I have not heard about this before, I suggest sending us a ticket about that.
Mathijs Kok
PMDG
Well success , disabled nose wheel lift/2kts and and not such a long plan after the push turn and its all good so thanks for you r help and the screenshots/videos.
2 Likes
Any time frame for the nav update release?
Itās being tested at this moment. Should not take long.
Mathijs Kok
PMDG
2 Likes
I think this is my issue too- thanks for sharing this info both!!
2 Likes
Iād like to ask if anyone flying the PMDG 777 on Xbox has been able to do a full flight without an Insufficient Fuel warning, or without running out of fuel?
Iāve not been able to complete any flights. I have a brand new clean install of MSFS Premium Deluxe (no Game Pass), with all World and City updates, and the PMDG 777-300ER. I have been using Simbrief, and have tried with live weather and also with āClear Skiesā pre-set so that there is no wind.
I am able to do plenty of long hauls in the 787 and A320neo without issue. Iād be happy to try to replicate a route that works in the 777, but I havenāt found one.
Yes. Many. I would suggest looking at the thread. Are you using time compression in cruise? There is an issue around that it seems.
Personally I have observed problems most times I have used time compression and have not had any (as far as I remeber) when I do not.
1 Like
Lots of flights in live weather processed through SimBrief with enough fuel and no warnings. I donāt use weather presets when flying airliners where I will be uploading a SimBrief flight plan; and the upload is always of a fresh flight plan such that any weather data that SimBrief takes into consideration is current. Also, I sometime add some fuel as a factor, i.e., P03 or P05: Easy peezy, no worries. I also donāt concern myself with any known defects, leaving all that to PMDG to work out in good time as they seem to be aware of the fuel situation. Cheers!
are you using time compression?
Yes many without issues (at 1X or 2X). I use the default B77W profile and almost always I get to my destination with 16 Ton ~
Did a few flights at the beginning using 4X and causes excessive fuel consumption for some reason.
After trying various things I had good success when holding off using time compression until after completing the ascent to my first cruise altitude on a flight from OEMA to TNCM.
I then ran on x4 for quite a while over land and the Mediterranean and then switched up to x8 when I reached the Atlantic. I got my first fuel warning after an auto step climb sometime after this and then was forever adding fuel every few waypoints to keep things on track, whilst monitoring my ETOPS.
I canāt tell you what my fuel on landing was, as got a CTD on approach, which came out of nowhere but put this down to a memory issue as running series S.
Causation is not necessarily correlation but I put it down to climbing whilst using time compression.
Updates announced yesterday (Oct 3) for PMDG 777 should be available in Xbox Marketplace āmid-Octoberā.
Glad to see the navdata update is finally going to be fixed. Although itās an impressive list of fixes, there is no mention of the fuel burn issue. I have uninstalled the 777 and will try again when the update is available.
3 Likes
The fuel burn issue is a tricky one. We are unable to replicate the issue reliably, and people that reported the issue also tell us they do not see it in every flight. Clearly it has to do with time compression, as it only seems to happen when that is used. But why all processes can handle that and fuel burn sometimes getās confusedā¦
We are hoping that with more tickets reporting it, things will be more clear. So keep on reporting please.
Mathijs Kok
PMDG
2 Likes
OK, I can appreciate that.
When the update arrives on Xbox, I will pick a test route, and keep a record of everything so it can be used to replicate if need be.
2 Likes
Do we know which liveries are coming in the pipeline?
If you have the 737, youāll like the 777. If you donāt have any interest in learning the flight mechanics, you can just start from the runway state and fly.
That being said, youād be missing out on the fun of learning the bits and pieces for setup. It will also be difficult to fly and land using the capabilities of the airplane. Itās be an expensive 777 for what you are using it for, but itās definitely better than the Captain Sim version (can also get the livery packs as well).
2 Likes
Curious thing happened today (related to fuel burn and sim rate)
I flew EGLL to RJTT. About 14.5 hrs avoiding Russian airspace (over the North Pole).
Standard Asobo airports for both. No traffic, Real weather, Sim rate x1 Xbox Series X. Plan from Simbrief of course.
EGLL was a bit choppy - a few textures were not loading/ LOD was poor, and sound was crackly on climb out, but no CTD.
I monitored about the first 100 minutes to the first step climb and fuel burn was normal - following Simbrief exactly.
Went to bed and checked in around 7.5 hours later. Everything was still running, but fuel burn was deviating quite a lot from the expected. Over the next hour or so it dropped to 0 expected on arrival.
After some more investigation, I noticed the sim was running SLOWER than real time. I was at about 7 hrs into the flight plan where I should have been around 11.5.
1x was almost exactly half real-life speed. Increasing/ decreasing this using the EFB got me back to about a sim minute lasting about 1:20-1:30. Speeding up my cruise to 4x/8x yielded about 75% of what the accelerated time should be.
Has anyone else seen this?
I suspect what was happening (and some quick calculations suggest this is about right) was that the 777 was burning fuel at the correct rate, but making progress towards RJTT more slowly than it should, due to SIM time being slower.
I have spent hundreds upon hundreds of hours flying in FS2020 and never seen this before across any free or payware aircraft. (I like to think I am quite a meticulous sim pilot too, have read this thread in full, and followed everything).
Something very strange going on.
That likely had a lot to do with at least part of your observed problems. From the PMDG documentation:
https://777.pmdg.com/introduction/#/lessons/bQGupS4FDJgViXslcI6WApw2ohyn-N0T
This observation makes a lot of sense. Iāve also noticed time seems off by a lot when using time compression, but hadnāt thought to measure it.
There is another odd thing that happens - the fuel flow indicated on the EICAS (units per hour) does not account for the drop in sensed fuel from hour to hour using the clock in the cockpit. For example if FF reads 16 (8 per engine per hour) at 0100z, the fuel burned by 0200z is more than 16.
This weekend I plan to do a 4 hour flight KLAX to KJFK with no winds and Clear Skies preset - using the 787-10 and the 777, with and without time compression, and capture the time, distance, FF, OAT, TAT, fuel sensed at each waypoint to compare.
I already know the 787, Longitude, and other planes have no issue with sim rate or time compression, but maybe showing the comparison will help convince PMDG to look a little closer.
I flew the 787-10 (on Xbox) repeatedly over the pole and although there are very odd quirks with the sim trying to draw the flight path, and shudders for a few minutes due to the plane quickly passing through different QNH values from each Longitude, time passing and fuel burn were not affected any differently than if flying further south