Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. btacon
    You need to ensure the Avionics Master is turned on. From memory it’s a Rocker Switch located mid panel slightly left. A look up in the manual will tell exactly where it is. Good Luck, -B
  3. c912039
    How is this related in any way to the OP's request for something for XP12 that is similar to what FSHUD & FSIPANEL offer?
  4. orchestra_nl
    At what altitude was that? I am cruising at FL80 at 163 kts IAS (186 kts TAS) The speeds in the manual are in TAS and with 185 I am between economy and normal cruise. With maximum throttle it in that configuration I can just manage to get 215 kts. But on higher altitudes it may different.
  5. St Mawgan
    There aren't any as of yet. Might follow. From another forum, the developer response -
  6. RaptyrOne
    Interesting that you say this - I noticed this with the Azur Poly OV10 Bronco two days back. One and only time so far but toe brakes seemed to have no effect at all after landing. Used the parking brake and reversers eventually to prevent excursion. Never happened previously. Brake pedals were visually being pressed in the cockpit so input was being registered in the sim. I don't recall that the rudder was not working though, just the brakes. I am not on the beta. Using CH Products rudder Pedals.
  7. fsiscool
    Even non normal procedures are mostly covered with the standard phraseology, right? So IRL free floating communication might not account for more than 0.001% of all ATC conversations (I mean deviations are probably much more frequent, but I am not talking about standard situations which sometimes are handled with a little variation but real exceptions which can't be handled at all without deviating from the standard protocol).
  8. ashleyjames
    Hi all. Loving the duke however, I can't seem to find the option to muffle the engine sounds such as when you have the headphones on or noise cancel simulation like the A2A comanche. I remember seeing the option in a preview video. Any help would be much appreciated Ash
  9. MrBitstFlyer
    Yes, there is a set of procedures and phraseology, but in the real world situations occur outside of this. Products like BATC will struggle outside of its scripts. SayIntentions will not. It will respond in a reasonable way to whatever you throw at it.
  10. MrBitstFlyer
    It IS a lot better IMHO, therefore the subscription cost, although high, is justified for the leap in technology. All new technology starts off expensive, but reduces overtime. Posters have shown their preferences how BATC should improve, but SI doesn't have these restrictions now.
  11. Redge
    I understand not everyone cares, but I'd want it to adapt to the situation you're in though when things don't go as planned. Like this flight of mine a couple of months back using a much earlier version of SI:
  12. BrammyH
    That number I believe is the maximum altitude; not the optimal.
  13. Patco Lch started following ORBX.
  14. Patco Lch

    ORBX.

    Patco Lch replied to G-RFRY's topic in The Prepar3d Forum

    This is very interesting. I didn’t know that.
  15. ha5mvo
    Because if you remove the cosmetics off the cheap 30$ add-on you'll find something that we have had for years. There are decade(s) old ATC programs that are at least as good if not a whole lot better when it comes to, well...ATC. At this point it brings nothing new unless you consider computer generated accents as being top priority. The question of price is entirely irrelevant to the nature of the addon.
  16. andy1252
    That's the nice thing about not caring about the flying (piloting) side of all this - I wouldn't know the difference between a 747/777/767 cockpit anyway. I could probably tell if they were using the default Cessna 150, but beyond that - not really <grin>. Given that I don't use a yoke, just a CH Pro HOTAS setup, none of them match my desktop anyway. As you say, an aircraft is a whole lot more than just its sim performance/behaviour. Some of them are like old friends (even to the point of scruffiness and crankiness <grin>)
  17. Today
  18. Treetops45
    Bert, interested to know if you load a Turbine Duke with the PMS GPS as the one already chosen in your EFB, & then fly it, whether the aircraft follows the PMS flight plan? All my Turbine Duke liveries currently load with TDS as the 'default' GPS in the EFB. When I change [ "hot swap"?], to the PMS via the EFB, the GPS screen then has green txt at the bottom of the PMS screen switching rapidly between the text, ENR & TERM. Also the Magenta Line twitches, which, I know from previous flights means the aircraft is not going to follow an NAV magenta line. Any way to get the PMS set up as the default GPS for when you load the aircraft? If I can get that in place then I can test the PMS. T45
  19. jon b
    RNAV STARS connecting directly onto an ILS are becoming more common now in the USA. In the Uk however the STARS still usually terminate at a holding fix , and from their expect radar vectors to the ILS.
  20. carlito777
    Never used it, because it would be a breath of death for my wallet. Why do people compare a cheap $30 add-on to a ridiculously expensive subscription based add-on? It should better be A LOT better than Beyond ATC at this insane pricing. I'm perfectly happy with Beyond ATC in early access. With all the patches coming daily it will have a bright future ahead.
  21. PeterBremer started following Reality XP databases and Real-world GTN650 navdata work for updating 430?
  22. PeterBremer
    For the 430W, download the database to your PC. Before installing it on the card, unhide the files in the directory where it downloaded the database, Use the relevant file for the simulated version worldwide.bin
  23. PeterBremer
    As Garmin publishes the necessary information and I was able to create the required really up-to-date databases for the 430/530 on a 28-day interval on it, I expect there would be commercial possibilities as well. For obvious reasons I do not publish that method.
  24. Cpt_Piett started following Black Square Duke Released!
  25. MrBitstFlyer
    This is why I personally have not purchased BATC. With Say intentions I can ask anything of ATC, no problems with needing to follow a script. What I have read so far about BATC is a more clever version of the standard scripted ATC we have had for years. Say intentions has been a breath of fresh air in the ATC addon space.
  26. sloppysmusic
    Just to rule something out is this for all flights? It's not a rocket but it will settle into a speedy cruise once leveled off and power /prop and importantly mixture is adjusted. Also definitely no flap still down? I once flew a 2 hour flight in the 736 pmdg with flaps 1 as my deteriorating eyes missed the flap dial. It was small enough to not think something was drastically wrong but enough to make me check everything else in the plane first. Msfs mixture is not the most accurate from what I've heard. The sweet spot is not always where it should be and it's not a smooth transition either.
  27. tup61
    It's very odd but even though I do think BATC is way too buggy still and FSHud is superior when it comes to the ATC itself I just can't stop using BATC... There is something about the interface and the voices and also parts of the phraseology which makes me use BATC all the time. Even though I know it is a very, very buggy addon. And even though I actually seriously wonder if they will ever be able to fix things completely. I mean... the dev himself said it is impossible (!!!) to create an ATC addon that will work for every airport and every procedure in MSFS. So... should we be happy with 75% or the airports working? Or 50%? I never heard another ATC addon dev day they won't be able to support every airport and procedure. But well, maybe the BATC dev simply is honest and the others aren't. 😉
  28. stans
    I noticed that in at least the past two Carenado discount sales that none of their FSX/P3D products were offered at any discount. Seemed strange to have a big sale and keep full price on the oldest products.
  29. tup61
    Yes, specially when everything goes according to plan. I sometimes wonder why I am so interested in ATC software... it usually does what I expect it to do and when it doesn't it's usually due to bugs. If often feel I myself have to take ATC by the hand and lead it on so things indeed go according to plan. You might say because it adds to the immersion and that's true but after a while you get to know all the lines that ATC usually says and it becomes more and more obvious it's all fake. SI would or should be the exception to that... But BATC is very obviously 100% scripted which you specially notice when 'funny' things are being said, like when you ask for clearance when you aren't near the runway. It's funny to hear ATC shout at you at that time but when you have heard the EXACT same 'funny' line a few times it becomes a total immersion killer. I rather had BATC didn't say anything funny at all like FSHud. Sometimes (well, quite often) less is better.
  30. sloppysmusic started following Two questions about BeyondATC
  31. sloppysmusic
    I didn't know this but it makes sense now. If I'm correct the main point of ATC is aircraft separation and to a lesser but important extent providing help in finding the airport in changing IFR conditions. If there is no ai coverage am I correct in assuming the result is similar to making a road trip by car where there are multiple traffic light stops and roundabouts but only you obey them all other drivers ignore them?
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...