Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bert Pieke

Vertx DA62 has launched!

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, rwilson881 said:

I really like the aircraft and feel that the G1000 in it is adequate.

Personally i don't enter flight plans directly, I pull from Simbrief, enter it into my EFB and modify as required (correct rwy, SID, STAR, ...).

Unfortunately, I still don't have interior sounds in the 62 and haven't received any email or other support from Vertx.

Hope I didn't waste the $$.

I can only respectfully tell you that you didn't waste your money, it's on your end not on Sean's end. I do feel for your situation, but problem has to be in your sound setup, even if other planes do have sound, otherwise there  would be more users losing their sound on this plane.

  • Like 1

i7 7700K @4.6, GTX 1060 6 Gig, Windows 10

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, rwilson881 said:

I really like the aircraft and feel that the G1000 in it is adequate.

Personally i don't enter flight plans directly, I pull from Simbrief, enter it into my EFB and modify as required (correct rwy, SID, STAR, ...).

Unfortunately, I still don't have interior sounds in the 62 and haven't received any email or other support from Vertx.

Hope I didn't waste the $$.

you could check your sound files are there, look in :-

C:\Users\???????\Documents\Prepar3D v4 Add-ons\Vertx DA62\SimObjects\Airplanes\Vertx DA62\Panel\Sound

click on one of the wav files to see if it plays.

you have installed into the default location ie 'Prepar3D v4 Add-ons' Folder

bob

ps you could also check the path to the sound (internal sounds)  is correct in the panel.cfg file ….

gauge01=dsd_p3d_xml_sound_x64!Sound, 0,0,1,1, \Sound\Sound.ini

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Calm down, guys 🙂 I didn't want to insult Sean and his great project, it is simply not adequate for someone who flies real DAs all the time. So I will just back off the product running on P3D pro for now and see what happens. If some of you enjoy the present version, great. Have fun and we'll see what might be in the pipeline. I trust in Sean's great talent. 

 

  • Like 1

Sebastian J Hess
heavy PMDG user

 

Share this post


Link to post

I am day purchaser of this amazing bird.  I hope Sean is doing well with his situation.

Really hoping that new upgrade has full navigraph support baked in.  It is absolutely annoying to have subs to have airac data - FSaerodata and then Navigraph.  I do want damage/etc/wear & tear modelled in too.  I am quite positive that there will be update soon.  Hang in there everyone.

  • Like 1

FSBetaTesters2.png

One of these days, I will get my Tech Alpha invite for MSFS2020

Share this post


Link to post

Well said - it needs to be integrated to make it complete. 


Sebastian J Hess
heavy PMDG user

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/28/2019 at 2:38 PM, Skywolf said:

I am quite positive that there will be update soon.  Hang in there everyone. 

Reliable info? or optimism?

  • Upvote 1

Jose Albino

i7-4790k @4.6Ghz -16 GB DDR3 - GTX1060 Asus 6gb ROG Strix

WIN10 - P3D v.4.5, X-PLANE 11, FSX-SE, FSW

Share this post


Link to post

onebob

No interior sounds

thanks for the suggestions. I've checked all you suggested and I'm good.

I've also tried changing the default installation location from ".... add-on" to the P3D root, with no joy.

I also agree with Bazza744  and Skywolf about hoping for a update soon.

but first hoping Sean's real world issue is not too bad and resolved.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, rwilson881 said:

I've also tried changing the default installation location from ".... add-on" to the P3D root, with no joy.

It will only work if you select the 'default location' ( addon folder) at the install, I load the Air commander 114 first because I have a problem with engine graphics, so you could try that.

bob

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Bob,

Just uninstalled and reinstalled back into the "..add-on" folder. still get the alert, no sound and reinstalling the sound package does not fix it.

I've checked all my drivers are up to date.

This is only happening with the 62.

I'm sure once I can get some support from Vertx, It'll be resolved.

thanks for the suggestion.

Ron

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/19/2019 at 9:52 PM, Bazza744 said:

Well, I do so respect there are personal issues - but if there is no further development on a basically brilliant idea, it is such a shame when such a magnificent project stagnates. Flight envelope works really well, is v close to the real thing, but if you offer the G1000 manual on the website and the software can only perform 30% of the real system, that's a bit off. Nice eye candy, but it would be great if AIRAC and navigational behavior would be more accurate. I'd be happy to pay PMDG rates like $120++ if it were equipped with more system accuracy. Kudos, Sean, but that would be wonderful. Otherwise, it's a castrated version of something that has so much potential, I am flying DAs all the time, and we agree it could even be a great training tool - not a video game. (by the way, your rendering of the flight deck is wonderful, just a bit lacking in system depth when you fly the real thing all the time) Just my 2 cents. And that differentiates your rendering from a company starting with C.  

Hi, out of curiosity when you say the G1000 shows only 30% of what it can do in real life, what do you mean exactly? When you download airac data through Fsaerodata you get a pretty much complete navigation base. 

I do agree that we miss airport charts (but this is the kind of stuff you are better looking on your tablet or computer), weather or safetaxi, but what else you see that is missing that makes it not enough good for training? I’m not a real life pilot so I am curious. 

Also I see a lot of complaints about this G1000 but is there a better P3D G1000 out there?

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Karelpatch said:

Hi, out of curiosity when you say the G1000 shows only 30% of what it can do in real life, what do you mean exactly?

There are many basic G1000 functions which simply aren't included at this point, and as soon as you start to do any real nav, you come across these limitations. Even basic things are missing, like you can't pan the map, which is a hell of a limitation when you need to scan around the map to check anything out. I also see overshoots of corners especially at higher speeds under GPS autopilot control, so the plane fails to preempt corner turn points to give smooth progressive navigation. And there are just lots of functions which you get used to using on a daily basis on an G1000 which as plain missing at this early point in the development of the Vertx DA62.

The plane itself is lovely, great to fly and handle, great flight model, a real joy, but at least for me, a lot of the joy of flying a plane like this comes from doing IFR nav in low vis in mountainous/difficult areas in bad weather and being able to use full IFR techniques and glass cockpit facilities, and that isn't fully possible yet due to omissions in the implementation at this stage of it's development.

Over the years I've got used  to flying RealAir stuff with the Flight1 Garmin GTN suite, which is a full implementation apart from weather radars, and I look forward to a similar implementation in the DA62.

However, I'm not sure we will ever get that. It may just be too much work for one man. The Flight1GTN GPS in RealAir planes is not programmed by Flight1 or Sean. They just provide a shell inside which the real Garmin GTN Trainer code runs, so all the real computation donkey-work, accuracy and elegant navigation is done by the original Garmin code.

I'm not sure that is the case with the Vertx DA62. I did not have to install a Garmin G1000 trainer to get the DA62 G1000 working as it stands today. It seems to me that Sean is having to rewrite the actual G1000 code as an emulation in it's entirety within the Vertx DA62 model, which it would seem is a big ask - such code takes years for a team of specialist developers to write.

So I expect as Sean's real life allows, we will see updates and improvements to the DA62 G1000, but I doubt we will ever see a full study level G1000 implementation, not unless he can move to incorporating the Garmin Trainer code in a shell again.

But having said that, Sean has a habit of exceeding our dreams and expectations, so I would be very happy to be proved entirely wrong. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post

Question is where is Rudi? I know he was beta testing the product and hasn't posted since March.  Hope all is well on your end @rudi0310

Love watching his DA-62 Videos

  • Like 3

FSBetaTesters2.png

One of these days, I will get my Tech Alpha invite for MSFS2020

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/14/2019 at 3:22 AM, SledDriver said:

There are many basic G1000 functions which simply aren't included at this point, and as soon as you start to do any real nav, you come across these limitations. Even basic things are missing, like you can't pan the map, which is a hell of a limitation when you need to scan around the map to check anything out. I also see overshoots of corners especially at higher speeds under GPS autopilot control, so the plane fails to preempt corner turn points to give smooth progressive navigation. And there are just lots of functions which you get used to using on a daily basis on an G1000 which as plain missing at this early point in the development of the Vertx DA62.

The plane itself is lovely, great to fly and handle, great flight model, a real joy, but at least for me, a lot of the joy of flying a plane like this comes from doing IFR nav in low vis in mountainous/difficult areas in bad weather and being able to use full IFR techniques and glass cockpit facilities, and that isn't fully possible yet due to omissions in the implementation at this stage of it's development.

Over the years I've got used  to flying RealAir stuff with the Flight1 Garmin GTN suite, which is a full implementation apart from weather radars, and I look forward to a similar implementation in the DA62.

However, I'm not sure we will ever get that. It may just be too much work for one man. The Flight1GTN GPS in RealAir planes is not programmed by Flight1 or Sean. They just provide a shell inside which the real Garmin GTN Trainer code runs, so all the real computation donkey-work, accuracy and elegant navigation is done by the original Garmin code.

I'm not sure that is the case with the Vertx DA62. I did not have to install a Garmin G1000 trainer to get the DA62 G1000 working as it stands today. It seems to me that Sean is having to rewrite the actual G1000 code as an emulation in it's entirety within the Vertx DA62 model, which it would seem is a big ask - such code takes years for a team of specialist developers to write.

So I expect as Sean's real life allows, we will see updates and improvements to the DA62 G1000, but I doubt we will ever see a full study level G1000 implementation, not unless he can move to incorporating the Garmin Trainer code in a shell again.

But having said that, Sean has a habit of exceeding our dreams and expectations, so I would be very happy to be proved entirely wrong. 🙂

Thanks for your detailed answer. Yes I heard that the Vertx G1000 has been written from scratch whereas the Rxp and F1 GTN are based on the Garmin trainer. 

I also find the lack of pan ability frustrating but I got used to it since I don’t know if it’s even possible to develop this from scratch. I also noticed the turn overshoots, definitely an issue that could be fixed. 

In the last months I have been using the Vertx DA62 almost exclusively, doing a trip around the world with real weather and almost always in real time. I do small legs and touch and go in various airports, taking my time and having fun. I departed from Paris, France and currently exploring Alaska. I am trying to be as realistic as possible and learning a lot about IFR and VFR charts and rules and I only use VOXATC. I must say that I’ve be been learning a lot during this time. 

This is where I have trouble to understand exactly how the current DA62 G1000 prevents us from doing realistic IFR: I plan my routes using IFR charts, enter coordinates in Littlenavmap or some other planning softwares and then load my flightplans in P3D and everything appears as it should be in the G1000. I updated all AIRAC data with Navigraph and Fsaerodata, so when i am given an arrival procedure I can load it normally with the G1000.

For SIDS I have to use workarounds, that is true, because they don’t appear in the procedure tab.

Vnav works very well as long as it’s not a direct-to route. 

No weather support on the G1000 but I use a radar module and/or my tablet and it’s perfect for me. I’d like to have the airports METAR and TAF at least. Shouldn’t be hard to add.

No charts inside the G1000. That’s too bad but I understand they would need some sort of subscription. This would definitely be something I would pay for. I use AirMate or Aerovie instead + Skyvector. 

No safetaxi. That’s a luxury I’d be happy to have. 

 

But these things that are missing are not a deal breaker in my opinion. I don’t see why you can’t fly realistic IFR if you have to load the charts and the weather on your iPad? Everything else is there for a safe flight, don’t you think? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Sure, but in the real world, the reason you splat all that money on G1000 or similar, is to have all those things integrated. So some of them missing, breaks the immersion in a second.

Share this post


Link to post

I can see your argument and would also love to have a more in-depth experience..

But with the Vertx DA62 you got a high fidelity aircraft addon which flies to the numbers, looks great and is really immersive. PLUS you get a pretty well usable G1000. All for 40 bucks. Mindstar sells their G1000 (only the G1000, and it's not even based on the training software, so even that one is not fully usable) for 50$ alone. Nearly all GA addons do not even come with a digital cockpit, but replicate steam gauges and leave the rest up to units like the GTN series by Flight1 or RXP. And their aircraft also sale for around 40. What you get in the Vertx package is absolutely great value for the money. 

I too hope there will be a further update with more functionality, but with a fully working G1000, with Wx, and some other additions this addon would have to sell for maybe 60 or 70. And who would spend that on a GA? Too few 'special interest' people to make it profitable. One idea would be to add an advanced version as a further payware addon. I'd be happy to get that.


Regards.
Matthias Hanel
 

MilViz Beta Team // Econair Staff

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...