Can anyone see the wing tips from the cockpit or is it just a floating light

 

Wings are not visible from VC "6 one way, half a dozen the other" on that one. On the down side you can't see them; on the up side, they are not eating up resource. For anyone on the fence, I say give it a shot, F1 has a generous refund policy and they can't all be PMDG ya' know.

Hey all,

Thanks for all your Forum posts.

 

I have a question for MindYerBreak,

 

You obviously don't like the VC Cockpit which is fair enough,

As it is difficult to please all the people all the time,

Could you give a brief and constructive description of what you do, or don't like about it.

 

Customer satisfaction is not something we can always achieve,

but we are a fairly open lot here at McPhat,

and can talk to us, so I personally am just intrigued.

 

Granted it's not PMDG, otherwise it would be a PMDG copy yes?

We have used 2 completely different methods for rendering the cockpit,

The method we chose was using the bump and specularity functions of FSX to give a more dynamic system to the way

it looks as the plane banks and pitches, and as the sun moves around, you will see the cockpit differently,

We could have gone the photo method, there are a lot out there being such an old bird,

but that wouldnt give the feeling of textured surfaces, only the appearance.

 

I'm not saying we can ever please everyone,

but continuous improvement is only from feedback in a constructive way,

some things we can implement, some we can't.

 

Anyway's,

Thankyou to those that do enjoy this one,

and sorry to those that don't.

 

Safe flying everyone

 

sara

"A bunch of vague nonsense"...

Thank You!!!

And I guess YOU must be the mastermind of all times giving You the right to call what i wrote "A bunch of vague nonsense"

I have the right to give what thoghts I want about the DC-9 WITHOUT have Your "A bunch of vague nonsense" thrown in the face!

Shame!!!

 

P.

 

You have a major attitude problem

 

You come in here and bash a product without any actual facts to back it up. That's why I called your post vague nonsense

 

And instead of coming back and posting actual facts, lists of things that aren't right, you just keep yapping and using lots of exclamation points.

 

Keep your useless non helpful comments to yourself.

 

The fact you tried claiming it was light on system modeling just shows you are probably trying to push an agenda rather than post informed posts.

 

How does it land? Their Super 80 had some kind of bug when landing. Seemed to always have a nose downward attitude that I could not correct, no matter what speed I set. Not a good experience

 

The price that they are asking is more than I want to pay to try another of their products.

 

I will wait for more reviews.

 

It's not a bug, that's how airplanes with small wings and powerful engines in back land. It's a different strategy to bringing them down compared to mid wing mid engine airplanes.

I really like the way the VC was done. I like the way the light moves through the VC. It is a neat approach to texture. I hope they do a re-done MD-80 VC with these effects:) Check this video out of the vc...pretty stunning!!

 

Bought it, set texture loading to 4096....and really a big....'meh'. To comment on the texture issue, 4096 at least makes things readable, but my NGX cockpit looks much better at 1024. I think there will be a fix for this in the future though.

 

The gauge programming and systems seem to be a rework of the Super80 package, with the inclusion of functioning circuit breakers. Even those don't really work quite right either (pulled a few of the FWD LEFT FUEL PUMP AC Phase breakers and got no annunciation). I would have thought we'd see a bit of an improvement over the Super80 in a couple areas, like actual electrical loading.

 

 

 

You mean this one?

 

Jos

I hope the FPS issues get resolved, I love steam gauge planes and navigating by vor

You mean this one?

 

Jos

 

Nice. It seems lthere may be some previous opinion and experience coloring people's opinions about this latest Coolsky release before they really take the time to inspect the systems programming of this aircraft. This is my first Coolsky purchase, and based on my past research, I believe Coolsky wasn't known for extreme-realism systems simulation, but they are solidly at that level with this release. This is particularly true in my opinion with the fantastic failures simulation, working circuit breakers, and functional EPR gauges (looking at you Captain Sim on this one).

I always considered Coolsky to be at the top when it comes to tutorials and step by step explanations. No other addon maker truly "teaches" you how to operate the aircraft. Their 2D tutorials were innovative and top notch.

 

That said, I'm a bit hesitant. Can anybody else post FPS numbers?

No wonder PMDG takes so long to release! This is a tough, critical group to satisfy with new releases (myself included). I haven't bought the Coolsky YET for the following reasons:

 

1) PRICE (I'm not cheap btw, after all I am American we spend spend spend to keep the world economies afloat:)

2) Reviews mixed from Avsim users, especially about the FPS issue

3) Space in my hangar running low since I have so many payware aircraft already

4) The wings... something about the wings doesn't feel real to me

5) Something about loading of default Cessna 172 prior to selecting this aircraft? Is this 2012?

 

still may get this but on hold for now

the fact that its 2012 has nothing to do with loading the 172 first.

 

A lot of payware planes with in-depth systems need to have the 172 loaded first, even if the company doesnt put oit in the manual, its considered something that sometimes needs to be done

 

lee

the fact that its 2012 has nothing to do with loading the 172 first.

 

A lot of payware planes with in-depth systems need to have the 172 loaded first, even if the company doesnt put oit in the manual, its considered something that sometimes needs to be done

 

lee

 

Agreed, I do that with some of my aircraft just to be safe.

I think the date reference is eluding to perhaps having a significant amount of time to find a way around that limitation. I have many aircraft, few of which really require this. PMDG included.

The plane is not that bad on frames. I see the same or lower as in 2 or 3 compared to the NGX. I also run at super heavy addon regions and airports almost all the time.

 

I would be curious as to know the difference in how this is an issue for some as some people are running better rigs than mine and getting less frames.

 

I am getting around 25-30 with this plane with the exceptions being at FlyTampa Tampa and Orbx area KSEA and that is with pretty high settings.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This certainly is why PMDG takes so long to release stuff. I knew with the NGX it would be ready and even then their SPs were very fast. Not that I expect this to be PMDG. I am 98% sure I will buy it but I am going to wait a few months and I hope there will be a SP or two to sort some things out. I will probably go after the QW Avro first and save this one for the holidays.

 

A lot of payware planes with in-depth systems need to have the 172 loaded first, even if the company doesnt put oit in the manual, its considered something that sometimes needs to be done

 

 

I have honestly never heard of any addon requiring this...