30 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

I would be happier if I could make this a permanent choice for each aircraft, rather than having to set it at startup, but that is a minor issue.

Hey Bert, at my end, I only need to turn failures off once, and the state is then persistent.  Is that not how it is for you?

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

The problem is, that it becomes a default part of the plane and becomes an expected use if you are ever to talk about, discuss or get help with a plane, which completely spoils the experience for me. Exact same thing happened with the A2A, troubleshooting or gaining any sort of understanding of the plane, people will go-to recommend these unrealistic engine pages as a big old crutch to understand when you're feeding too much mixture, too little, what the outside temperatures are doing in real-time and I've even seen someone get shut down for not wanting to do that either but was hoping for advice on the plane's action themselves.

Really?

So you're saying that the frustration for you with having these features (for those who want them - I don't, incidentally), is that support then becomes difficult, as those providing support will insist that you use them?

That's the oddest, non-event I've ever heard.  Sorry but can you link examples of this "phenomena" please, because it sounds hugely obtuse and unlikely?

As I said, I don't use failures or synoptic pages either, but I would have no appetite to have them removed from people who do use them. 

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

But I think I'll just skip the plane entirely, that also solves my problem

Sound like the best plan 👍

Edited March 27, 20242 yr by JYW

11 minutes ago, JYW said:

Hey Bert, at my end, I only need to turn failures off once, and the state is then persistent.  Is that not how it is for you?

No, the failures are turned back on after not flying it for a while.

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

And again, we aren't playing Mechanics Simulator

Who is we in that assertion?

Perhaps some people will enjoy the mechanic role, where this addon is concerned.

Just because it's called Flight Simulator doesn't limit people to a specific definition that someone on the internet came up with.   Heck, some people sail boats in MSFS!  

3 hours ago, Sethos said:

I'm gonna make an odd complaint and I realize I might be alone on this but I don't like this beginning trend of exposing core flight or engine information, down to the last detail to the pilot via the readily available interfaces like the EFB. It makes absolutely no sense from a simulation standpoint, giving an unrealistic amount of information to the pilot that he wouldn't have that he can also act on. Seems to be completely antithetical to what a simulator is supposed to be. Feels more like an arcade assistance tool

I rather see those extra pages like training material to be used when at the FBO or at home.  I wouldn't use those pages for any flight regime, but an excellent addition for training material.  Nobody is forced to see or use them, so I don't really understand  the negative points about their inclusion.

I would expect a real pilot to have that depth of knowledge about their aircraft, so an excellent addition to the EFB IMHO.

1 minute ago, Bert Pieke said:

No, the failures are turned back on after not flying it for a while.

Ah ok.  I didn't know that.  I rotate around my Black Square aircraft and I'd estimate that each one gets flown at least weekly.  Some (like the '850) a lot more frequently 😎

2 minutes ago, JYW said:

Ah ok.  I didn't know that.  I rotate around my Black Square aircraft and I'd estimate that each one gets flown at least weekly.  Some (like the '850) a lot more frequently 😎

Just one of those things... maybe something at my end.. Or "In the Cloud".. 🙂

1 hour ago, Sethos said:

Again, as I said, I'm not against these things being available in some form that has to be activated, hidden in debug menus, perhaps even multiple 'difficulty' levels of the plane where you can clear cut say "I'm flying on 'realistic' difficulty and want help with X", then people know you don't have access to that 'cheat' interface and the plane behaves in a certain way. Because as I said, when you make it part of the default experience, people will also expect you to rely on it to get any sort of help or understanding, which I hate.

Does it really matter if the training material is a page in an EFB or a separate training manual?  Your boot analogy isn't describing the situation correctly - a page in an EFB would equate to your manky boot being in a cupboard, not in the open on the floor.

I am not going to use these pages as part of my flight preparation flow or as a resource to deal with a failure, but sitting on the tarmac with an in depth training resource with animations is going to be fantastic.

It's kind of hard to have a conversation when you are quoting me multiple times in multiple posts, before I even replied, try keeping it in one post.

I never asked for a graphic representation of engine details, or ever thought about it.

Then I saw it in use in an aircraft and realized I totally need that!  😎  It is cool and that's what is most important to me. 

JF has just announced the release week in the comments of the Environmentals video:-

 

Start counting down the hours guys!

Edited March 27, 20242 yr by JYW

18 minutes ago, JYW said:

JF has just announced the release week in the comments of the Environmentals video:-

 

Start counting down the hours guys!

The same date they 'announced' 6 days ago...

 

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/announcement-black-square-turbine-and-piston-duke/601041/98

Environmental systems...looks hot!

Haha

 

Edited March 27, 20242 yr by ryanbatc

Flying these things will be more stressful than the real ones….

But which one should I get? The Duke or the Cows? I’ve liked all BS aircraft so far though. And I’m not really a fan of the G1000.