Coolsky DC9 Classic - any news following the first patch?

[hmsdreadnought 12]

The "Coolsky DC9 Released!" thread has gone cold. Curious how the plane is with the new patch.

 

Thanks!

[smokeyupahead 6]

No videos on YouTube , no where to find any usefull comments as to what works and what doesn't.

That's what I don't like about flight1's forums, you have to be registered to access which means you have to purchase before knowing how good or bad their products are.

It is odd that their are no videos or serious reviews up.

 

 

David

[radoslav01 1]

With beta1 patch COOLSKY DC-9 have more problems than in initial release version. Altimeter in VC shows 913 as a STD QNH, and during the flight some phantom flashing polygons appears in VC which are pretty iritating. I think those are the ''smoke in cockpit'' polygons... I'm not 100% sure what it is.

VC cockpit textures have mip maps and they are not in HI resolution as COOLSKY and MCPath shows on preview pics. That makes flying from VC extremely hard because switches inscriptions are hard to read.

There are two more things I absolutely hate about this plane. The first one is the fact that this DC-9 is made absolutely for retro flying using only VOR, NDB,... etc. I have tried to retrofit it with ISGSIM set of gauges (GNSXLS) but autopilot refuses to follow route, therefore I needed to manually sett hdg to stay on route.

The second thing i dislike very much is the fact that McPath delays paintkit on purpose.

As an online flier I need RNAV capability for some airports. Did somebody explained developers that some airlines still uses DC-9 equipped with GPS and if they vanted to make serious plane addon they should pay more attention on simulating NAVIGATION system (custom GPS with AIRAC cycle update). For me this plane is nicely repainted toy with which you can simulate emergency procedures but not flying on IVAO or VATSIM ...

[CraigyW 30]

I do believe that this addon has been marketed as 'retro' flying in the sense you navigate navaid to navaid or bearing and distance from a navaid. If thats not what you wanted radoslav01, you were a fool for purchasing the product.

[FlyGeordie 17]

I absolutely love this plane, and have had really no problems at all. I have none of the strange polygons in the VC etc. It performs great, and as said, it is supposed to be a retro plane, that is what Espen was aiming for - it's a DC-9 after all.

 

I love flying VOR<>VOR and NDBs, but if I cannot sit at the PC for a whole cruise, the plane will follow the FSX GPS flihgt plane anyway, when in doppler nav mode - that will do me.

[Dick 47]

I agree with Flygeordie. I also absolutely love flying the DC-9. It is new so indeed there are some issues. Nothing serious though for me. And the developer is working hard top get these rectified. Had a patch already after a week. This plane is not for the slower systems. And yes there is no FMS.. some interesting hand flying to be done here. Just as Flygeorgie I also use the FSX flightplan for the cruise .

[T_Fleck 36]

With beta1 patch COOLSKY DC-9 have more problems than in initial release version. Altimeter in VC shows 913 as a STD QNH, and during the flight some phantom flashing polygons appears in VC which are pretty iritating. I think those are the ''smoke in cockpit'' polygons... I'm not 100% sure what it is.

 

It did no such thing. Because you came up with one example of something that did not work after a beta patch, does not equate to it breaking more than it fixed. The fact is it did indeed fix a multitude of issues for the couple things that may have inadvertently been broke; it is a beta patch after all.

 

The flashing polys have been there since before the patch. This is an issue that McPhat will have to sort out, which I am sure they will. It is not caused by any of the gauge programming and is likely an issue with the 3d model. Also, not everyone has this issue, personally, it has only ever manifested once and went away on it's own.

 

VC cockpit textures have mip maps and they are not in HI resolution as COOLSKY and MCPath shows on preview pics. That makes flying from VC extremely hard because switches inscriptions are hard to read.

 

The textures indeed are in hi-resolution (2048); just not UHDT 4096 to be released later. I have no issues reading any of the labels in the VC although I do also question the use of MIPS.

 

There are two more things I absolutely hate about this plane. The first one is the fact that this DC-9 is made absolutely for retro flying using only VOR, NDB,... etc. I have tried to retrofit it with ISGSIM set of gauges (GNSXLS) but autopilot refuses to follow route, therefore I needed to manually sett hdg to stay on route.

 

That sounds like a you problem and not the developers.

 

The second thing i dislike very much is the fact that McPath delays paintkit on purpose.

 

This is my feeling as well, however, there is no proof for such a claim.

 

As an online flier I need RNAV capability for some airports. Did somebody explained developers that some airlines still uses DC-9 equipped with GPS and if they vanted to make serious plane addon they should pay more attention on simulating NAVIGATION system (custom GPS with AIRAC cycle update). For me this plane is nicely repainted toy with which you can simulate emergency procedures but not flying on IVAO or VATSIM ...

 

Again, that is something you would have to figure out. NWA's former DC-9-30's did not have GPS or other modern navigation equipment and they did just fine in real life, right up to the point they were retired a couple years ago. Fact is, you are asking for something that has found it's way into very, very few (if any) DC-9-30's.

[William J.S.S 173]

I love how the developers tell people it is a Beta patch, and people read official patch, and then complain

 

I love this plane, large numbers do not have these issues He speaks of. The Beta patch fixes night lighting issues and the Altimeter is being addressed. As for performance, yes she may be a little hard on the system. I see no issues even in Orbx KSEA but I don't have a low end system.

 

As for the retro style. Did you even read the description of the plane? The preview video before it actually shows most of the plane tells you that is is just that, retro, no or low tech.

 

 

 

BTW. It is called flight planning. I fly only on vatsim and use this in and out of KBOS KMIA KTPA KSEA KLAX KSAN KLAS and hundreds other. You can fly SIDS and STARS with it, you just have to know how to read charts is all and use navigation techniques that are learned at the most basic level for all pilots.

[JMR 2]

I returned my copy to Flight1. I'll probably pick it up later sometime down the road after a service pack has been released but so far it's been a big disappointment for me with regards to bugs and performance. Flight1 has a 30 day refund policy so it won't hurt to buy and try it.

[XPX64man 130]

I love the DC9. I did see the problem with the altimeter last night, but I was having OOM issues with it before and was able to make a three hour flight last night, so they must have fixed that also.

It's a great airplane with a beautiful cockpit. For sure, it's old style flying, which I still have a lot to learn, but having a lot of fun doing it.

[Wendall 50]

Like some of us, I have a ton to learn, but I enjoy the crap out this plane. After reading blogs and posts written by old timers who didn't necessarily make friends with glass cockpits, I thought, "hey, why not bring up a challenge and learn to fly/navigate old school?'

 

After I patched this bird, however, I get weird blue and red triangles in my VC, and the rear fan bladed look worse than they did. But other than that, the plane is still great!

[Houghton11 12]

Personally, this bird has been hangar-ed for me until the VC texture issues are sorted out.

 

It's kind of tough for me to go through all the hoops to get a psuedo-readable VC when my Carenado C90, QW RJ's and other addons all look much better...without having to play around with max_texture_loads.

 

I'd love to give it more of a chance but the systems was kind of disappointing to me as well. Not really the step up from Coolsky's MD's I was expecting.

 

On an even more personal level, I also have a bit of an issue of how McPhat has ran his outfit there for the last while. But that's personal opinion.

[haskell 307]

Buy it! I did. And returned it. That's the beauty of Flight1.

 

I LOVED this plane. I loved that there was no GPS... all old-school. If I want to fly "computer style" I'll pull out the PMDG 737. But this plane was a blast to flight plan... all VOR airways! That was part of the fun for me. Pretending I was flying in the late 60s with the tech that was available. And ALL simulated beautifully.

 

BUT, I had texture flickering and the crazy orange triangles. It bothers me that the excuse is "this is not for weak computers... turn some settings down". I have an i5 overclocked to 4.7 GHz and a GTX560. It should be able to handle it.

 

The kiss of death was a CTD. I had been flying a long haul with 2 hours of flying invested. And on short final... FSX shuts down. ARGH! I have never had ONE CTD since I built this rig for FS, so it had to go back.

 

But the refund process was fast and easy. So you have nothing to lose by trying. They say some people have no issues.

 

If I can be convinced all the bugs are gone, I will repurchase it in the future. I love it. Hope they do!

[aentwis 61]

I just feel that I have been returning more of the F1-wrapped packages than retaining them... the last to go back was the QW RJs... I very much think twice before buying pretty much any addon these days. Every time I do so without waiting out on first reviews, I have been stung by issues, poor performance, and so on...

 

If it means waiting an extra few weeks, then so be it...

 

A

[haskell 307]

Maybe I should take a lesson from you! It seems the initial release of all new planes is buggy. If I had the self-control to wait!