How does PMDG pick beta testers?

[Aaron Buchanan 19]

Very well put, Jhan         Beta testing comes with alot of commitment to making a product useful and well refined, not a chance to impress friends or get a early look.
 

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

Beta testing comes with alot of commitment to making a product useful and well refined, not a chance to impress friends or get a early look.

 

OMG YOU'RE ALIVE!

 

Now that it's warming up, you going to start the smoker season?

[Aaron Buchanan 19]

 

OMG YOU'RE ALIVE!

 

Now that it's warming up, you going to start the smoker season?

 

 

But of course. Performance of duties in regards to Flight Simulator friends is what I live for!

 

Though I may be a lurker on the forums, rest assured that I am still watching.

[CaptWalden 4]

Concur on the statements made about having patience and the tediacy of beta /alpha testing. Its super nasty-you might get the first release with an installer, and it wont even work! Then you have to sort through that. It becomes a process and you will start to develop the chain of working solutions. I have a technical know how from working on the Apache attack helicopter. I have also almost finished two complete betas, first one was the ESDG Cessna Citation X 2.0, and now working with Majestic to finish their Q400 (only got on that one because their engines are very similar to the T700 engines on the AH-64D). Once they are done, its off the BETA boat for a while and wait for the next developer to come up with something and attempt to get on with them.
 

But its not all that glamorous. One thing that many people over look is actually putting the aircraft in situations where the user might find themselves, ie, using them with FSInn and SB4. Not the most streamlined or efficient softwares, but I do know that I get app hangs every once and a while with the NGX. I have done a certain solution and it works every time now, but it probably took a good 50 flights to finally get it figured out.

 

Best thing for you to do-buy yourself some of the actual real world flight training books, and learn your VFR/IFR principles to a T. Learn, re learn, and apply. Because I garuntee if you get asked to fly a DME ARC approach and can t perform, you are going to feel like an idiot.

 

This is just my .02, good luck to you if you can get on board.

[bjratchf 80]

 

Concur on the statements made about having patience and the tediacy of beta /alpha testing. Its super nasty-you might get the first release with an installer, and it wont even work! Then you have to sort through that. It becomes a process and you will start to develop the chain of working solutions. I have a technical know how from working on the Apache attack helicopter. I have also almost finished two complete betas, first one was the ESDG Cessna Citation X 2.0, and now working with Majestic to finish their Q400 (only got on that one because their engines are very similar to the T700 engines on the AH-64D). Once they are done, its off the BETA boat for a while and wait for the next developer to come up with something and attempt to get on with them.

 

But its not all that glamorous. One thing that many people over look is actually putting the aircraft in situations where the user might find themselves, ie, using them with FSInn and SB4. Not the most streamlined or efficient softwares, but I do know that I get app hangs every once and a while with the NGX. I have done a certain solution and it works every time now, but it probably took a good 50 flights to finally get it figured out.

 

Best thing for you to do-buy yourself some of the actual real world flight training books, and learn your VFR/IFR principles to a T. Learn, re learn, and apply. Because I garuntee if you get asked to fly a DME ARC approach and can t perform, you are going to feel like an idiot.

 

This is just my .02, good luck to you if you can get on board.

 

 

 

 

Totally agree... The idea that Beta testers are handed "free software" is not close to what we do. We often have to work with unfinished software and find solutions and give constructive input as to its development. Often I'll focus on a small feature of the product to make sure it runs exactly as it should. Currently I'm writing some documentation for the Majestic Q400, and it has come a long way- but a large amount of personal time gets invested into the product, flying, recording bugs, transferring bugs onto our troubleshooting website and translating them into something a programmer can put to use. You gain a lot of respect for the developer's task at creating a program that mimics its real-life counterpart. This is not an easy job, nor for the faint of heart!

[Jackal. 25]

[bjratchf 80]

And of course us beta testers have to balance other aspects of our life that take importance, like making a living and getting laid. Sometimes "can I get back to you next week?" will delay a problem fix for a bit.

[CaptWalden 4]

Well, that just boils down to priorities. Why accomplish just one task when you can do both?

 

In all seriousness-being a BETA tester involves quite a  bit. First off, do you know the different type of approaches, what is applicable to the aircraft, and if the aircraft is capable of flying the specific approach? Secondly, do you have enough expierence either real world or in the sim world (there is a difference, some people can t grasp that) to be able to recognize appropriate flight behavior, upsets, how to handle emergencies, contact air traffic control, etc?

 

Like I know where a lot of the youngsters are going with this- I d love to get a long TransLANT 777 flight up in the air, and do my homework while I am flying...truth is-if there is a failures system implemented, you might have to go through each and every single possible one to see how it effects the aircraft. I am not sure how PMDG does it, but I am fairly positive that if they were able to create their MX system with the NGX, subsequent releases within the PMDG aircraft line would be along the same architecture and failure system. So in essence, no you would not be able to BETA test by just doing homework, and only flying it for the take off and approach, and then report back ITS GOOD! When you might have had your ED Hydraulic pump go out...and you wouldn t have even noticed...

 

Lot goes into it guys, and if you do get an offer from PMDG consider yourselves lucky...it would be a crowning achievement to your simming expierence to have the know how to fly for these guys.

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Gents-

 

We have two very different groups of testers. 

 

Tech Advisors:  These are folks who come from within the industry and are experienced with the design, manufacture, build, operation, maintenance or flying of the airplane being modeled.  We conduct a review of credentials, to include verification and in some cases authorization of background review- and we also test them a bit to see what their general knowledge level of FSX is prior to inviting them aboard.  These folks help us verify that the simulation works like their airplane, they help us suss out conflicts in the documentation, differences in manufactured types, and otherwise make sure we "did it correctly" when there is some ambiguity in the data.

 

Beta Testers:  These are folks whom have been selected based on our relationship with them here in this forum, primarily.  Beta testers get to help us do a myriad of dirty tasks including replicating problems, correcting documentation, testing the installation and removal process, working with various scenarios to replicate hard-to-find problems and occasionally they even get to enjoy themselves with a new product...

 

Joining either squad must also include one important factor:  We have to enjoy interacting with you.  After all- these folks get to see us when we are tired, burned out, under-slept, cranky from months of development- and they have to give us negative feedback when the last thing we want is to hear another squawk from someone who who hasn't spent the last year writing thousands upon thousands of lines of code until their eyes bleed....

 

It also means they have to be somewhat forgiving- because sometimes we can be cranky...

 

No- really...  When RYAN is the most chipper guy on the squad- it means things aren't going well.  Just ask him...  The last seven days have been just like that. 

 

:blink:

[KriVa 307]

Nice to know how you guys actually pick the different groups of testers and advisors.

If you still need someone to proofread the manuals and tutorials, give me a shout.

[CaptWalden 4]

Robert,

 

I will give you this- the NGX MX system was phenomonal. Was the operating window of the 250 hours based on real world FAA MRB documents or was that just an interval you guys came up with because its more in line within the cycles/hourly flight times of simmers?

 

IE-the MRB intervals on the 767 are something along the lines of X amount of cycles, 2000 hours, or 180 calender days based on wear/tear. I was wondering where you guys came up with that.

 

Currently as part of my duties with the Army I am doing OJT for the A/P license. I work less than a half mile down the road from Marana Aerospace Solutions, which takes aircraft that are heavily used in mainlines and then brought to MZJ for scrapping and parts salvage. Quite an interesting operation, past few months have seen a few A330s, a B777, and they are currently taking down 1 747-200 and three 744s, 1 from Korean Air and 2 from Lufthansa (no doubt replaced by their A380s). Since I have every Monday off, I am going to attempt to see if I can do some more OJT with them, and get some time on the heavies. Its quite interesting trying to see the interface between pilot and mechanic, the two are basically interdependent of one another. 

 

I am curious to see how you plan to do with the 777/744 2.0. 

 

Thanks

 

Gents-

 

We have two very different groups of testers. 

 

Tech Advisors:  These are folks who come from within the industry and are experienced with the design, manufacture, build, operation, maintenance or flying of the airplane being modeled.  We conduct a review of credentials, to include verification and in some cases authorization of background review- and we also test them a bit to see what their general knowledge level of FSX is prior to inviting them aboard.  These folks help us verify that the simulation works like their airplane, they help us suss out conflicts in the documentation, differences in manufactured types, and otherwise make sure we "did it correctly" when there is some ambiguity in the data.

 

Beta Testers:  These are folks whom have been selected based on our relationship with them here in this forum, primarily.  Beta testers get to help us do a myriad of dirty tasks including replicating problems, correcting documentation, testing the installation and removal process, working with various scenarios to replicate hard-to-find problems and occasionally they even get to enjoy themselves with a new product...

 

Joining either squad must also include one important factor:  We have to enjoy interacting with you.  After all- these folks get to see us when we are tired, burned out, under-slept, cranky from months of development- and they have to give us negative feedback when the last thing we want is to hear another squawk from someone who who hasn't spent the last year writing thousands upon thousands of lines of code until their eyes bleed....

 

It also means they have to be somewhat forgiving- because sometimes we can be cranky...

 

No- really...  When RYAN is the most chipper guy on the squad- it means things aren't going well.  Just ask him...  The last seven days have been just like that. 

 

:blink:

[z06z33 763]

Robert,

 

I will give you this- the NGX MX system was phenomonal. Was the operating window of the 250 hours based on real world FAA MRB documents or was that just an interval you guys came up with because its more in line within the cycles/hourly flight times of simmers?

 

IE-the MRB intervals on the 767 are something along the lines of X amount of cycles, 2000 hours, or 180 calender days based on wear/tear. I was wondering where you guys came up with that.

 

Currently as part of my duties with the Army I am doing OJT for the A/P license. I work less than a half mile down the road from Marana Aerospace Solutions, which takes aircraft that are heavily used in mainlines and then brought to MZJ for scrapping and parts salvage. Quite an interesting operation, past few months have seen a few A330s, a B777, and they are currently taking down 1 747-200 and three 744s, 1 from Korean Air and 2 from Lufthansa (no doubt replaced by their A380s). Since I have every Monday off, I am going to attempt to see if I can do some more OJT with them, and get some time on the heavies. Its quite interesting trying to see the interface between pilot and mechanic, the two are basically interdependent of one another. 

 

I am curious to see how you plan to do with the 777/744 2.0. 

 

Thanks

Cutting up a 777 already? Wow they must have been using it alot to time it out that quick.

[CaptWalden 4]

Not sure if they were completely cutting her up or sealing her intakes and fuel tanks for storage. They weren t tearing her apart but she wasnt going back into the air anytime soon.

[KriVa 307]

The LH 744s have done their fair share of cycles and hours. They have been used VERY intensively over their lifetime, which is why they're being sent to the desert.

[StarBlue 27]

Ryan CRANKY???  Nah, Never!!! 

 

The worst case I ever saw was the FS2000 Beta.  Microsoft decided that it was going to be nothing more than an evaluation.  By the time it was sent to us, it was already Gold Mastered.  Meaning that no matter how big or small a bug we found, it was maybe going to go into SP1 not not the initial release.  Not sure many of you remember FS2000, it ran like a dog on the best machines.  Frame rates often in the single digits if you decided to use the Concorde.  A LOT of CTD or even an occasional BSoD; more than FSX ever had or was claimed to have.

 

Anyway the FS Beta group was very passionate about their simulator, huh imagine that.  Anyway when the proverbial fecal matter hit the rotating cooling device, it got UGLY!  Beta's quit, sent angry letters to BillG@microsoft.com, complained loudly on forums in violation of NDA's as it had not officially released and we had not been released from the NDA.  The Program Manager made the mistake of trying to smooth it down, I think she left in tears.  Even the programmers got involved in the discussions and backlash.  Many left and I think Fly! and Fly!2K did well because of the push to make it the standard.

 

Ultimately when it hit the market and flopped, stuttering frame rates didn't cut it even though 17,000 airports were added.  They called us all into a chat, asked what went wrong.  They got it, also I think some leadership changed.  But they started on FS2K2 and brought back as many Beta's they could get to come back.  Testing began in the Alpha stage in early 2001 and lasted until late August; at least 9 months of testing.  They sent us gold master copies and then 9/11 happened.  They delayed the launch because MS decided to remove the WTC towers.  My copy of FS2K2 still has them. 

 

Anyway PMDG has by far the best scheme in how they test.  The technical team nails it down and the beta team find all of the nitnoids like a polygon sticking through the side of the plane.

 

As for a 777 being chopped up, Wow not even 20 and given a death sentence.  I can't imagine with the demand one being scrapped, but you never know maybe it had a lot of fatigue issues.  I wonder how long it will be before we see 787's in the desert.  I know some of Boeing test fleet, ZA001 for example, has been flown to the Mojave Desert; stripped of her insides and engines.  She sits quietly for the next time she flies for the last time to a museum.

 

for example, has been gutted, engines removed and put in a hanger