How on earth are Hifi going to fix something that laminar has refused to fix for many versions of XP. Activesky for XP is but a twinkle in Damien's eye at the moment I suspect, but I am sure he doesn't want to spend another 6 years trying to fix a huge bug in yet another simulators weather engine. I'd rather he put his time and skill into depicting better weather systems that appear more realistic, perhaps reading satellite imagery to more accurately depict what is really happening around the world along with dynamic changes in weather between updates from the server based on TAF's etc.

Hifi is a business with a product.Their product is an addon to another product (FSX)That product (FSX) is no longer supported, or being marketed, etc.Hifi's product will DIE if they don't integrate with another Flight Sim Product. The logical solution is to develop for Xplane. I'm sorry that the world of business and capitalism is such a mystery to you, but anyone else can plainly see the untapped market that Xplane represents. Learning the code will take a bit of time, but developing the weather sim will be relatively easy since it is a matter of porting existing code over to the new platform.

@Andy,I guess you won't be "Beta-Testing" for the X-Plane version.

Whoooow steady neddy where did I say anything about me not wanting Hifi to produce products for XP, why is it everyone in the X-Plane forum is so defensive and confrontational all the time, geez no wonder the world is in such a state if intelligent flight simmers cant even comprehend a simple post on a forum. Laminar are the only ones who can fix the turbulence system in XP properly, it is wrong to expect an external programmer to come along and hack into XP to fix it when Laminar could do it far more efficiently than Hifi could. I want Activesky for XP probably more than anyone else here does, I've been waiting to beta test such a product for many years, hint hint Jason, look at my signature and thank you for the witty and insightful retort.

This statement makes me think you think otherwise.

Activesky for XP is but a twinkle in Damien's eye at the moment I suspect, but I am sure he doesn't want to spend another 6 years trying to fix a huge bug in yet another simulators weather engine.

This statement made me think otherwise.

geez no wonder the world is in such a state if intelligent flight simmers cant even comprehend a simple post on a forum.

Don't be such a child. The world's problems have nothing to do with your trolling or the Flight Sim community in general. Xplane vs FSX is a First world problem, in the same way "I can't hear my tv when I eat chips because they crunch loud in my mouth" is a problem.Get off your moral high horse, you're not any smarter or more intelligent then any of the people posting on here today.

Edited January 26, 201214 yr by cmdrnmartin

I just went into XPX and tested that.I switched the engine off as noted and starting at a direct xwind of 20kts it was rock solid, went up to 30 kts still not moving. Finally at 40kts it started to slowly blow the aircraft around at the tail. This was in 10.03rc2. That is a little different from your results. What was it you said " turning around on it's axis in a 12 mph wind". Hmmm[edit]Just went back and ran the test again. At a 40kt wind it weather vaned into the wind then stopped moving with the brakes holding it.

Funny. This seems to be a problem that a lot of people have, but which doesn't exist because you don't have it. Nevertheless its announced to get a fix in the next beta.Hmmm

Don't be such a child. The world's problems have nothing to do with your trolling or the Flight Sim community in general. Xplane vs FSX is a First world problem, in the same way "I can't hear my tv when I eat chips because they crunch loud in my mouth" is a problem.Get off your moral high horse, you're not any smarter or more intelligent then any of the people posting on here today.

Sir, Being arrogant doesn't really make you smarter either.Please behave yourself if you wish to stay with us.Thx!

It's not arrogance. I'm not claiming I'm better, I'm saying that he's got an inflated sense of self worth. Also, maybe you should consider that he's trolling the Xplane forums looking for a rise, instead of accusing me of needing to 'behave.'Feel free to PM me if you wish to continue this conversational path.

Andydigital has in the past offered some good tips and advice. I've seen several posts that was very complimentery.Wish they would put a speel checker back on this forum. I might not look so dumb then. :(

CRFI models, and the new Activesky for XPLANE should address these issues.

I find it interesting how some X-Plane devotees take pride in the fact that their simulator of choice undergoes continual development and improvements, but then turn around and anticipate that a long-standing issue with flight characteristics in turbulence should or will be handled by a 3rd party addon developer.I take this to mean that X-Plane is no better than FSX in that users will need to depend on 3rd parties to correct errors and finish the product?X-Plane advertises itself as a higher standard in flight dynamics and simulation. I don't see the harm in holding their feet to the fire as it relates to that claim... but if they do want to crack into the less scientific flightsim market and go after the hobbyists and enthusiasts like me (aka: current FSX customers), they will need to make concessions to at least keep the simulator enjoyable, regardless of what the blade element math results in.

Wish they would put a speel checker back on this forum. I might not look so dumb then.

wb5okj, if you use Firefox, check this thread I put up in the help area - I was vexed by the same issues until I did some Googling and found a workable solution.-Greg

I do, (use Firefox), I did, and it works well. Many thanks Greg. A simple solution, which makes it an elegant solution. :(

Sorry I had image loading turned off in my browser. I just had a look.

hint hint Jason, look at my signature and thank you for the witty and insightful retort.

Did you read my post properly. It's already been fixed (if it was an issue with the f33 in the first place). XPX10.03rc2. Check what surface you got the AC parked on. (we are talking about the f33?)

Funny. This seems to be a problem that a lot of people have, but which doesn't exist because you don't have it. Nevertheless its announced to get a fix in the next beta.Hmmm

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by jasonX

I just tried a couple of flights with the 10.04 Beta 1, and there doesn't appear to be any improvement to the turbulence problem. Both flights were with very nice payware aircraft and ended in "over g" situations, and the weather was nowhere near bad enough to have created these issues. There needs to be some way to tame this turbulence down when using real weather. I was watching the weather data (data output), and the turbulence was jumping erratically all over the place, .05 to .3+, and when it got that high it would kick out the aircrafts AP, and within seconds the "over g" box appears and the flight was over. It wasn't like the aircraft went into a steep dive, it just said over g and that was the end.If the "real world" turbulence was anything like what we have in XPX right now, the whole aviation industry would be shutdown. You wouldn't be able to fly in anything but near perfect weather. Please tame down the turbulence.Glen

Edited January 27, 201214 yr by Muskoka

Mr. Laminar-president, tear down that turbulence wallgive us a turbulence-slider'cause yours is the source code