January 1, 201313 yr Well, I have a very short list of planned add-on purchases for 2013...Majestic Q400, PMDG 777, PFPX, Orbx Southern Alaska and/or NorCal. Of a short list, I think the Majestic is at the top of list. I very much look forward to a new turboprop. Eric Szczesniak
January 1, 201313 yr It looks incredible, maybe too incredible... at least for me. The NGX, I'm finding, is almost too complex for me... | My Liveries | FAA ZMP | PPL ASEL | | Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 64GB 6000 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |
January 1, 201313 yr Hi, can someone explain to me how it will have accurate weather radar returns? I heard time and again this is not possible in FSX. Have they made a breakthrough? Thanks Peter Peter James
January 1, 201313 yr Price? And I'm expecting the 'pro' version with failures to be expensive. Soarbywire - Avionics Engineering
January 1, 201313 yr Author I forget the exact details. If you look far enough back in Facebook you might find it. Basically it's the way they read it that they've done differently. Sorry I can't remember right now but I do know they way they're doing it has never been done before. Maybe I can find a link to what they said. Cheers Lee
January 1, 201313 yr This will be a must buy for me. I wonder if I'll have the discipline to wait a few weeks after it comes out, just to make sure? Probably not.
January 1, 201313 yr Author Omni- price will be dependent on what version you get. For the older Q300 the Pro was/is $70, Pilot $40 or something and the Airline $100 something. The Pro is what most of us would need,I think it will have failures but don't quote me on that. The Airline version was,well for airlines. Training and stuff.
January 1, 201313 yr It looks incredible, maybe too incredible... at least for me. The NGX, I'm finding, is almost too complex for me... The Q400 is a simpler plane to operate systems wise, but being a turbo prop, will be slightly harder to fly, especially concerning the engines. The 737 remember, has what's essentially a flight engineer's panel stuck on the ceiling, while the Q400, being a 1999/2000 aircraft is much more automated in terms of not having two APU generator switches, if you know what I mean. Also, my friend who flies with Horizon tells me the plane is very fun to fly, though he admits to being biased towards his own aircraft, whatever it be. Thanks, Adlai
January 1, 201313 yr Commercial Member Hi, can someone explain to me how it will have accurate weather radar returns? I heard time and again this is not possible in FSX. Have they made a breakthrough? quoting Oleksiy from Facebook : "our weather radar does not use the FSX clouds. Instead we analyze the weather report around the aircraft and at several hundreds weather stations around, and make the assumption about the reflectivity based on the beam geometry, the cloud layers heights, the types of clouds and the reported precipitation" the opinion that a weather radar is not feasable inside the FSX comes from a false idea that the weather depiction on the screen is directly related to the cloud coverage. The latter seems to be inaccessible in terms of variables and moreover limited to 80 nm. Our radar uses the same principles that a real one (reflectivity of water drops) and expands to the full range of 240 nm.
January 1, 201313 yr Looks stunning! Hopefully we'll get to see a Q200 and Q300 next! Simmerhead - Making the virtual skies unsafe since 1987!
January 1, 201313 yr quoting Oleksiy from Facebook : "our weather radar does not use the FSX clouds. Instead we analyze the weather report around the aircraft and at several hundreds weather stations around, and make the assumption about the reflectivity based on the beam geometry, the cloud layers heights, the types of clouds and the reported precipitation" the opinion that a weather radar is not feasable inside the FSX comes from a false idea that the weather depiction on the screen is directly related to the cloud coverage. The latter seems to be inaccessible in terms of variables and moreover limited to 80 nm. Our radar uses the same principles that a real one (reflectivity of water drops) and expands to the full range of 240 nm. Thanks very much. Peter James
January 1, 201313 yr Ready and waiting to buy this one, gonna be one of the top 3 add-ons of the year I'd say... Rónán O Cadhain.
January 1, 201313 yr Ready and waiting to buy this one, gonna be one of the top 3 add-ons of the year I'd say... Yep....Top 3-4 none GA's Aircraft will be, in no order Majestic Q400 FSLabs A320 PMDG 777 PMDG 747v2 David Murden. MSFS • Fenix A320 • PMDG 737 • MG Honda Jet • 414 / TDS 750Xi • FS-ATC Chatter • FlyingIron Spitfire & ME109G • MG Honda Jet • • Fenix A320 Walkthrough PDF • Flightsim.to • DCS • A10c II • F-16c • F/A-18c • F-14 • (Others in hanger) • Supercarrier • Terrains = • Nevada NTTR • Persian Gulf • Syria • Marianas • • [email protected] All Cores HT ON • 32GB DDR4 3200MHz • RTX 3080 • TM Warthog HOTAS • TM TPR • Corsair Virtuoso XT with Dolby Atmos® • Samsung G7 32" 1440p 240Hz • TrackIR 5 & ProClip •
January 1, 201313 yr Yep....Top 3-4 none GA's Aircraft will be, in no order Majestic Q400 FSLabs A320 PMDG 777 PMDG 747v2 For me: FSLabs A320 Majestic Q400 PMDG 747v2 I'm not really interested in the 777 even though I fly for BAV, nor does my other VA use them. Karl Brooker
Create an account or sign in to comment