Why do I still use FSX?

[fppilot 4,335]

12 hours ago, W2DR said:

Three reasons. 331 add-on aircraft. 603 add-on sceneries. And, most importantly, they all work.....flawlessly.

Well I do not have that many of either.  I primarily fly four FSX (now FSX SE) aircraft.  The Realair TDv2, Milviz B55 Baron, Milviz Cessna 310R, and the A2A Cessna 182.  I have 306 add on airports, mostly GA and freeware (quite a number are in the freeware Orbx Global Airport scenery).  I have flown into and out of all of them as I find and add them as I plan my flights based on real life events.  I also use Megascenery Earth as my underlying scenery, and at the altitudes I fly are quite acceptable.

My flights average just under two hours, some much longer, some much shorter.  I also fly with real time weather, which is often IFR and IMC, so realistic weather is important.  And thus navigation and AP implementation are important to completing flights.  

My FSX SE and add on installation appears to be sticking around for quite some time....

[Luis Hernandez 564]

Well, I say why not? I learned not to use add-on airports, and still run both FSX and FS9 in my laptop. I keep X-plane for some VFR sightseeing, until I get a better rig (or I'm sure enough my laptop won't complain about heat with MSFS2020).

[fs4fun 366]

The new MSFS has a lot of flaws and limitations, but I'm spending most of my sim time with it just to learn all the ins and outs. Just an example I'm on autopilot and ATC gives me the approach/transition (which is pretty cool actually, not just defaulting to vectors to final), so I put that in the GPS and the plane turns way off in the wrong direction, nowhere near the the transition waypoint. The thing that most impresses me is the performance on my lousy old laptop is quite respectable while also looking really good visually with no tweaking, that's not at all the case with FSX which took a lot of extra work to look good and perform well.

I'm not giving up FSX though, too many great addon aircraft, wonderful AI traffic thanks to AIG and fantastic weather simulation thanks to AS16.

[Patco Lch 1,459]

My hats off to folks who get the most out of what they have and don't have to go dancing after the pied piper chasing every new thing. Marketers do hate them.

[Bob Scott 7,704]

One reason--the PMDG MD-11

I keep FSX on my portable sim rig for the occasional MD-11 flight, and sometimes the J-4100 too.  But were it not for the MD-11, I'd probably have already dispensed with FSX.

[fppilot 4,335]

3 hours ago, fs4fun said:

so I put that in the GPS and the plane turns way off in the wrong direction

There appears to be a flaw where the G1000 / AP in some aircraft need a fix in place that precedes the IAF for the published approach in order to function correctly.  If the approach is activated with the IAF as the next fix appears to cause the issue.  I hope to better test the theory tomorrow or the next day.  In the aircraft I am flying the 172 (G1000) seems to be OK with the IAF as the next fix when the approach is activated, but the DA62 turns in the opposite direction.  
Now this is my experience when flying on a flight plan and is based on just when an approach is first "loaded: and then the approach is "activated" on the PROC page of the G1000 after passing the final enroute fix of the flight plan.

[fs4fun 366]

16 minutes ago, fppilot said:

There appears to be a flaw where the G1000 / AP in some aircraft need a fix in place that precedes the IAF for the published approach in order to function correctly.  If the approach is activated with the IAF as the next fix appears to cause the issue.  I hope to better test the theory tomorrow or the next day.  In the aircraft I am flying the 172 (G1000) seems to be OK with the IAF as the next fix when the approach is activated, but the DA62 turns in the opposite direction.  

Thanks, yes this happened to me in the DA62. I'll try the G1000 C172. In my case I was cleared to the IAF after crossing my last enroute waypoint and I immediately activated the proc.

[fppilot 4,335]

6 minutes ago, fs4fun said:

Thanks, yes this happened to me in the DA62. I'll try the G1000 C172. In my case I was cleared to the IAF after crossing my last enroute waypoint and I immediately activated the proc.

Also try again in the DA62, activating the approach before that last enroute fix and see what it does.  I have been too busy elsewhere this weekend to test it out.

By the way.  Thank you for being a donor and supporter here:

Edited September 13, 2020 by fppilot

[fppilot 4,335]

5 hours ago, fs4fun said:

Thanks, yes this happened to me in the DA62. I'll try the G1000 C172. In my case I was cleared to the IAF after crossing my last enroute waypoint and I immediately activated the proc.

Collectively we will get ahead of this.  Then we can clamor for the fix.

What we need here is for some member with actual G1000 experience to verify how it's logic works in this respect.  I have taken quite a number of rides in a GTN 750 equipped Cessna 310, and even more rides in a Baron with dual GNS's and have been declared proficient and delegated to handle those duties.  I have not on even one occasion ridden along on a flight in a Garmin glass panel equipped aircraft.

Edited September 14, 2020 by fppilot

[TuFun 426]

This is the only reason I keep FSX-SE/P3Dv3 around is for this aircraft.  I've done a lot of work on the Howard (paint) and the only thing I don't like about those sims is the lack of self-reflections which MSFS does very well.

 

Howard 500 by Milton 

[787flyer 633]

 

2 hours ago, TuFun said:

This is the only reason I keep FSX-SE/P3Dv3 around is for this aircraft.  I've done a lot of work on the Howard (paint) and the only thing I don't like about those sims is the lack of self-reflections which MSFS does very well.

 

Howard 500 by Milton 

 Hi TeD,

Yes I totally understand your decision to keep FSX and P3D around. 👍

Thats a nice aircraft.Did you add in the rivets and the screws yourself?  That's pretty impressive fuselage detail and the chrome reflections on the engine cowling look quite convincing.😁

Thanks for posting.

 

That also reminds me of another (5th) reason I also kept FSX around...

A good 3-5 years ago I invested a lot of time (100+ hrs I would say) spent designing airport scenery. I released 8 major versions of Frankfurt Airport for FSX with the latest detail of the airport layout, runways and taxiways as well as buildings I designed in GMax. Its nice to go back and get some enjoyment out of what you personally put into the sim even after all this time.

 

....oh and BTW that EDDF version is way more frame rate friendly in FSX than the commercial version sold by a well known distributor. Excuse me for a brief moment while I blow my own trumpet a little  🎺 Toot toot!

[TuFun 426]

13 hours ago, aldridgem said:

 

 Hi TeD,

Yes I totally understand your decision to keep FSX and P3D around. 👍

Thats a nice aircraft.Did you add in the rivets and the screws yourself?  That's pretty impressive fuselage detail and the chrome reflections on the engine cowling look quite convincing.😁

Thanks for posting.

 

 

Yep, all new normals (bumps), screws, rivets, and panels. Remarkable aircraft and basically the same aircraft from the FS2002 days, although it's been updated by Milton to FSX/P3D status.  FSX (bumps) and P3D (reflections). 

[kaosfere 3,115]

On 9/13/2020 at 4:14 PM, fppilot said:

There appears to be a flaw where the G1000 / AP in some aircraft need a fix in place that precedes the IAF for the published approach in order to function correctly. 

This is something that @cwburnett has been working hard on fixing for the CJ4 mod.   We're also going to be applying the same fix to the G1000 and (eventually) other Garmin displays.  So stay tuned to updates on either of those mods based on whichever you're interested in.

[ShawnG 1,823]

On 9/12/2020 at 8:07 PM, W2DR said:

Three reasons. 331 add-on aircraft. 603 add-on sceneries. And, most importantly, they all work.....flawlessly.

I absolutely guarantee that 603 add-on sceneries in fsx do not work flawlessly together, and if they work at all acceptably it is only after a whole lot of work, testing and patching.  Been there.  If I could do a simple install of my fsx purchases, and be able to fly the MD11 again, I would do it tomorrow, but... life’s too short for all that noise again.

now, if you have a tuned and working fsx setup on your rig already, enjoy!

[W2DR 1,859]

Give me a break. All I said was I HAD 603. Nobody is dumb enough to try to install all that stuff at the same time. I know what works together and what doesn't. It's not all that difficult to manage.