Donstim

Exactly. There is no need to know whether it is joystick axis X+, Z, Y, or button xyz, or whatever. Just go to the input that you want to assign and do exactly as you say. Be sure to use the "axis" inputs for elevator, aileron, throttle, and brakes. Once you understand this, it is almost trivial to set up a controller (at least for the bindings, not necessarily the sensitivity). Even if there was a default set of bindings for the CH controllers, I would still want to be able to see what they are and change them to my liking.

Sorry, not true. I and plenty of other CH Products users were in the beta. There were message threads about other controllers being used as well and plenty of issues with the controller bindings. I have to admit I was surprised the release version did not contain a set of default bindings for my CH Flight Yoke, but ti only took about 10 minutes to set it up manually.

I'm responding to these posts, not ignoring them. What, can we only post negative comments here? Too bad that so many are having problems. I'm glad that I'm not one of them.

Good to hear! Yeah, I don't have CH manager installed. Got rid of it a long time ago.

Although I've only had one flight so far just to check it out, I found the A320 autopilot to work fine in all the modes I tried: selected nav, managed nav, selected altitude, selected speed, and managed speed. No problem maintaining either a steady heading, altitude, or changes in either. Even flew a STAR that ATC gave me upon arrival at my destination. At this point, I don't understand the complaint that you can't do IFR well in this sim.

Yeah, I don't get that either. Fortunately, both the yoke and pedals are working fine for me. When you go through the setup process and you hit one of the toe brakes to set it as the input for one of the brakes axes, does it enter the toe brake slider identifier in the input box? Did you then apply and save the inputs? Does the rudder axes work okay with the rudder pedals? Maybe set the toe brakes to work the rudder or some other control and see if they will do that (just to see if your toe brakes hardware is working properly)?

I have the CH Pro Pedals, and the toe brakes work fine for me. Make sure you use the left and right brake axis settings. Click in the search box of the command, then press the appropriate toe pedal. I also have the CH Flight Sim Yoke, and although I had to set it up manually, it works fine after that.

There is no "XBOX version" yet.

So click on that "filter" to show "all" not just "assigned." Then you have ready access to all inputs indexed by category. To assign an input select it, click in the search by input box, click the button you want it assigned to, and validate.

Just turn off the cockpit tool tips. Done.

I completely disagree with this. Just did a short test flight from KSEA to KGEG with the 320NEO, and the autopilot worked great. Tried managed nav, selected nav, managed speed, selected speed,and selected altitude modes, and they all worked fine for me.

Hmmm... but according to your previous post you also lost access to the alpha version. Still consider it to be an advantage when you could have waited until say Aug 15th to get the launcher?

It's out...Not on the insider site yet, but on the public site.

Agree; it is obvious there are plenty of bugs (as expected) at this stage.

Not sure how IVAO and VATSIM fit into this picture. Maybe you guys can clue me in to what you mean? I fly solely on VATSIM and would hope to have something similar with the new sim - meaning live ATC and some "control" over those flying in that "world." AI stuff is okay, but I prefer real live stuff.

Yes, thanks. I had just started reading this thread and didn't look to see when the discussion had started. I decided to delete my post, but unfortunately you were quicker to comment on it than I was to delete it! Thank you also for the informative posts you made in this thread.

DELETED [Responded to an obviously out of date posting]

That's the only place a takeoff like that should be attempted!

It would be nice if it actually could have the option to be as realistic as possible -- including different types of contamination (e.g., dry snow, wet snow, ice, slush), ground friction effects, contamination drag (both from the gear/tires moving through the contamination and the effect of the contaminant kicked up by the airplane impinging on the airplane), hydroplaning, and visibility. But, I'm not expecting anywhere near that level of detail/realism.😀 For one thing, the realistic depiction of actual runway/taxiway conditions would mean obtaining and interpreting field condition reports for all available airfields. WIshful thinking I am sure, but maybe there could be options to either: a) download and use the current field condition report (if available) or b) designate whether snow covers the runways/taxiways/apron, and if so, provide a means to clear it (e.g., snowplows).

The icing pic is great. I wonder how realistic icing will be from a standpoint of the type that forms based on the atmospheric conditions, where it forms, and what effects it has on airplane performance and systems/equipment.

Well, they fixed it good for me. When trying to update FSX-SE, I got an error message that MSVCR80.DLL, MSCVP80.DLL, and MFC80.DLL could not be found, so it was unable to run the installer. These files do exist on my computer, last installed with Windows Update on 7/26/2019. Now I get a "Access is denied" error when trying to start FSX-SE. Not really interested in going through the whole installation process again with all my 3rd party scenery, airplanes, etc. Guess I'm done with flight simulation until the new Microsoft Flight Simulator. Update: Weil, I fixed it. I copied the specified files from where the were into the FSX-SE main directory. It opens fine now. I will probably have to go back and reinstall some stuff, though, because I first followed their process for recovering from installation/updating errors. One of the steps was to verify the integrity of game files. It found over 5000 files that needed to be replaced. I have a feeling that some or all of these files have to do with add-ons that will now be affected.

Yeah, form the community that isn't going to buy their product. Big deal...

I would have thought, as a Forums Administrator, that you would have been aware of the many posts about FSX-SE's improved VAS handling (well, not exactly accurate, but I'll get to that in a minute) over the boxed FSX version. You are right that there is a very severe VAS restriction for any 32 bit piece of software when faced with the demands of complex aircraft/scenery/weather in the midst of high def textures. The boxed version of FSX made that restriction even worse by holding on to every bit of scenery you fly near, making flight time a very good predictor of OOMs. What FSX-SE does that is different, in my understanding, is that it releases scenery details from the cache when it is a certain distance away. If you watch a VAS log in FSX, free VAS just keeps shrinking throughout the flight. In FSX-SE, however, free VAS will shrink, but will then recover as scenery details are released. No more sure OOMs after X hours of flight! As I've said in each post and in the beginning of this one, this does not fully resolve the OOM issue as FSX-SE is still a 32-bit piece of software and hence VAS is limited. But it really does help, and for me at least, makes it much easier to complete a long flight in a complex aircraft (FSLabs A320/PMDG 737NGX) with complex airport and general sceneries (Orbyx, Blueprint, FlightBeam, FlyTampa, etc) with AS2016/ASA2106, on VATSIM. I don't dread hearing that FSUIPC ping..ping nearly as much. I've never been one to care much about frame rates. I limit mine at 32 and am happy above 20-25 for takeoff and landing at complex airports.

Sure, they are "essentially" the same sim -- FSX. But the improvements are not to be taken too lightly. I saw some performance improvement, which was nice, but not the main reason I switched. me. For me, flushing the terrain cache was significant as it allows me to operate the FSLabs A320 (and PMDG 737NGX) into all the complex airport/scenery/weather add-ons I have without the dreaded OOM crash. Not that it is a 100% solution for OOMs (I can still experience them if I'm not careful), but it greatly alleviated them for me. The performance improvements and some of the other fixes were nice adds to that. FSX-SE and FSX boxed may be essentially the same sim, but they are very different in terms of playability for me.

Yep, that's what FXS-SE is. And the changes reading from top to bottom are relative to FSX boxed.