badderjet

Just to be on the safe side, as some people said they were in but did actually never receive a mail, where again would you be able to check if you're in...? In the Insider area or where was that?

I applied just like anyone else, but yet I couldn't care less just like you. I've beta'ed and partly alpha'ed the past few versions of MSFS so I kinda know how this is like, and TBH I am stuck with a quite old desktop here and I actually want to wait as long as possible (alap?) until I get the massive upgrade for the Golden Master. I'll be totally fine checking that one out, then on decent hardware.

Interesting, thanks. But that accent is horrible. 🤪 Wish they’d do a talk about the actual algorithm.

Yeah, as said before I’m like 100% sure this is NOT what they meant. Even in more current footage, look at the KORD video, the runways are more than off. Even at such a major hub with good satellite image coverage. The runway material is off, the skidmarks are almost completely absent. For such heavily used runways, the opposite should be true. I’ve never seen convincing skid marks in any sim yet, maybe excluding hand made custom airports with satellite runway textures. Usually there will be heavy and widely spread out rubber deposit along the entire TDZ, with a bit less wide rubber area along the entire centerline, hiding quite some of the runway markings like the centerline. Also you will often see rubber marks at sharper entry taxiways (even only 90°), where aircraft usually make tight turns to align themselves for takeoff. The nosewheels tend to skid a bit and leave those markings. I think these visual features are extremely prominent irl and would add an enormous amount of real life airport feeling to the sim in general. Which I think should be of utmost importance in a FLIGHT sim. On a quite related side note, they mentioned quite early they’d recreate the whole ground friction model. Irl the friction will be significantly reduced on the rubber deposits especially on wet runways. I wonder how their enthusiasm is gonna be concerning these details for a realistic simulation.

400/20 I believe. Not that I'm really getting that all the time, but in theory, oh well. Should suffice. The real bottleneck is actually the super crappy wifi receiver on my current desktop, albeit sitting only 3m from the antenna with no major obstructions. With the Apple devices I'm getting that speed easily.

Why would they, if they already announced the Navblue partnership. Wouldn't expect anything Jepp here.

Because they do not have the slightest clue how to operate an aircraft.

I've said it before but I'll say it again, I totally hope for FF support. My good ole MSFF2 has been sitting on the shelf for the last couple years, awaiting a new job. While I'm not exactly sure how turbulence would be rendered in a joystick, as you simply can't feel turbulence on a stick irl, I'd definitely like to have great ground effects. And again, repeating myself, a killer feature would be if you could feel the runway centerline lights when you hit them with the gear. I'd really freak out if we got a thump plus an accompanying sound. This is a very prominent effect irl. Tools like FSForce have brought a way more realistic trim solution to the sim, which has been just wrong from day 1. I'm not complaining though, as it's just a very different thing to "trim away the forces" on a real stick than trimming on a self-centering joystick that has a fixed and not changing center point. Actually I'd appreciate a hybrid solution for MSFS where you could enable or disable realistic trim for a FF device or just leave it the classic and practicable, albeit a bit more unrealistic way.

More to the above discussed, I just had a closer look at the most recent shots again and noticed something. Compare these shots of the 172 G1000 and the 152. While the 152, interestingly enough, has 3-digit fractions on its COM panel, the G1000 has only 2. Now in this particular shot of the 152 there is no 8.33 freq tuned, but the 3-digit variant could eventually mean it's 8.33 capable, but of course it does not have to. Not so the G1000, which definitely is 25 kHz-only so far. This is not a good sign. If it stays like that there is absolutely no way to tune in a vast amount of real life freqs. Especially since recently a humongous number of freqs was changed from 25 to 8.33, e. g. 136.5 became 136.505, 118.025 became 118.030 and so on.

Interesting. What do you think about key commands in general, and how did you like the way it was in FSX? Although I have not touched any desktop sim in 5+ years, I still believe that I have all the most common key strokes in muscle memory. I would not mind if they retained the old concept. No idea though how it was in P3D, any comment?

Since it was so relatively „easy“ to get into the Alpha (although not everyone did actually get in yet) by just signing up on a website and doing nothing else, do you think those people will get the RC for free as it was the case with earlier versions? I can’t really imagine but I was wondering. As testers for the last FS versions back then we surely got the Golden Master for free, but then again the tester selection process was completely different, as you couldn’t just „sign up“. Although I still don’t really know how that went behind the scenes.

I‘m sure what you meant to say is it speaks volumes about those people who disrespect rules and leak videos. No they don’t.

What do you mean "still"? Were there many others that are wrong? Internationally the markings differ quite a bit, but the US style seems to be three stripes at 500', that is correct. Also according to Google, Bing and Apple. Furthermore I wish they were able to do that material like it looks on the pictures, bright concrete, white markings with apparently black thin borders to increase their visibility. I'd still hope so much for way more runway varieties. And again, the skidmarks are just totally missing. That brand new paved runway look is just wrong for any airport of that size.

Not entirely on subject, but you know this, right? The full real life experience at home... 🤣

Haha I hear ya... and coming in with four whites. 😅 But indeed saved the touchdown somehow and hit the ground just right, unlike all those YT landings, of which 99% are way too long.

Weird, why does this sound so familiar, just like every second day at work (before COVID, that is)... 🤣 Well written!

Since with that one "update" this seems to be confirmed, I'll continue with something else: I totally want the old slew mode. One of the current "updates" suggests there will be one, but I just wanted to make sure it's been requested. 😅

Not buying unless the toilets flush. j/k 🤣 On a more serious note, we've all seen operative external doors. I personally don't care about cabins at all, why would I. But to each his own.

Sure you may. It's super important, as it seems until very recently (see below) you were simply not able to tune in a ton of real life frequencies. Now for a realstic experience you would wanna be able to tune em in, wouldn't you. Interestingly enough, your post made me research the topic a bit, and guess what, P3D v5 release notes point out under New Features: "Added 8.33 kHz spacing support". Voila. Wasn't that released just recently? And 8.33 has been around for, wait... how long? 🙄 Luckily I skipped P3D altogether. Still, I'm eager to see if they get the channels right in MSFS, as the number you tune is obviously not the exact frequency. If you turn that knob you might think it's just a .005 MHz increase, but it's not. You can tune in 131.015, 131.025 and 131.030, but not 131.020 for instance...

I have to. Mine is party below minimum spec, so I have no choice. Gonna wait as long as possible though, maybe that'll help $$-wise a bit. I won't upgrade just to have a chance to go Alpha, that makes zero sense. Just finished the analyzing part in that other thread haha 😂 Did anyone actually notice there are pilots sitting in that cockpit? 🤪

Well, this thing is gonna be phenomenal. Period. Finally got that stall warning whine that I asked for recently, nice. Not that they made it because of me (they very much likely didn't), but they modelled it. Cool! Some nit-picking and other remarks (yes, keeping Alpha-state in mind): Still not a fan of the lightning strikes. I still maintain their duration should be much shorter, and no blending and fading in and out. Ideally just one frame, except maybe more super high frame rates. In case there will be such thing. 😄 It's just always the same for those wx effects, aircraft strobes, approach light rabbits, REILs... I wish they'd just fix those altogether. Interesting to see that the rain drops on the windshield will actually repeat themselves, the same drops at the same locations all over the time. In no way does that ruin the overall amazing effect, but now with a longer sequence I found it fascinating to see. That grass seems to green. And so long. I hope that the grass on grass strips is actually cut short. 😅 That Mont-St-Michel clip makes very clear how 3d those waves are. Awesome. Not sure if those C172 wing tip nav lights that can be seen in the hangar are actually that opaque. The rear one seems more transparent, but then again I haven't seen a 172 irl in a while, let alone a current one. Maybe someone with more knowledge can comment. I had hoped so much for a classic analog 172 version to go along with that beautiful 152. Too bad... That ATC seems to be very similar to FSX as far as I can remember. The TTS doesn't exactly convince me so far, also the pronunciation of waypoints as letters seems weird. Hope they include a much broader variety of phrases in the long run. The A320 hi alt clip with the wx and time changes makes me wonder a bit about the icing model. As I see it irl icing will usually start quite uniform at the leading edge, then going backwards. This looks very irregular here. Also, if you just keep flying in clear and dry air the ice will usually just dry off over time, also on aircraft parts that technically can't be deiced. Can't wait to see their model in action. Those A320 strobes seem to illuminate the forward part of the fuselage at night time, but apparently just the first of the two strobe flashes triggers this. The Cessna videos, especially the long C152 VFR one, show a weird flickering on the left wing strut. Still don't like those prop discs, as I maintain it's simply not what the human eye sees. You might have this blurred blade effect at low rpm, but certainly not in flight. I feel like this should be a uniform, semi transparent disc. The only variation that you can see irl is when the sun light hits the prop from certain angles, then you can see this variation in lighting due to the actual depth of the disc. The C172 G1000 volume knob has a tooltip that suggests you can change the audio volume. I can't wait to see if we actually have a more sophisticated aircraft audio system this time. With all the Wwise tech anyway. That Courchevel info box says things like "Wind 2.75 Kts 90 °". Seems like an odd format and precision. In one of the older screenshots they had an alternative HUD, with a round VSI (I believe). I wish they had kept that, as it apparently allowed different ranges for the instruments. I still think a +/-6000fpm range is not suitable for SEPs. And I wish these ranges could be defined on an per-aircraft level. Also I think the engine indications on the HUD should be rearranged, to have them side-by side. Especially pronounced on the B747, where you have #1/2 (left wing) in the upper line and #3/4 (right wing) on the lower one. Splitting them up left/right would be more logical. The KSEA runway materials seem way off, and again there are no pronounced skid marks. I dearly hope they will fix this for the heavily used runways. Also the taxiway centerlines seem white in that video. Maybe it's just the rendering distance, but it seemed weird. Or Alpha, if you wish. That video was obviously sped up, so it's hard to tell, but I hope they'll finally improve the sequenced flashing lights. I will absolutely continue to complain about them. First of all, they were on during daylight CAVOK. Those are usually just active in severe IFR wx. Second, they were on and visible in both landing directions at the same time. That's just wrong. It makes sense for a free-flight scenario, but then I wish they included a switch to enable a more realistic behavior here: Have the lights and approach aids like ILS enabled only in the active runway direction. Yes, that centerline in Lukla is far from 1m wide irl. And finally, I wonder if and how Asobo will react to those leaks. Kinda reminds me of Steve Jobs when he introduced the iPhone 4 or whatever that was, showing pictures at the keynote and saying like "I'm sure you've seen some of these before...". 🤣

Yes, I did not say that ATC has nothing to do with IFR in general, I was more referring to the fact that 8.33 iso 25 kHz channel spacing (on a COM radio...) isn't exactly the first thing that comes to mind when thinking about IFR.

That's a very good point. UI/UX and other features outside of the actual flying could indeed be worth an own episode. Good thinking!

What's even more striking is that the wing leading edge is blurred around where the engine is, and the engine pylon itself, to some extent. I truely hope the heat effect isn't taking place here (on top of the wing). I've noticed several times in past screenshots and videos that the origin of the heat effect isn't always convincing and often seems to be in front of the actual exhaust pipe opening. Could need some improvement IMHO, but I'm still glad the effect is there at least.

I keep forgetting stuff. Again, zero actual relevance to IFR but since this is an de-facto ATC thread: it's time to arrive in the present and finally provide 8.33 kHz channel spacing. Can't wait to see if they actually get the right channels in and not just increase the number by .005 with each turn of the knob... 😂