ActiveSky 2004.5 and 737 NG work OK?

[Guest christianholmes]

I seem to remember a problem with AS and the NG, is that still the case? I've heard nothing but great things about AS, and I want to pony up and try it, but only if it works perfectly with the NG. Can anybody clear this up?

[Orlaam 306]

I don't have it...yet ;( I do believe that the two work just fine together. Someone asked the question a while back and PMDG said it was no longer an issue.

[Guest christianholmes]

Hi thanks- Yeah, I just found the topic that said they work well together now. I'm going to buy it now.

[Guest 320MAD]

Just be careful mate. I have both and on my spec the two together cut 30fps off. From 71 to under 30 with both running. But I don't mind I can't live without either.320MADP.S. how can I change my nic????

[Guest meyomyx]

Works fine........ gusts are a pretty usual problem for this genre of add-on.

[Guest BCS777]

Works fine with me.Just wondering why you need frame rates of 71 ?Thought human eye only observes upto 20-25.My FS is limited to fps 25. On ground in airport with dense scenery like EBBR I get about 17, fair enough :+

[Guest Darren Howie]

Human eye scan rate and FPS are two entirely different things.Imagine that you are flying falcon 4 and rolling at 540 deg/sec.At 25 FPS that equates to just over 21 degrees per frame.Having seen that and then seeing it at 60 fps where you get 9 deg/frame you can clearly spot the difference in smoothness while flying.Try it out with the aero plane in fs9 and see.Turn everything down to almst zero set 60 fps and do some rolls.Then set 25 fps and you will see what i mean.Darren

[NJ_Flyer 3]

I would highly Recommend Active Sky, It works with no problems for me. I run FS2004 locked at 18fps and I dont see any drops in frames rates with AS running. I personaly NEVER fly without it! :)

[Guest rubberball]

Ditto the last post 100%I never fly without it now..they run like a clock...Keep up the excellent work guys.Regards Paul