7 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

Obviously, or I wouldn't have said anything.

I'm also doing one right now, working fine.

just had a CTD after taking off in the updated AS A340 after I clicked a button on the overhead... ok, it's a beta. not complaining really

For someone who is pretty happy with SU5 and doesn't want to upset the apple cart, are there any things worth upgrading for?

I know about the default airport lights.

Terrain resolution enhancement? Better performance? AI aircraft landing with their gear visible?

2 hours ago, rick celik said:

Ok so just did a quick test in the fokker 100 at YSSY. The GS in the PFD matched the PAPs the whole way down. It was just a quick dirty test so I think more testing needed. Seems the aircraft height along the GS and threshold was also more realistic.

Do you think this would affect payware scenery airports as well or just default?

16 minutes ago, Langeveldt said:

For someone who is pretty happy with SU5 and doesn't want to upset the apple cart, are there any things worth upgrading for?

I know about the default airport lights.

Terrain resolution enhancement? Better performance? AI aircraft landing with their gear visible?

Im in the same boat as you. The only thing I’m interested in with this update is the PAPI and ILSs working better.

21 minutes ago, Langeveldt said:

For someone who is pretty happy with SU5 and doesn't want to upset the apple cart, are there any things worth upgrading for?

I know about the default airport lights.

Terrain resolution enhancement? Better performance? AI aircraft landing with their gear visible?

Scheduled for SU125.

[img]

Seems they've knackered the landmark lighting again though. Pretty sure neither St James' Park or the Tyne Bridge are used to blind pilots at night.

Guys, please share your experience flying through the clouds. Has the trubulence been emproved so far?

I flew a few visual approaches at (payware) airports yesterday and it seemed like the PAPIs were actually realistic for a normal approach. Didn't pair it with an ILS but even in real life PAPIs and ILS may not be exactly aligned. But my impression is that yes they were working well. But haven't tried on generic airports yet.

3 hours ago, fakeflyer737 said:

Do you think this would affect payware scenery airports as well or just default?

Probably depends if the scenery is using the default nav data or their own.

4 hours ago, Langeveldt said:

Better performance?

Feels smoother to me.

Edited Wednesday at 02:02 PM2 days by Tuskin38

I'm unable to retract the gear in the FSReborn Phenom 300e. (Yes the gearpin is out) in this initial beta, anyone else?

Going back to SU5.1 fixes it.

Stu

2 hours ago, zorro747 said:

Guys, please share your experience flying through the clouds. Has the trubulence been emproved so far?

For me, it was not improved. Went back to 5.1

It was never said turbulence would be improved in SU6

Cloud turbulence hasn't been improved a lot, but thermal and terrain turbulence I find is more noticeable

Edited Wednesday at 03:21 PM2 days by Tuskin38

21 hours ago, Fielder said:

For the record, I have never had any delays changing cockpit views. It has always been perfectly instantaneous (except when the sound settings got messed up).

I just now went to Youtube and searched on "msfs delays changing views". And got no videos showing examples of this problem.

Well, for the record, I think you are misunderstanding it, or you have picked up on something where someone has not described it very well.

There is no delay in changing views, but the view is messed up for a split second straight afterwards. You have to wait for the cockpit to render properly or for the LODs to adjust or whatever. It looks a mess for a split second before then. It was fine until SU4, when they tried to 'optimise' a few things. 🙄

5 hours ago, FPVSteve said:

[img]

Seems they've knackered the landmark lighting again though. Pretty sure neither St James' Park or the Tyne Bridge are used to blind pilots at night.

Yes, yet another regression caused by not including code from previous improvements. It is at the stage where the issues with quality control are just very sad now. They don't seem capable of learning.

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

Yes, yet another regression caused by not including code from previous improvements. It is at the stage where the issues with quality control are just very sad now. They don't seem capable of learning.

They have a habit of introducing UI bugs during betas even though they're not actively working on the UI in the first place, yet again in this beta users are having to jump through hoops just to alter a graphical setting in VR. This happens far too often and it's very strange, it's like they want to introduce bugs to get reported to then spend time fixing instead of simply getting on with it.

I'm 100% convinced they don't have an internal testing team or they do but they're continually ignored, as none of these types of bugs should be getting through to a Public Beta with the size of the team they should have at their disposal.

The number of regressions Asobo create is vastly higher than any other game developer I've ever known, but as you say they're not capable of learning.

Think how far further along this franchise could've been had we not had two step forwards one step (at least) backwards every single Sim Update.

ChasePlane was updated to work with the new Beta.

@MarcG The same old tired arguments.