a method in MSFS that allows communication back and forth between aircraft coded in C++ and compiled into assembly language (e.g. WASM) and the sim itself. That has not existed. Hence need to write the UFT (not “EFB”) functionality in a scripting language (e.g., Javascrip or HTML) and figure out a way to let it communicate between WASM and the base sim.
Or do you claim otherwise?
3 Likes
UFT/EFB, tomato/tomatoe… I understand that there are very strong proponents of PMDG around here. I don’t dispute the fact that MSFS is new and introduces some new (and great) stuff. But I have actually worked with people who got much more complicated stuff to work in a shorter period. We are talking about an „UFT“ for some sim airplane after all, not some complicated robotic algorithm… (the only excuse I would accept is that PMDG has limited resources to get it to work, which would actually be reasonable and understands for one or two guys taking months to figure stuff out. But RR sure makes it sound like they are inventing something new)
2 Likes
You’re missing the key point here: PMDG codes their planes in C++ which gets compiled in the sim on first load in WASM. Until very recently, MSFS provides no way for WASM modules (airplane) to communicate with external modules in the sim (the flight tablet). In fact, had the flight tablet been written in WASM too, there would be no way for the sim to pass data to the tablet, let alone for the tablet and the plane to speak to one another.
So PMDG has been writing the tablet in a scripting language (unspecified, but probably Javascript) so it can retrieve data from the sim itself. They then had to create a translation layer so their script-based tablet could communicate with the plane (in WASM) and vice versa. Pay close attention to this part: THIS COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL HAD TO BE WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH.
No other plane in the sim has done this nor needed to. PMDG needs to do this because they chose NOT to rewrite all their existing codebase from C++ to something else that worked more smoothly with the sim natively like HTML/XML or Javascript.
The bottom line is, once this is all done (and most of it appears to be), it will be applicable not only to the 737, but all future products yet to be released (777, 737 Max, 747 and whatever else they have in the pipeline) and probably will be back-ported to the DC-6.
7 Likes
Sounded to me like the MAX is further behind, post-747. It’s too bad, I have zero interest in either 777 or 747. Long haul just doesn’t float my boat.
5 Likes
I wish it was 777 - 757 - 747 - 737 MAX but I know that’s not gonna happen.
I wish the 737 MAX would’ve been picked up by another developer by now just for competition (making better products). The Bluebird 757/767 looks awesome, I don’t think there’s no need for PMDG to that. So I wish the 737 MAX to come after the 777. Not going to fly longhaul routes with the 777 though, so I’ll fly it in Japan and somewhere in Asia where they do shorter routes.
4 Likes
I totally forgot about that Bluebird 757, you’re right (well, I hope it won’t be just the looks that’s awesome). And if the 777 and 747 provide the same good and reliable acceleration as the 737 then long hauls are not a problem for me (though at the moment I usually don’t accelerate time in MSFS as I choose max 2 hours flights).