Minos

Nice shots. However, for a simulation (X-Plane) that prides itself on having the very best night light environment, I am surprised that the runway lights are so far off. In real life, there is no way you could see the runway lights at such an angle (50-60) as the one shown in Pic 9 and Pic 10. At the very best, runway edge lights can be seen once the aircraft is almost lined up with the runway. Pic 9 and 10 seems to display 360 degree beacons visible at all angles... Or maybe it is made on purpose to help those pilots with sloppy navigation skills? My experience flying is that an airport in the middle of a large city at night is best found by searching for a dark patch almost non-illuminated in the middle of the many city lights. As a matter of fact, the largest aiport in the world, KATL, can best be found by searching for a red "Fly Delta Jets" billboard in a dark patch rather by trying to find non-aligned runways. Minos

Is that a quadcopter drone that you are flying over an airport and over a runway?

Go home and do it for free on your spare time

Nice. This is probably one of the best thing you can do right now with the limitations of the sim. This being said, I feel that most of those side effects are stuck back to year 2000 level. Whether these are smoke effects, rain spray, dirt spray and the like... none are realistic in any of the flight simulators I have tried. For instance, in terms of contrails, X-Plane is probably the absolute worst-offender with cartoonish puffs right at the engine exhaust (why not ahead of the fan too?). As much as most other aspects of flight sims have progressed significantly during the past 10 years (cloud shadows,, lightning, ...), I feel that these environmental effects have lagged behind by almost 15 years. Anyone often at airports would tell that these rain/water effects are really grossly mis-simulated. First, there should be an acceleration and some resulting wavelets of water in rain puddles on the tarmac right after the engines before any kind of water spray. Even then, the spray should start up only when throttles are slightly advanced and should be directional. This being said, the reverse spray is almost nice!

Comment referred to is related to wing-body joint and is to be found on various screenshot on their Facebook page. As for "Most respected and least known, it seems..", you might not have been there for too long if you do not know him. He used to design what were arguably the very best airliner models for FS98 to FS2004 with the Project Opensky group, most of the time exceeding the visual quality of most payware addon aircraft.

It is unfortunate they seem to ignore Hiroshi's wise comment. Hiroshi has to be one of the most respected aircraft designer within the flight simulation community.

Does this require an STC?

Nice painting. However, I have been many times to Honolulu and have never seen these Mars-like colors! Minos

Here, everything seems to be in the same unique 0ft MSL plane since we are speaking of sea-level bodies of water. So I am not sure the "multiple plane" explanation, as given previously, holds true.

Hi there, Nice job. But I do not understand what you mean by MD83 into B717. The model shown here has very much the length of the MD83, the tail of the MD83 and the engines of the MD83. Mins

Go around!

Well, there are both urban and suburban farmers of weeds. Scattered avoids detection by both the NSA and CIA spy sats but in rows is more efficient for harvesting..

So much for the realistic flight dynamics... I hope it is not blade element theory, because having used it countless times for low fidelity aero works, I know it should work OK. :( :ph34r:

100% of accidents are human-error. The fewer humans are involved, the better for my health. Thanks, Minos

Will you stop whining? What the point of bringing a C172 at 65,000ft anyway. Plus not leaning at altitude will not kill your engine instantly. It may foul some plugs in the long run (days) but certainly not instantly.