greggerm

Before opening the video... that Judy McLane one looks like Quonset... Ayup! Certainly is! Haven't had an airshow there in years... very disappointing.

Per the national registry, Mr. Young's memorial can be found at the Quantico National Cemetery (Triangle, VA) in Section 9A, Site 124.

It happens - I'm in a long stretch of not using flightsims right now. Still check in regularly here and several other communities to see what's happening and follow the goings on, but the yoke and pedals are set aside for the time being. There's no specific reason for me... I'm just... not as interested at this moment in time. I've been through this several times since subLogic FS2 on the good old C64. It's not a technology thing, a budget thing, an innovation thing, or even something that was an active decision... it just is what it is, but it's fine because when the pendulum swings the other way, everything is all still right there.

Well that was a bit of a surprise... hmmm... I wonder what's in store for us this time!

As Andy/Spesimen wonders, the PMDG MD-11 (and perhaps the 747 and JS4100) are not officially supported by PMDG for use under FSX:SE. That being said, I can say that I have successfully used the MD-11 under Windows 7 x64 and FSX:SE with no workarounds necessary. Note that it does not work properly when using Windows 10. Good luck with the new buildout!

In the case of the FSL A320, the cost of the FSX version plus an upgrade to P3D will total the exact same amount as the P3D version itself. For those folks flying with both simulators, they can jump in now and enjoy what the product has to offer today while they wait for what will probably be their preferred version tomorrow, and not spend any extra. Quite nice if you happen to fly on both platforms!

If you've been simming since the 1980's and factor in all the hardware and software for every computer you've ever simmed with for your entire life, perhaps. But even if that were the case - it could often be said that lots of flight simming may have actually helped lay the groundwork for someone's interest in obtaining their PPL, as opposed to the other way around. I certainly don't mean to pick on the original point (*because me and my checkbook over the years get it!). For me, flightsimming has been a very positive feedback loop - interested in aviation, found flight sims. Made me more interested in aviation, made me more interested in simming... and on and on and on. Even if my sim-oriented investments over the years could have defrayed a foray into a real license, I still consider it money well spent! All good problems to have, though! -Greg

ActiveSky 2016 is the latest weather generation tool in the ActiveSky family, and is indeed functional with any ActiveSky compatible 3rd party integrations (such as the PMDG 777 and other programs) Link - http://www.hifisimtech.com/as16/#faq Link - http://www.avsim.com/topic/491604-wx-radar-and-as-2016-compatibility/

Just a couple thoughts... First, we don't know what X-Plane 11's timeline is. If X-Plane 10 is our guide, there will probably be a protracted period of time between when Laminar Research starts making blog postings about XP11 and its eventual release - and they haven't even started the blogging about it yet. Second, the first 6-18+ months of a major X-Plane version's life is usually a little shaky. Drawing again on my experience with X-Plane 10, there is a substantial teething period for X-Plane after a major version is first released... not only ironing out some unavoidable bugs, but continuing to build in features which were planned or expected for the version but hadn't yet been finished. With history as our guide, I would expect XP11 to also undergo a longer-than-you'd-expect maturing process. Along the same lines, over the past several years X-Plane 10 has had a chance to mature - it's still being built out with improvements and fixes, but it's far better than it was during its younger years. If you're interested in X-Plane, I'd recommend downloading the free XP10 demo today. If you like what you see and experience, jump in and make the purchase! If you don't, then you have a more concrete reason for sticking it out until XP11 rolls around and matures a bit. Good luck! -Greg

Any other tips, tricks, and experiences are welcome - is it truly that simple and easy thing to manage? (*Perhaps I've been overthinking it for all this time!) Thanks, -Greg

Thanks for the tip, Tomasz! I actually do have the DX10 Fixer and while it does make some great improvements, it's still not enough to keep me happy with FSX for all my simming needs. I've updated my initial message with that note in case others think it might be a good recommendation. I appreciate the input though!

Hello, my name is Greg, and I have flightsim OCD. For years, I've subscribed to a mantra that I will only have (1) flavor of a MSFS-based simulator installed at any time on my PC. A nice, clean PC with no dual simulators - no muss, no fuss. With that being said, I've found myself in the midst of a tug-of-war this summer between the gloriously beautiful Prepar3D v3 and the highly compatible FSX:SE. I am flying along enjoying the beauty of P3D, but start to miss flying the Level-D 767 or PMDG MD-11... So I flush my system with a new baseline build and bring it back up with FSX:SE, make some airliner flights, and start missing the beauty of P3D again... So I flush my system with a new baseline build and bring it back up with P3D, but I start to miss flying the Level-D 767... So I flush my system... Some say that José is "The UNINSTALLER", but I'm sure to have given him a run for his money over the course of the past ten years or so. As efficient and proficient as I have become in the art of reinstalling my entire PC, the fact is I am finally getting tired of it. I'm considering giving in and performing a dual install. For those of you who run both FSX:SE and Prepar3D v3, I've got some questions - primarily surrounding scenery and weather addons. I'll throw them out here and feel free to answer, comment, or otherwise mock me and my thought process. Any need to install one before another? Any sensitivity with addon vendors to have their product installed on one before the other? Will I need to install each of the (3) flavors of SimConnect for each platform independently? Orbx - will there be two "FSX Central" instances (one for FSX, one for P3D) and will they be independent? ActiveSky 2016 & ASCA - (I own it for both) - Any users running both versions for your dual-installed sims? Gotchas or issues? (primarily on the ASCA side, as I know there are two distinct versions of AS2016) REX Texture Direct - any dual users supporting both FSX and P3D with REX:TD? Gotchas or issue? This is a big step (for me, anyway). I know many of you might do this very thing, so feel free to share any of your tips, tricks, hints, or cautions as I prepare to make the change. Editing to add: I do have the DX10 fixer for FSX and find that while it makes substantial improvements, to me it still not enough to keep me permanently running FSX - especially with what the PTA/RealismShaderPacks can bring to P3D. Editing to add: I also own the Estonia Migration Tool, but some of my FSX-only addons remain incompatible. I have not used it for my recent rebuilds, and don't plan on using it going forward. Thanks! -Greg

Thanks, Michael - I appreciate it.

Hello pilots - I'm in the midst of speccing out a system upgrade, and I recall that back when the MD-11 and 747v2 were pulled from the market there was some nebulous discussion from PMDG about how the two older aircraft were experiencing some troubles on newer chipsets. It wasn't clear if it was GPU related, CPU related, or motherboard related, so I have the following question: Is anyone operating the MD-11 under Windows 7/FSX on a Skylake i7 6700 processor these days? I get the sense it will work just fine, but I'm seeking some confirmation to help set my mind at ease. (Note - I am aware of the Skylake chipset's unique issue regarding Windows 7 and USB peripherals when it comes to the initial installation.) Cheers, and thanks for your input! -Greg

Back on topic, anyway... Chances are the author is using 5m source data to create the LOD10/38m mesh files. Even though the default terrain is also LOD10/38m, the higher resolution source data should provide some modest improvements to the accuracy of the terrain. Obviously, improvements will not be as dramatic as other mesh sets which provide both better source data and a better LOD. Most other vendors who have used higher res source data than their LOD output have noted this in their product descriptions to help avoid confusion.