Putting the current version to a rest

[Bert Pieke 7,426]

4 minutes ago, sightseer said:

I wonder if the winds issue is related to the incorrect cloud altitude problem?  maybe the winds from just above actual ground level are simulated winds from the offset cloud level and then suddenly on touchdown it injects the ground winds if reported by METAR?

Even the feet to meters issue could be a factor here..

[N314SC 5]

1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

MSFS is not serious sim if you not a serious simmer LOL You guys all playing games all along whether it P3D, DCS, or X-plane. "Game" can only become "sim" if you treat it like one.  

To be fair, a lot of Level D, Directive 2-compliant boxes do not have the visual fidelity of P3D....are they not "serious"? I have gotten type ratings in sims that only have night visuals.

[JRBarrett 2,968]

14 minutes ago, sightseer said:

I wonder if the winds issue is related to the incorrect cloud altitude problem?  maybe the winds from just above actual ground level are simulated winds from the offset cloud level and then suddenly on touchdown it injects the ground winds if reported by METAR?

METAR winds begin to transition into the sim environment when descending below 1500 feet AGL when within 5 miles from a METAR-reporting airport. It is a relatively slow transition - not instantaneous. It has been working that way since they first started using METAR for airport surface wind, temperature and pressure last year.

Edited November 28, 2021 by JRBarrett

[MrBitstFlyer 3,654]

53 minutes ago, Noel said:

I'm a staunch apologist for Asobo and still am, though SU7 challenges this some.  SU5 I predicted would be troublesome w/ the port to Xbox, but SU6 totally reversed those issues and the sim looked better than ever as most would agree.  So really, the only perplexing thing to me at this juncture is how it is Asobo allows this level of deterioration for a Sim Update.  I think the only plausible explanation as to why they don't prioritize a higher level of QC is they know they have a super winner and feel people won't abandon ship, so are resting a little too much on their laurels.

My chief complaint personally is that the quality of clouds has gone downhill--flying thru them can look downright bad--but in no way do I believe they won't fix and optimize it as with other parts of the sim, going forward.  Plus, the Dev Version of the B787-10 Heavy Division mod I have been using suffered some non-catastrophic troubles with SU7 that HD has addressed in their new stable version, however in doing so I believe they killed the OneWay Importer so I can't continue to use the WorldMap for flight planning as I'm not interested in using SimBrief, which I did not need to use w/ the prior Dev Version.  I think they will restore this function at some point hopfully.

Clouds after SU6 were great but towering clouds now look like volcanic Ash from a volcano.

The release of MSFS has led to XPlane 12 development - a good thing I feel as MSFS needs some sort of competition to tighten up its act. I realise MSFS will have a much bigger market share, but if the weather and lighting in XPlane surpass MSFS, it may lead to better sim updates.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

First of all, we all know the Default ATC is garbage, so anything that happens with it is not surprising. The takeoff issue could be just the aircraft, I fly about 15 hours a week, and not seeing any takeoff problems, and I do not use the default ATC. For me, MSFS is excellent. 

I just landed from a live time flight in the G58 between Phoenix, Az and Burbank, Cali.  Take off normal, climb to 12,000 via VOR nav.  Landed with ATC direction and no problems to report at my end.  Had a great and immersive flight.  So many different systems...so many different add on's and stuff in the Com folder.  I think it all is in the mix...

[MrBitstFlyer 3,654]

38 minutes ago, Virtpilot said:

Having flown now for a few years in VATSIM, closing down the default atc was the first task I did with this sim. Nothing can not beat the realism and challenge of using VATSIM. It´s free and really easy to install. When I´m not flying in VATSIM, I settle for being alone in the world 😀

Vatsim is great (I was the Head of the London area when it was Satuk).   PilotEdge beats it for realism because every airport and every frequency is live all the time., but only if you fly in the western US.

[Bobsk8 11,903]

9 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Clouds after SU6 were great but towering clouds now look like volcanic Ash from a volcano.

The release of MSFS has led to XPlane 12 development - a good thing I feel as MSFS needs some sort of competition to tighten up its act. I realise MSFS will have a much bigger market share, but if the weather and lighting in XPlane surpass MSFS, it may lead to better sim updates.

X Plane has been making micro steps for years in it's development. Now they need to make a 100 yard dash to catch up. Don't think they can do it, frankly. 

[Dominique_K 9,914]

I will make it hopefully simple

1- MSFS is a real pain in the behind because it came to us half-baked and because its buggy  and repetitive sim updates have not finished the job and probably will never do it.  

•  Asking for more quality control and care is the sacred duty of any simmer under the sky, let us keep torchs and pitchforks close at hands ✔️

2-  MSFS gives me the best simming experience I've ever had after decades flying its predecessors and competitors because it came well optimized for my machine, is way more accurate in rendering the world and there are already very decent aircraft  on market. 

•  If it was not for MSFS I wouldn't not be flying a simulator right now  ✔️  

 

 

[Virtpilot 125]

41 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Everytime I have tried Vatsim, I have eventually have  been left alone in the world and on Unicomm. No controllers where I want to fly, or they sign off after I take off , or on approach. The worst was when I would see a controller on line, hurry and set up a flight in his area, fire up the aircraft, and then find out he had signed off.. 🤬

Hah!! Has happened to me also, several times, it is annoying.. Sometimes an paranoid idea has come to my mind.. do they sign off because they see that it is ME who is flying... 🤣🤣

[sightseer 895]

27 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

METAR winds begin to transition into the sim environment when descending below 1500 feet AGL when within 5 miles from a METAR-reporting airport. It is a relatively slow transition - not instantaneous. It has been working that way since they first started using METAR for airport surface wind, temperature and pressure last year.

they could have broken that.

P.S.: Im going to go watch football.  caught an enjoyable couple of games yesterday. one was a snow game.  I love snow games.

Edited November 28, 2021 by sightseer

[turbomax 2,902]

1 hour ago, N314SC said:

and most all my flying has been IFR/airliner stuff.

I think that makes all the difference. when it comes to mostly VFR flying with some occasional MVFR/IFR and general aviation then nothing beats MSFS, but I can see your point mostly "IFR/airliner stuff", you have different priorities and I value your opinion. we need not argue here ad infinitum, it is just different priorities and preferences, we are not in church or religious missions here. we all have 3 simulators to choose from. as they say in advertising: "the freedom to choose", that's all we need and never ending progress, which they all provide,  in various flavors and speeds.

Edited November 28, 2021 by turbomax

[Weatherman 191]

1 hour ago, slashed2 said:

Just to comment on the atc issue this is most likely the atc having you climb out to 15,000 initially to clear obstacles such as mountains etc....  When you asked for a lower filed altitude it subtracted from the 8000 that you set in the flight plan.  Once you clear the obstacles it would have had you descend to your filed altitude of 8000.  

No. Most of the track was over the waters of the Mediterranean. Absolutely no obstacles there. And I even did the climb to 15.000 in the beginning as instructed. But I could have lived with that, and with the stuck CDI, if it was not completely impossible to hold the plane on any runway during start and landing.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,654]

39 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

X Plane has been making micro steps for years in it's development. Now they need to make a 100 yard dash to catch up. Don't think they can do it, frankly. 

Probably not, but I can't wait to see what they will achieve with V12.  I just hope the advances are big enough for any chance that MS will react.

[turbomax 2,902]

55 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

If it was not for MSFS I wouldn't not be flying a simulator right now

and if it didn't support VR I wouldn't be flying a simulator right now 😊

instead I would have to read some "good books" or finally learn to play a music instrument. like a friend of mine once told me: many years ago when I was a young boy my grand daddy taught me to play the piano, because without money there was not much else to do. now he is a great musician and plays in a band. that would never have happened had there been internet, Netflix etc. back then.

he got lucky. how I wish there were no flight simulators!

Edited November 28, 2021 by turbomax

[MrBitstFlyer 3,654]

2 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

MSFS is not serious sim if you not a serious simmer LOL You guys all playing games all along whether it P3D, DCS, or X-plane. "Game" can only become "sim" if you treat it like one.  

I rather feel it can be the other way around - we load a 'sim' and can use it as a game.