Hey everyone,

Can anyone tell me if the patches are already included in the product download when purchasing, or do we have to install the AC, then apply the patches separately? Thanks.

 

 

Best, Jeff

Wow, this plane still seems a contentious issue for users either aligned one way or the other as the above two responses demonstrate -

 

I have had the Skysim DC-9 since its release in 2009, and and while I am unimpressed with the VC Cockpit and the fuselage, it does fly well - and yes I am aware it is by no means as fully functional, nor with enhanced extra's - it offered the DC-9 10 thru 50 and also the Freighter and did offer some semblance of old school flying..

Soooo.... at this stage I am still on the fence. And here is why;

I know of two models coming up that I have a strong interest in purchasing; (PMDG's DC6 and Aerosoft enhanced Airbus X) and have a limited budget.

And the unresolved issue of the original MD80 from the same programmer - as briefly mentioned in one of the forum posts on this plane - the approach speed was never fully satisfactorily resolved to my mind. ( It tended to have a nose down approach rather than a 3 degree positive profile - and yes I experimented with various approach speeds at or below or above the recommended approach speeds ). I stopped flying it because of this issue and waited for a patch that never came.

You need too install the Original first, then patch 1, then patch 2 in that order.

 

Hope that helps.

This looks interesting. I have watched the Frooglesim Youtube clip of first impressions - he was pretty pleased with it but did mention low frames 14-15 Fps- until he carried out a complete reinstall of FSX and now he gets 30 plus FPS... (something I am completely loath to do with all the scenery, and airplane add on's with registration requirements that I have).

Looking at his specs, they are a fair bit better than mine - so I would love to know if this latest patch has optimised anything ..

 

Thanks for watching the vid. I have been waiting for these two patches to come out before I dove back in to do the full review. I'm starting on that this weekend. I still to this day haven't identified just what caused the frame rate drop requiring the re-install but from what I'm seeing now you "should" see approximately the same frame rates in this aircraft as in the PMDG 737NGX.

 

As for specs, yours are pretty close to mine. You actually have a more powerful processor but I beat you on graphics card (which really doesn't help all that much in FSX land).

 

Froogle, thanks for your reply. The Vid card, (and please forgive me if I misquote here), according to BOJO from a 2010 topic, really does help you if it has 2 gig of ram as you can use the Bufferpools=0 option (although from memory I think this possible tweak was in contention by Nick N) - so in theory, it should help with texturing and the blurries...

 

I await your review with interest - and I do enjoy your youtube clips

 

Ray

( It tended to have a nose down approach rather than a 3 degree positive profile - and yes I experimented with various approach speeds at or below or above the recommended approach speeds ).

 

I was under the impression a rear engine long fuselage airplane like a 727 or MD-80 would have a nose down approach

Most approaches seem to be just a few degrees up at most, there is very little difference between the approach and flare before touch down.

That's also roughly how the manual describes the approach too.

From the odd discussions with a number of ex-Air Canada DC-9'ers the fuelage profile varies nose up and nose down, per the flap position, gear up or down, load and CofG, with touchdown/flare in concert with Sara Louise's last two posts.

This topic of nose up or nose down was pretty heavily debated at the time I recall - but from my point of view if you drop an aircraft on approach below the recommended approach speeds and close to a stall, by all accounts it should lift the nose - instead, and this is from a couple of years ago now, my recall is that I just got a very heavy non-recoverable pitch down.

 

And I know this is not an MD80, here is an Eastern Airlines Dc-9-51 on final approach to reirement.

 

 

You can clearly see the approach angle is nose up, not down

Edited October 28, 201213 yr by ray hughes

I have downloaded the TMLE but unable to install it. I got an error by the end of the installation. Any idea? Thanks.

 

I would try to re-download it. Your download may be corrupted. Also install as administrator and disable your anti-virus.

I didn't have any problems with my install. It was pretty straight forward.

I would try to re-download it. Your download may be corrupted. Also install as administrator and disable your anti-virus.

I didn't have any problems with my install. It was pretty straight forward.

 

I've just re-downloaded it, disable anti-virus and run it as administrator but same error "error while creating or modifying exe.xml file".

 

Thank for supporting.

Post the contents of your current exe.xml file.

Coolsky DC-9 has definitely nose up attitude during approach. Full pax,25% fuel.

 

 

You can clearly see the approach angle is nose up, not down

 

The airplane is literally empty with almost no fuel. A flight never taken in real operation. That is not a good comparison