28 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

Direct from WT/Mat above ::::

I was the same about mods, but glad I decided to try them. Much easier to add/remove than P3D !!

 

G

Goodness!  So do I just extract the closed folder into the Commity folder and that's it?  Or do I need to go to Content Manager and install after that?  Do I need to install the G3000 mod to make the CJ4 work properly.  Thanks ;o)

17 minutes ago, Noel said:

Goodness!  So do I just extract the closed folder into the Commity folder and that's it?  Or do I need to go to Content Manager and install after that?  Do I need to install the G3000 mod to make the CJ4 work properly.  Thanks ;o)

No, CJ4 mod is a one shot. If you want to mod the Longitude then you'd want the G3000 mod and Darkfly's Longitude mod. Literally just unzip to community and it's there, delete it to remove in it's entirety - not found a catch yet 😉

 

G

 

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Goodness!  So do I just extract the closed folder into the Commity folder and that's it?  Or do I need to go to Content Manager and install after that?  Do I need to install the G3000 mod to make the CJ4 work properly.  Thanks ;o)

You are better off getting Addon Linker and saving all your mods in various folders elsewhere and linking them back to the Community Folder.  That way you can turn individual mods (or entire folders of mods, like all of France, or all the mods that you only use with one particular aircraft) on and off willy nilly before flying without deleting them.

Edited May 8, 20215 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

As an older phart one of the aspects about MSFS that appealed to me from the start was getting away, permanently, from various mods, tricks, links, tweaks, hacks, myriad addons for weather, for flight planning, installers like Orbx Central as nice as it was it's pretty much Marketplace w/ Content Manager, etc etc which I did for decades w/ FSX/P3D.  I've not really had any issues w/ MSFS, maybe 2 CTD since August 2020, and so I am loath to mess with anything anymore!  I am still loving getting rid of the spinning load indicator and restoring great performance ever since.  But thanks Glenn I appreciate the thought. 

I installed the CJ4 mod and have to play with that soon, but I must say I like the simplicity of the cockpit in the Citation L quite a lot, which is why I'm having a blast hand flying a procedure out of KBJC to KJAC which now at altitude we turned it over to the autopilot so I could visit Avsim and chit chat a bit 

to VFR vs. IFR, I'm using MFSF as a scenery generator for the Aerowinx PSX 747-400 and I'm happy with it, except some snags like the weather syncronisation and sometime framerate issues, But overall it is working as it should - the VFR scenery with the IFR aircraft.

To the initial question: Becaus I only fly it VFR for a variety of good reasons!  I have a separate fully-capable IFR worthy simulator for those flights!
Two out of three of my flights are IFR.

 

Edited May 9, 20215 yr by fppilot

On 5/5/2021 at 7:41 PM, fppilot said:

I am not convinced that is the case.  There seems to be an understanding of current aviation in previous sims that does not seem to be in MSFS.  It just seems to me that those doing the coding are watching videos of actual aviation and flight operations and then attempting to code that which they understood, or felt they understood.

Hi Frank

I see your point and I understand you, But I believe most is perception.

The head folks @ Asobo took PPL training and fly real planes. These guys are smart and question everything they dont understand. They respecfully push back things they catch as speculation. 

They are also  modellers too. If they don't find physics and math to justify what they are told by 'sim experts'  (there are more of those around than we need  for sure)  on a complaint, they either go & fly the plane or bring it up with the tech contact with the manufaturer and resolve it.

We rarely had this before outside of PMDG and few others. RIght?

I used to count this but I gave up. It was about 3 out of 5 hated complains I read here and in other forums were the real plane never had the asked features.  Can you believe that? 

The product is not perfect, but I tell you: We now have a bunch of clever people supporting and enhancing the product. We had nothing for about 10 years. Do we want to go back? 

I fotgot to mention about the QA sessions, comms program etc. When did we have that before? MSFS support priority comes from our input as users, (not here of course) but on the dev support zendesk.

Cheers and thanks for your feedback !

AHS712D Alvaro Escorcia KSGR

AirHispania Virtual Airlines

 

 

Edited May 13, 20215 yr by wlix261

23 minutes ago, wlix261 said:

We had nothing for about 10 years.

We had PMDG. We had A2A. We had ORBX. We had so, so many talented and passionate developers supporting and enhancing FSX, both in its original form and as P3D. Do we want to go back? Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows? Depends on the future. But one thing I know for certain: I definitely don't want to lose them and what they stand for.

28 minutes ago, wlix261 said:

Hi Frank

I see your point and I understand you, But I believe most is perception.

The head folks @ Asobo took PPL training and fly real planes. These guys are smart and question everything they dont understand. They respecfully push back things they catch as speculation. 

They are also  modellers too. If they don't find physics and math to justify what they are told by 'sim experts'  (there are more of those around than we need  for sure)  on a complaint, they either go & fly the plane or bring it up with the tech contact with the manufaturer and resolve it.

We rarely had this before outside of PMDG and few others. RIght?

I used to count this but I gave up. It was about 3 out of 5 hated complains I read here and in other forums were the real plane never had the asked features.  Can you believe that? 

The product is not perfect, but I tell you: We now have a bunch of clever people supporting and enhancing the product. We had nothing for about 10 years. Do we want to go back? 

I fotgot to mention about the QA sessions, comms program etc. When did we have that before? MSFS support priority comes from our input as users, (not here of course) but on the dev support zendesk.

Cheers and thanks for your feedback !

AHS712D Alvaro Escorcia KSGR

AirHispania Virtual Airlines

Finally, a voice of reason and knowledge as well, amid the din of speculation frequently put forth as fact.  I could tell this was the case from Day 1, have encouraged folks to appreciate they don't have a clue why things are the way they are, and that Asobo's project timeline while somewhat public likely doesn't full reflect their true prioritization schema, and they didn't get to the incredible level they did already w/o knowledge, skill and dedication required to even get this far.  Thank you for this!

As a side note I had an incredible flight in the default Citation L this morning from Kuwait Intl to Dubai Intl, an procedure-selected ILS approach to 31R at dusk, that was flawless and absolutely incredible! 

I am saddened that something in airport SDK available to developers have left out a very nice feature that almost all of the default airports have, but only rarely do 3rd party developers also enable, and that is getting the ILS Freq fields into the MFD in the G3000:  Waypoint Info > Airport > Freq tab.  In default airports one can scroll to the ILS freq for that runway, click it and it activates, so with no need to look for ILS freq outside of the sim and manually enter them. I really like this feature that FSDreamTeam has in fact discovered the way to get them to also work in their airports, as well Roman Designs of Canada worked to learn how to not lose this functionality.  My two airports from Orbx and one from FlightBeam did not solve this.  I zendesked it early on in the hopes Asobo would fix this fast so all of these airports you see released in the Marketplace will work correctly, but alas they closed the ticket and took no action.  I won't buy any airports w/o this basic desirable functionality.

Edited May 13, 20215 yr by Noel

19 minutes ago, wlix261 said:

We rarely had this before outside of PMDG and few others. RIght?

So why are their results so far behind?  I have better flight dynamics, avionics, nav data, ATC, ATIS/AWOS, live weather, cloud textures, add on aircraft models, flight plan management, and more with 2005 vintage FSX (now FSX SE) and addons.  The most recent of those addons is perhaps the Reality XP GTN series (2016?) or Active Sky 2016.  Perhaps the A2A C182 is more recent?  Would have to track back.  At 8,000 to 23,000 ft altitude my Megascenery Earth v3 is not bad at all.  2018?  So why is a 2020 sim, now evolving into mid 2021, so far behind on so many attributes?  That is the issue for many many of us.

I do enjoy occasional sightseeing in MSFS.

12 minutes ago, Noel said:

they didn't get to the incredible level they did already w/o knowledge, skill and dedication required to even get this far.

They must still be flying with vacuum gauge equiped panels, because what they did / have done themselves since release with avionics are toys in a game.  Like the Mattel Hopalong Cassidy six-shooters with "shootin shell" plastic bullets compared to the real thing.   (Google "shootin shell")

I also had some Wyatt Earp, Marshall Dillon, and Bat Masterson fun.  When I was in elementary school in North Carolina.

Edited May 13, 20215 yr by fppilot

45 minutes ago, fppilot said:

So why is a 2020 sim, now evolving into mid 2021, so far behind on so many attributes?  That is the issue for many many of us.

Maybe because FSX/P3D are a hundred and fifty years old?  It's where it is because their mission involves a whole lot more than FSX/P3D ever will, including porting to Xbox, which surelly will be a segue into PC desktop simulation for some if not many.  You had to have a veritable PhD in troubleshooting windows, graphics drivers, editing configuration files, dealing w/ myriad updates of everything every time P3D did a new release.  You're really not sure why things aren't as mature, already, a whole 8 months post release?

44 minutes ago, fppilot said:

They must still be flying with vacuum gauge equiped panels, because what they did / have done themselves since release with avionics are toys in a game.  Like the Mattel Hopalong Cassidy six-shooters with "shootin shell" plastic bullets compared to the real thing.   (Google "shootin shell")

I also had some Wyatt Earp, Marshall Dillon, and Bat Masterson fun.  When I was in elementary school in North Carolina.

God help us what a sad portrayal--nope, just trolling.  Very glad my circuits don't see the reality you seem stuck in, or you're just trolling.  The flight I did this morning in a default plane in MSFS was so far beyond the garbage coming out of stock P3D aircraft, airports, runways, atmospherics, etc etc etc.  Oh, that's right a couple more buttons work in P3D.  The entire flight, even ATC, was spot on from complete w/ the plausible descent calls, to following the procedures present in LittleNavMap.  I have to think people like you just don't know how to use MSFS, even in its developmental state.  

Bye Bye Frank, don't care to waste another reply to this goofiness.

I'm reading these last few comments and this reminds the development in another topic a few hours ago:

I believe this might explains "why some people say that this is just a _______" (different choices possible) 

TL;DR: I don't think what matters the most is what is good or bad, what is right or wrong. What matters the most is we get the choice as simmers, gamers, users, because it appears to me there are many different ways to enjoying our hobby, not just a standardized nor sanitized way. Lack of diversity and 3rd party offering compared to past offerings is probably a contributing factor to the diverging opinions too.

Edited May 13, 20215 yr by RXP

16 minutes ago, Noel said:

God help us what a sad portrayal--nope, just trolling.  

Been around here since 1998 and I do not troll.  I am a serious flight simulator enthusiast with a breadth of actual flying experience. Trolls are under bridges that cross water.  My head is well above water and my FS feet on solid ground. Spent 25 years of a career with a major corporation who now produces an innovative and highly popular personal jet aircraft.  One of the attributes for personal evaluations over those years was "Challenging Spirit".  Helped make that corporation great.  Greatness can be with MSFS as well.  But not unless we form a choir of Challenging Spirit. 

This is a much lacking simulator.  Pitch in and help foster development that is true to actual aviation.  Perfect pitch makes for wonderful music.  As a simulator this one is still sounding a sour note. 

As entertainment/sightseeing it is without any doubt or argument a real treat!

Edited May 13, 20215 yr by fppilot