Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Werner747

FS9 dead? I don't think so!

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone!I just spent the last two hours looking at all the posts regarding the future of FS9, and I have to say the the outcome is encouraging :-) I also use FS9 and if some of you posting here considdered your pc as below par, mine is even worse: a P4 3 GHz wit 1GB RAM and a 256 MB Geforce 6200 8X AGP. Yet I can run it with all the sliders flatout and using quality add-ons like PMDG's 747 and 737 software. I also run a very large volume of AI traffic packages and always use real world weather and I also fly online with VATSIM. I never get less than 20 fps even at KORD (which is a real frame rate killer!) and all the other big airports. My average fps is around 38 to 40 fps with these settings. Now, I have also spent very large amounts of my hard-earned cash on these add-ons and other sceneries and would like to take this opportunity to address a few issues that I have picked up on this thread.Firstly, I do own FSX. I bought it when it first made the shelves here at our shops in South Africa. I looked at the system specs at the back of the box and thought wow, this should work great. At this point in time I was using only 512 MB RAM and a GeForce 5700 LE with 128 MB RAM. Needless to say, with this system and the fact that I didn't have any of the SP's then, made for one of the most disappointing experiences of my life :-(I tried everything to get FSX working properly but to no avail. Then later I doubled my RAM and got my 256 MB 6200. It was running much better but still not really an option. Then when I finally installed the SP's a few weeks ago, my performance has shot up and I get really good frame rates with high detail settings :-)However, FS9 is still my main base of operations. I have collected many sceneries over the years and that, tied together with high quality add-on planes, makes for a very real experience. However, I have to confess that I'm not really a very visually driven person - realism in the FDE department is what really matters to me.Tied with this of course, is the fact that when I fly into bad weahter and a busy airport, that the flight must be smooth - I don't want to feel like I'm watching a slide show on Power Point or something like that :-) FSX cannot give me this, only FS9 can.I also own light aircraft, very good payware products, but I use them in FSX only for VFR at low altitudes when I don't have the time to do overseas (or any other flight for matter) and FSX is a very dormant program on my machine :-) I like it, and it has potential, but in my opinion, just like Vista, the leap was just to great. Indeed, who care what a house looks like from FL360; I have been at that altitude several times before, you cannot read billboards and see inside houses from that high up. Besides, you should be more concerned with your AC's systems and performance, unless you are a passenger! LOL!If you are a visually driven person though, try taking a look at some of the new scenery that are becomming available for FSX and FS9, particularly the FS9 counterparts. One that stands out in my mind is the FlyTampa Kai Tak, which not only faithfully reproduces the airport as such, but in fact reproduces the whole city of Hong Kong around the airport in stunnig detail. Well done to the guys at Fly Tampa for a breathtaking production! Great stuff!In this scenery, you can even see the cars driving on the roads (something up untill this point in time only reserved for FSX owners) - they even used completely custom textures for the runways and taxiways. Land there and taxi around a bit - you'll feel like you're inside FSX, but without the considerable drain on your system resources.Looking at the custom textures and different type of autogen scenery, does anyone see a patern developing here :( . Instead of developers now moving away from FS9 completely, they are finding ways to upgrade it to unheard of extremes! I think we're in for some amazing add-ons just yet!As for reduction in price, I'd like to give you guys some idea of what the price impact is here in SA. As you know, we are traiding in the ZAR. When FS9 first appeared, it cost R 499,00. You can now get it for R109,00. The price has decreased quite substantially because of FSX comming on to the scene. It is however noteworhty that it is still possible to get FS 2002 here for R 90,00.Now let's take a look at some of PMDG's product's. When the FS9 747-400 became available here the retail price in our shops were R 675,00 without postage of R 45,00 at the time, so when the product ends up on your doorstep, it would have cost you R 720,00. The FS9 version is now R 890,00 (if memory serves) and postage has now increased to R 55,00 so it would now cost me R 945,00, in other words about nine times as much as the actual flight environment. If you want the FSX version that is R 960,00 + R 55,00! No matter how you look at it, that much makes a dent in your pocket (or bank account!)Now, I love PMDG's products, because in opinion they are the most realistic add-ons available. I'd like to thank them for the amazing work that they have done and will continue to do. You guys make us realize our dreams that never came into being :( The price impact is hectic, yes, but herein lies the crux of the matter for me - I'm a serious simmer and love spending hours of time just flipping through manuals and studying the technical information; I want to be as close to a certified pilot on the type when I'm done as is possible. I have almost 4 000 hours flight experience on the 747-400, for me the ultimate airliner of all time, and I'm approaching 70 hours on the 737 NG (only bought that end of last year :( ). If you are a real world 747-400 captain, you won't be flying anything else but that for your airline (correct me if I'm wrong). When buying a 747-400 from PMDG, you are obviously a serious simmer right? In my opinion, only buy what you are really going to fly, or it does sort of become a waste of money.I do agree that in the economic times we are in we have to be careful to overspend; use our money wisely. I'm also more than willing to pay top dollar for great products, but yes I do agree that it would be great to see the prices come down a little to make things more bearable for everyone concerned.I would also like to appeal to PMDG not to just cut FS9 from the production line - a massive amount of people still use it. Enjoy you flying everyone!Werner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Werner!All I want to say is that I think exactly like you, which I showed in many posts here and there. So no need to repeat myself again.FS9 is all I need and it is not going to change anytime soon. And I'm also saying it as an owner of FSX and quite a nice PC.Even if some developers definitely stop making FS9 products, I do have a lot of excellent sceneries, aicraft and utilities to enjoy FS9 for years. Still, of course, I will be buying more to come.One remark:

In this scenery, you can even see the cars driving on the roads (something up untill this point in time only reserved for FSX owners)
That (fortunately for us) is not true. There are busy roads with cars around some other quality FS9 sceneries (e.g. from Aerosoft or UK2000).It surely does add a lot of realism while on finals or departure. I love it too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now we have some more nice, free Caravelles from AFG :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, Werner!All I want to say is that I think exactly like you, which I showed in many posts here and there. So no need to repeat myself again.FS9 is all I need and it is not going to change anytime soon. And I'm also saying it as an owner of FSX and quite a nice PC.Even if some developers definitely stop making FS9 products, I do have a lot of excellent sceneries, aicraft and utilities to enjoy FS9 for years. Still, of course, I will be buying more to come.One remark:That (fortunately for us) is not true. There are busy roads with cars around some other quality FS9 sceneries (e.g. from Aerosoft or UK2000).It surely does add a lot of realism while on finals or departure. I love it too!
Yes, I'm sure there will be other high quality add-ons that has this feature, but I only have Kai Tak :-) I also found FSX's traffic too quick and "zippy", but in this one the cars are nicely holding the proper speed limit as you fly over them :-). I think what I'm trying to say here is that developers are (in some cases) doing just as much hard work for fs9 as they are for FSX which is good news to us :-). I tend to only get what I need when I buy, so I only bought that because I want my VA's hub where I'm stationed to add this as a scheduled stop in the route database (even if not a lot of people fly it - I will! :-)). I noticed that there are some really nice quality add-ons from FlyTampa like St Martin and some of the major American cities to which I will considder in the future.RegardsWerner747
And now we have some more nice, free Caravelles from AFG :(
Hi Gavin,Yes, I have never actually used any of their products - only hear of them. But I'm going to check these out! Thanks!RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have one that speed up FSX?
Hi nam1394,I found that when I installed the SP's my FSX rocketed! Apart from high fps, loading times have almost halved and the graphics look better. I run an old system by modern standards and before the SP's, it was almost impossible to fly and definately impossible to enjoy FSX - that has al changed now :-)It still takes it's toll on the system, but I only use it with my smaller planes on relaxing flights rather than when I pull my 744 out the hangar - that is what FS9 is there for! :-)RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi nam1394,I found that when I installed the SP's my FSX rocketed! Apart from high fps, loading times have almost halved and the graphics look better. I run an old system by modern standards and before the SP's, it was almost impossible to fly and definately impossible to enjoy FSX - that has al changed now :-)It still takes it's toll on the system, but I only use it with my smaller planes on relaxing flights rather than when I pull my 744 out the hangar - that is what FS9 is there for! :-)RegardsWerner747
I installed SP1 and I didn't see much difference. Will SP2 help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Werner 747 [i also use FS9 and if some of you posting here considdered your pc as below par, mine is even worse: a P4 3 GHz wit 1GB RAM and a 256 MB Geforce 6200 8X AGP. Yet I can run it with all the sliders flatout and using quality add-ons like PMDG's 747 and 737 software. I also run a very large volume of AI traffic packages and always use real world weather and I also fly online with VATSIM. I never get less than 20 fps even at KORD (which is a real frame rate killer!) and all the other big airports. My average fps is around 38 to 40 fps with these settings.]I would be interested in your fs9config. I also have a P4 3GHz But I am unable to have all the sliders flatout. My graphics card is a geforce 7800GTX. Perhaps you would be kind enough to let me have a copy of your configs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, from the replies in this thread, we need to acknowledge the virtues of our favourite sim. Since it is so enjoyable on my ancient AMD 1.8 XP2200, driving triple monitors/views via GE Force FX5200 cards- I have started to refer to FS9 as "Classic Sim"And FSX is now spoken of as "New Sim". My computer tells me it is very pleased with this nomenclature- and wonders if I remenber "New Coke".Alex Reid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DAH4062

Werner 747, I agree with you completely (almost).I am one of those guys you refer to with a better PC and less than perfect results (I even have a post moaning about it in the forum).I bought FSX in mid '07 and only used it for a day, and loved it, but had to stop due to the fact that my wet and flobbery PC was in agony.I have however taken delivery of what can be described as a nuclear bomb, but will still run FS9, as it has served me well for 6 years, also running high end PMDG, PSS, Wilco and Captain Sim stuff, with acceptable(ish) results (you may gather I'm a "hardcore" simmer like you, and yes, I only got FS98 when I was 11 because I want to be a pilot). I wil run it alongside FSX, as a lot of stuff is not really compatible as we all know, especially my darling POSKY models.But we cannot deny that once all the bugs are ironed out and that PC and software technology catches up, most will migrate to FSX. The sense of immersion is awesome and to bring FS9 up to its standard is ruinously expensive and time consuming, not to mention the 30+ Gb of space required for terrain, water and ground texture enhancements. The missions are often described as stupid, gamey and designed to get extra customers for MS, and while this may be true, they are quite fun and are already being put to good use as training tools for the complex aircraft mentioned above, as reading a manual is not as good as someone running you through it.BTW have you compared the FlyTampa VHHX with the freeware 9Dragons? I am thinking of getting it (eh, see FSX compatibility, we're starting to get the good stuff), and would like to know if you get the FS9/FSX in one bundle, and whether it removes VHHH. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Werner 747, I agree with you completely (almost).I am one of those guys you refer to with a better PC and less than perfect results (I even have a post moaning about it in the forum).I bought FSX in mid '07 and only used it for a day, and loved it, but had to stop due to the fact that my wet and flobbery PC was in agony.I have however taken delivery of what can be described as a nuclear bomb, but will still run FS9, as it has served me well for 6 years, also running high end PMDG, PSS, Wilco and Captain Sim stuff, with acceptable(ish) results (you may gather I'm a "hardcore" simmer like you, and yes, I only got FS98 when I was 11 because I want to be a pilot). I wil run it alongside FSX, as a lot of stuff is not really compatible as we all know, especially my darling POSKY models.But we cannot deny that once all the bugs are ironed out and that PC and software technology catches up, most will migrate to FSX. The sense of immersion is awesome and to bring FS9 up to its standard is ruinously expensive and time consuming, not to mention the 30+ Gb of space required for terrain, water and ground texture enhancements. The missions are often described as stupid, gamey and designed to get extra customers for MS, and while this may be true, they are quite fun and are already being put to good use as training tools for the complex aircraft mentioned above, as reading a manual is not as good as someone running you through it.BTW have you compared the FlyTampa VHHX with the freeware 9Dragons? I am thinking of getting it (eh, see FSX compatibility, we're starting to get the good stuff), and would like to know if you get the FS9/FSX in one bundle, and whether it removes VHHH. Thanks
Hi DAH4062Interesting write mate! I have not compared VHHX from FlyTampa with freeware 9Dragons, because I didn't know that something like that existed! LOL! But I will try to get hold of it to check it out. What I can give you though, is a good review of the FlyTampa VHHX.Unfortunately, you don't get the FS9 and FSX versions in one bundle. You buy them seperately. It also does not delete your VHHH. what it does is not only reinstates VHHX airport itself, but builds the whole city around it as well. If you have ever watched a good Kai Tak movie before from cokcpit view, you will be able to fly the approach without any problems - that's how realistic the scenery is; it is awesome! You have moving cars, static ships and all the buildings and the billboards are there and in the correct places. You even get fireworks displays in night approaches (which is absolutely beautiful) and they even put in the misty effect of the smog in the city!As for the the textures, you have two options - one is the SDK version. This uses deffault FS textures for rendering the runways, taxiways and buildings - not so cool but a lot more frame rate friendly. Then you get the non-SDK version. This looks like a different world! Photo realistic textures of all the runways, taxiways and buildings! It also includes static aircraft at the parkings (don't worry though - there is more than enough open parking spots for you :-)). The runway is also a photo real match for the real-world counterpart. You have to see this to believe it - it is AWESOME!!! The non-SDK version, as already mentioned an impact on frame rates - I get an average of around 35 - 37 fps with all the sliders open, but here it drops to about 17-19 fps (which really isn't bad, but noticable), so I don't know what will happen on FSX - but it is well worth the few fps drop for the quality; I'm not really that much of a visually driven person, but for this approach you must make an exception to that rule, because it is just amazing; you simply cannot ignore it! FlyTampa stated in the product review that they saw that the videos that get the most hits on youtube is the Kai Tak videos. That inspired them to this release. It is therefor no surprise that the IGS 13 approach is the main focus for this product, meticuously detailed and all the airport charts and diagrams are also included - you'll realy feel that you have flown this approach once you put that 747 down on the marks in some bad weather and strong winds :-)As for the installation, you add the aiport to the allready existing VHHH. You actually fly over VHHH as you make your right hand turn to start intercepting the IGS - this allows you to give the guys down there a smug look and let them understand that you are the superior pilot, because you are about to do the IGS 13 approach to Kai Tak! LOL! They tell you how to add this airport so that you have proper ATC (which I never use here) and also give you a step by step guide on how to get your FMC's setup for flying the approaches. I have followed this and my FMC's work without and hitches and I can fly the IGS runway 13 approach right up to the MM before disengaging the AP and flying that lovely right handed turn and approach to put her down :-). The installation is not as simple as just installing and launching FS, but it is not complicated either, just as long as you follow the procedures letter by letter, which isn't difficult to do either.All in all, an amazing product. If you can direct me to the freeware scenery, I can do the comparrison for you. But I can tell you now that you won't be sorry if you purchase the FlyTampa product. Check out their website for some amazing screenshots :-)As for the FSX transition, I have to agree that there will be a transition by a lot of people. But with the current economical situation and also the time needed to get my FSX updated with all the lovely planes that I do have, is going to cost me thousands so I will continue to use FS9 for years to come. I do enjoy flying FSX missions and also use it when I do helo flying for my VA. I also use it for my GA planes to do short and relaxed hops in, but yes, great product, but just like FS9, technology will have to catch up here a bit to :-)!RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Werner 747[i also use FS9 and if some of you posting here considdered your pc as below par, mine is even worse: a P4 3 GHz wit 1GB RAM and a 256 MB Geforce 6200 8X AGP. Yet I can run it with all the sliders flatout and using quality add-ons like PMDG's 747 and 737 software. I also run a very large volume of AI traffic packages and always use real world weather and I also fly online with VATSIM. I never get less than 20 fps even at KORD (which is a real frame rate killer!) and all the other big airports. My average fps is around 38 to 40 fps with these settings.]I would be interested in your fs9config. I also have a P4 3GHz But I am unable to have all the sliders flatout. My graphics card is a geforce 7800GTX. Perhaps you would be kind enough to let me have a copy of your configs.
Hi Mondeoman,Uhm, I don't really know to tell you the truth! LOL! I have never made any changes to my FS9.cfg file myself, but I will go and check out the config and get back to you. What I can tell you though, is that I don't use the standard FS9, I use the FS9.1 version update. I also find it a little strange that you cannot max FS9 on your system You have one monster of a graphics card there! Anyway, will get back to you soon!RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I installed SP1 and I didn't see much difference. Will SP2 help?
Hi nam1394,I don't know about that. LOL! I got both SP's at the same time a few weeks ago and didn't run FSX with only SP1 installed, so I don't know what the performance difference there would've been. What I do know is that the MS guys said that SP 1 was designed to give an increase of about 40% on most systems, whilst SP2 was supposed to fix scenery problems within the sim. For a complete list of updates you can visit FSinsider and see the MS reviews of all the changes. I would however recomend that you do install SP2 as well. From what I've heard from some people is that they got a reasonable performance increase after installing the adrenaline pack (which does come with SP2) after having run SP1 for some time. Again, I cannot verify this, because I don't have the Add-on package and I didn't actually see what their FSX ran like before that - it is hearsay evidence! LOL! Maybe someone can give you some guidance as to the missions in the add-on pack's performance in relation to the default MSFSX performance after installation.RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clearly, from the replies in this thread, we need to acknowledge the virtues of our favourite sim. Since it is so enjoyable on my ancient AMD 1.8 XP2200, driving triple monitors/views via GE Force FX5200 cards- I have started to refer to FS9 as "Classic Sim"And FSX is now spoken of as "New Sim". My computer tells me it is very pleased with this nomenclature- and wonders if I remenber "New Coke".Alex Reid
Hi Alex,Yes, I ran an FX5700 LE card with 128 MB RAM and 512 MB RAM for my system when I first got my PMDG 747-400. I asked the guys at PMDG beforehand whether they thought it would be wise, and they advised me to do an upgrade first. Curiosty and the love for the 747 eventually got the upperhand and I took that step - and was well rewarded! I ran like a gem (less fps than I get now, but still very good) with high FS9 settings. FS9 is very well designed platform and great to fly with - will be using it for many years to come!RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But we cannot deny that once all the bugs are ironed out and that PC and software technology catches up, most will migrate to FSX.
Whatever we say, I think this is possibly the truth. I know I'll give FSX another try when I get a newer computer. I do find it very sad that I have all these bautifull addons that will either not work at all, or badly in FSX, and that's a big reason for me to sit and wait for FSX becoming better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DAH4062
All in all, an amazing product. If you can direct me to the freeware scenery, I can do the comparrison for you. But I can tell you now that you won't be sorry if you purchase the FlyTampa product. Check out their website for some amazing screenshots :-)
Thanks for the info.Here are the filenames for the 9Dragons Kai Tak V2:9dv2p1-4: This is the .pdf manual, which is awesome (a word I hate to use, but does justice)9dv2p2-4, 9dv2p3-4, 9dv2p4-4: These are the installation files.9dv2-1: This is a little update that fixes some minor bugs.These are available here at avsim.com. Come to think of it, you could find them by searching "Kai Tak" in the FS9 scenery library, and then chossing Order by date, so that they appear together. The downloads are a little big, but it is well worth it. My only gripe is that it removes VHHH, so I dropped the Thomas Kwong scenery on top, minus the Landclass, with OK results.As for the FlyTampa one, I have already decided to get it, but prefer the opinion of a customer than a reviewer or the developer. Looking forward to it a lot, but you may not like the 9D one, it may be a bit of a downgrade, but not a big one (it took them 3 years, after all). On a final note, you are right there is nothing more satisfying than swinging a big ol' Jumbo into Kai Tak in rubbish weather (which it almost always is, kind of like England but with more sun).EnjoyRashid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the info.Here are the filenames for the 9Dragons Kai Tak V2:9dv2p1-4: This is the .pdf manual, which is awesome (a word I hate to use, but does justice)9dv2p2-4, 9dv2p3-4, 9dv2p4-4: These are the installation files.9dv2-1: This is a little update that fixes some minor bugs.These are available here at avsim.com. Come to think of it, you could find them by searching "Kai Tak" in the FS9 scenery library, and then chossing Order by date, so that they appear together. The downloads are a little big, but it is well worth it. My only gripe is that it removes VHHH, so I dropped the Thomas Kwong scenery on top, minus the Landclass, with OK results.As for the FlyTampa one, I have already decided to get it, but prefer the opinion of a customer than a reviewer or the developer. Looking forward to it a lot, but you may not like the 9D one, it may be a bit of a downgrade, but not a big one (it took them 3 years, after all). On a final note, you are right there is nothing more satisfying than swinging a big ol' Jumbo into Kai Tak in rubbish weather (which it almost always is, kind of like England but with more sun).EnjoyRashid
Hi DAH4062,Thanks for the indications mate! I'll get these asap and do a comparrison. I also have to say that you hit the nail on the head there with your comment about rather wanting to get people who use the product to comment than reviewers, because (to use another cliche) marketing will always be marketing, and what you cannot always be sure that you are getting what they say you are.One of the best examples of this is when they sell an airplane and say "certified by real world pilots" or some of the other very well known phrases and then the final package turns out to be a disappointment, so I also tend to speak to other people who already own the product to get their opinion of it first :-)RegardsWerner747
Whatever we say, I think this is possibly the truth. I know I'll give FSX another try when I get a newer computer. I do find it very sad that I have all these bautifull addons that will either not work at all, or badly in FSX, and that's a big reason for me to sit and wait for FSX becoming better.
Hi Thralni,I am very happy with my FSX at the moment, but I have seen some people with the same and better performance and then they go and buy PMDG's 747X and getting about 8 - 10 fps with it. That is no cool! LOL! I think I must get a much much better machine to be able to handle that and I'll wait until I can actually afford that in about 2 years or so and then look at migrating (THAT IS A BIG IF!!!). I think I'm gonna stick with FS9 for my platform to do my serious "heavy" flying on :-)RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you guys. I just installed PSS B777 in FS9 and it runs great. At EGLL, I get 17 FPS and higher. AI traffic at 80% and all my sliders at maximum except for MIP mapping quality at 5 and 3d clouds at 10. FSX, on the other hand, is a totally different story. Flaying default aircrafts at less demanding airports, I will get low FPS. My laptop is not the best. 2.0 duo core with 2GB RAM and nvidia geforce 8400m GS 256 MB and running VISTA. For us to be able to run FSX the same as FS9, we will have to wait for some time and I am keeping FSX in my shelf and for the time being I will enjoy PSS B777 which a great add on by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DAH4062
I just installed PSS B777 in FS9 and it runs great........ I will enjoy PSS B777 which a great add on by the way.
Really?? I have had it nearly 4 years and I hardly fly it anymore, I hate the model (new POSKY annihilates it) and the FDE is woeful. I have also got the PSS A330/340, A320 (fs02 ported into FS9), Dash 8, and Concorde. I have used merges with POSKY for the big buses, direct alias to PA A320 and the Conc. and Dash I use as supplied but not very often. I find that PSS panels are among the best out there (incl. PMDG 747, CS757), but I loathe the flight modelling. Just the way I feel anyway.Werner747, the library is dead here at avsim, but they should be on flightsim.com too, a site which I hardly use but in the last days has been a godsend. Let me know how you like the 9D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really?? I have had it nearly 4 years and I hardly fly it anymore, I hate the model (new POSKY annihilates it) and the FDE is woeful. I have also got the PSS A330/340, A320 (fs02 ported into FS9), Dash 8, and Concorde. I have used merges with POSKY for the big buses, direct alias to PA A320 and the Conc. and Dash I use as supplied but not very often. I find that PSS panels are among the best out there (incl. PMDG 747, CS757), but I loathe the flight modelling. Just the way I feel anyway.Werner747, the library is dead here at avsim, but they should be on flightsim.com too, a site which I hardly use but in the last days has been a godsend. Let me know how you like the 9D
Hi DAH4062,Yes I noticed that I cannot get in there! LOL! Anyway, thanks for the heads-up. Will check it out a little bit later. I also notice that you are not the first person not to like the PSS product line. LOL! Apparently they shut down a while ago and should be reopening some time this year it think. Never bought any of their products, couldn't afford it back then! LOL!RegardsWerner747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really?? I have had it nearly 4 years and I hardly fly it anymore, I hate the model (new POSKY annihilates it) and the FDE is woeful. I have also got the PSS A330/340, A320 (fs02 ported into FS9), Dash 8, and Concorde. I have used merges with POSKY for the big buses, direct alias to PA A320 and the Conc. and Dash I use as supplied but not very often. I find that PSS panels are among the best out there (incl. PMDG 747, CS757), but I loathe the flight modelling. Just the way I feel anyway.Werner747, the library is dead here at avsim, but they should be on flightsim.com too, a site which I hardly use but in the last days has been a godsend. Let me know how you like the 9D
I, also, have PSS A320 and PSS A330/340. I think their panels are the best, also, FPS friendlier than the PMDGs. But for the FDEs, I am not a real pilot so I couldn't tell. I use the IFDG merge for the A320, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DAH4062
I, also, have PSS A320 and PSS A330/340. I think their panels are the best, also, FPS friendlier than the PMDGs. But for the FDEs, I am not a real pilot so I couldn't tell. I use the IFDG merge for the A320, though.
I'm not a real pilot either, but there are certain things that show up that you can't miss e.g. the A330/340 when landing tend to fly pitch down (When settled on the ILS), and if you try autoland the nose gear touches first, so you have to manually reduce the speed by 10 knots on the MCP (Boeing term but I forget what Airbus call it). I read in PC Pilot magazine that the first version on download had the exact opposite effect, so perhaps they overcorrected. I assume that you don't have the 777, congrats, it rolls like an F16, esp. when you reduce rate through 4x or close the Map box, when it literally flips on to its side. Note that I have the CD versions from Just Flight, so these kinds of bugs should have been fixed. But I must reiterate that the panels are fantastic, there's no other word for it. True they are showing their age a tiny bit, but I find that the operation is very slick compared to the wilco Airbus (worthy successor even so). I'll be brief with the models: they're rubbish.
I assume that you don't have the 777
Sorry I was away for a while and didn't notice that you're the same guy! :( :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the indications mate! I'll get these asap and do a comparrison. I also have to say that you hit the nail on the head there with your comment about rather wanting to get people who use the product to comment than reviewers, because (to use another cliche) marketing will always be marketing, and what you cannot always be sure that you are getting what they say you are.One of the best examples of this is when they sell an airplane and say "certified by real world pilots" or some of the other very well known phrases and then the final package turns out to be a disappointment, so I also tend to speak to other people who already own the product to get their opinion of it first :-)
While I respect your opinion, speaking as an AVSIM reviewer I must contest this. A reviewer, certainly at AVSIM, is not bound to any developer. We simply install the program, try it out, and write down what we think of it. Influence of the developer is a no go for us! We are by no means a part of their marketing scheme. I think you can trust us to be honest in our reviews, and we are quite possibly a more reliable and useful source of information than a random customer (that's not to say customers are always not to be trusted, of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...