Next Generation Avionics in FSX?

[Guest Surge]

>I'm not sure why people are so critical of the Garmin 500>simulated in FS2004. I have actually played around with the>real unit in an avionics shop, and asside from not being able>to manually enter a flightplan I don't think there are that>many differences, and again, compare it to the FS2002 GPS!You're not able to go to cursor mode and scroll to a location to look up a navaid frequency or airfield info (my biggest headache). In FS9 it's locked to the flightplan with no cursor scroll mode.You're unable to change the information on the map screen using the menu. It just shows "no options" in FS9. The real unit allows you to show all sorts of info besides ETA and track info. IIRC you can even select what units you want to see the data in.You're unable to remove a waypoint or insert a new one into the flight plan - never mind being unable to create one.You're unable to save flight plans into the GPS units memory.I could make the list really long but those are my major gripes.Download and play with the simulator from Garmin for a few hours, then switch to the FS9 one and you'll suddenly become very frustrated like me. :DPaul

[michal 44]

Bill,I never had the GNS500 switch from enroute to terminal/approach sensing no matter what I tried. Perhaps I am going to try agian tonight.There was a long list (compiled by others) on Avsim forum listing all inadequacies of this particular GNS500. Microsoft simply cut/pasted pieces of original documentation from Garmin but it doesn't mean things are actually working. A good example is the look of the basic NAV page in this unit - in Microsoft's manual it doesn't even look like what we have in FS9. Yes, in their documentation things look very well (on paper).Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[Guest davidvoogd]

I never said it was perfect, but it was an utterly massive step up in realism over the previous GPS, and functions quite well. Just because a few features aren't included doesn't mean the whole simulation is trash.Yes I really am a Dreamfleet beta tester. You may notice they do include the Garmin 500 via a clickspot on their panels to supplement the excellent Reality XP Garmin 530 and 430.

[Guest tdragger]

Yes, yes. We suck. We know that. Thank goodness for folks like RealityXP. ;)

[michal 44]

>Just because a few features aren't included doesn't mean>the whole simulation is trash.No, it is not, but I would not call it Garmin GNS500 - if I were Garmin I would object. Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[Guest DreamFleet]

Michael J, David Voogd, please play nice. ;-)Last time I checked you were BOTH on our beta team.Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...R_FORUM_LOU.jpg

[Guest kurtj]

For me I would like to see a weather radar too! I also would like to see a working FMS or it intalled into whatever GPS so I can get my ETA. One of the quirks with the recent GPS even though it is nice to have, is that the ETA only works for each waypoint and not the total trip like the old one did. It also doesn't consider the time zone you fly over as well. The old GPS would give you approximate time of travel as well. I hope this will be improved into the next version.

[Guest davidvoogd]

Actually why not just include all of the above in one device with a full simulation of a Garmin 396, then you have weather overlayed right on your full moving map with all the info you could possibly desire :-hah

[Guest JeanLuc_]

Thanks Mike :-)

[Guest tdragger]

>>but I would not call it Garmin GNS500.We don't. Look closely.

[Guest rmaan89]

I think people are being really cynical, I mean fs2002 to fs9, the gps? WOW that was an incredible improvement, and for all those microsoft bashing 'kids' how much do you think can be implemented into that gps unit in the space of one fs version? The gps was amazing, and a HUGE step up in realism. It may not have been for the taste of our hardcore simmers, but ms had one version to bring their gps up to scratch and I think they handled that quite well. The only thing is we're now two versions down and with FSX comming out now, I would hope to see SOME kind of improvment on the gps, if not weather radar then maybe something to simulate the gps better and make it more realistic?Can anyone from MS comment on any likely changes to the gps unit? Can you at least say if there will or will not be any changes? ;)I still maintain that I could forget about all the other problems with the unit if I found something useful such as the weather radar. MS' weather engine gets better and better with each version, and the improvments they've made to the atmospheric environment from fs2000 onwards is AMAZING, i just want to take advantage of this with the radar! ;)Arman

[Guest tdragger]

<If there's good reason for change there will be. (IOW, no, I can't say--yet.)

[michal 44]

>>>but I would not call it Garmin GNS500.>>We don't. Look closely.You are right. I stand corrected.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

[Guest garwig2]

>>You're not able to go to cursor mode and scroll to a location>to look up a navaid frequency or airfield info (my biggest>headache)...>You're unable to remove a waypoint or insert a new one into>the flight plan - never mind being unable to create one.>>You're unable to save flight plans into the GPS units memory...All of these things can be done in the map window or the flightplaner without the limitation of having to do it with just five or six buttons. From a user interface point of view the map and flightplanner might actually be better, I don't see where time invested in these would benefit the Average Joes.

[n4gix 4,947]

>There was a long list (compiled by others) on Avsim forum>listing all inadequacies of this particular GNS500. Microsoft>simply cut/pasted pieces of original documentation from Garmin>but it doesn't mean things are actually working. A good>example is the look of the basic NAV page in this unit - in>Microsoft's manual it doesn't even look like what we have in>FS9. Yes, in their documentation things look very well (on>paper).I happen to know the CDI sensing works because I spent many hours rewriting the code to better emulate the GNS530 and GNS430 units. At the same time, I added quite a few new, functional pages and missing features.I was even nice enough to send the code to Susan at ACES for her (possible) amusement... ;)However, the single biggest drawback to all XML "code" is the complete inability to have file I/O (read/write) operations. That pretty much puts the nail in the coffin for any further development of the GNS in XML...