Rocky

Good point, indeed LFOT is an air force base. Even if it is dedicated to training, it is military. There is nothing confidential here but as you say, if it is censored in Bing, we won't have it, that's the way it is... Maybe an add-on developer will do it one day. You're right about the airport type, I don't really think they lied on the 37,000 airports, it is just because they added small airports like landing strips, but on the other hand some "important" ones are missing

They say MSFS has 37,000 real-world airports whereas FSX had "only" 24,000, so at least I was expecting to find all the airports from FSX with 13,000 new ones. During my last flight, I was surprised to see that LFOT (Tours Val de Loire in France) was simply not there... It is not a major airport but it is not a small one. How could they forget it? It exists in real life and in FSX. It is not the first time I notice an airport is missing. I don't believe there are more airports than in FSX. What do you think? Did you also notice missing airports in your area?

And now it works !!! It was just a problem of Microsoft account, it now works 🙂 Thank you all for your help.

I have just logged out from my Microsoft account, logged in again and re-ran MSFS. I don't have the "server offline" error any more.

And I am not the only one having this problem: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-windows_store/msfs-2020-will-not-connect-to-server/09e5070f-4274-4faa-809a-e646e4b8a76e?auth=1

Maybe this is the explanation: http://www.simscape.fr/images/ServerOffline.png This appears when I click "Live airport activity". This is probably the reason of my problem but I don't understand why this happens. My Internet is obviously up and running...

I tried this, but it seems it doesn't work... I set clear skies and when I switch to live weather, nothing changes. If I manually set bad weather, it all reverts to clear skies when I select live weather. I tried at several places, no success...

I also noticed this and I wrote a topic about this. It doesn't only happen in the US, I saw it in France too.

I knew it was a known issue but I thought it was fixed...

Additional information: I found this thread: It describes the same problem, that many Honeycomb users also have. I made additional tests and noticed this: When I associate a switch to the "Set Alternator" or "Set Battery" command, it works fine, the real switch controls the corresponding switch in the sim, but as soon as the switch is ON, the heading bug increments 10 by 10. Using the mouse wheel or mouse button does not change anything. If the switch is OFF, the heading works fine, 1 by 1. I tried to "simulate" the same behavior by pressing a joystick button and while keeping it depressed, adjusting the heading bug. It works perfect. If I associate the joystick button to the "set alternator" command, heading bug fails. My conclusion: there is a problem with the "set" commands. I'm afraid there is no easy solution here, except reporting the bug...

Since I use switches for the battery and alternator, like Honeycomb owners probably do, the autopilot heading moves 10 by 10. I thought this was an old bug that had been fixed long ago... I noticed this in the Cessna 172 with steam gauges, when trying to set the autopilot heading on the compass gauge. Did I miss something here?

During all my latest flights, maybe since the last update (not sure), the weather is always perfectly clear. I always fly with live weather and even if the ATIS tells me about visibility 3 and clouds at various altitudes, I never see a single cloud and visibility is always perfect, CAVOK, more than 10 NM. I have been flying at different places and times, at day, at night, in France, in Madeira, in California, and weather is always clear despite what the ATIS indicates. In addition, altimeter is ALWAYS 29.92... Did you notice the same or did I do something wrong? I thought it was a known bug that had been fixed... Thanks for your help.

It also happened to me once. I found it funny to be forced to fly without any instruments, an interesting exercise. Fortunately it was at day in correct weather conditions 🙂 After restarting the sim it never happened again...

Thank you KenG for your answer, full of interesting information, especially for people like me who are interested in professional simulation. As you wrote, FFS lifespan is counted in decades, which is why a company like Air France may have old ones (like the A320 sim I flew) and more recent ones, such as the ones for the A380. As you also said, the fidelity of exterior vision and the angle of vision are also important, I was amazed by the quality of it, especially when flying a pattern I could see the runway almost behind me. You seem to know very much about this sector, what company are you working for? If you are a specialist, there is one thing, I should even say the ONLY thing that breaks the realism of professional simulators: the amount of light. If you fly by night, this is OK, perfect. But if you fly at day, even if the exterior visualization is bright, it is nothing compared to the real light from the sun, even in a cloudy sky. Real pilots often wear sunglasses, I don't expect to wear sunglasses in a sim, but I often had to turn additional lights on to read the charts even during the day. I still didn't find a solution to this problem, I am still searching 🙂 This discussion might diverge from the original subject, getting further and further to MSFS, but I think it is interesting.

Hello simmers, As I read many topics about this, I wanted to say I don't think the question of MSFS being a game or a sim is not relevant. As long as you enjoy using it, gaming or flying, who cares? What I wanted to say here is about the way to define a good professional sim. The first I flew into a professional full flight Level-D sim at Air France facilities, I was surprised to see the visual was terribly awful, not even textured, something similar to what we had in the early days of PC simulation with no 3D acceleration. The instructors and trained pilots didn't care much about this because the important points were: The spatial environment: the most important for the pilot is to feel he is in the real aircraft. This is why the cockpit is reproduced exactly like the real one, most of the equipment (stick, levers, buttons, pedals) are EXACTLY the same as in the real aircraft The systems must react exactly like the real ones, especially the ways they react in case of a failure. Professional sims are mostly used to simulate any kind of failure. The visuals come in the last position. If the pilot can see the runway and land on it, with the possibility to add 1 other aircraft to train collision avoidance, that's enough. Nevertheless, some time later I flew the last generation CAE sim at Airbus Training (when it was still existing) and the visuals were very good, not better than what we had in FSX, but it was good. Having good visuals is good, but some other parts of the simulation are more important to them. In our field, it is different. Most of us give a high importance to visuals and cannot afford a real size cockpit, so let's stop the comparison between MSFS and real sims, let's enjoy it and that's it 🙂 Don't hesitate to comment, any reaction is greatly welcome.

I have been an Airbus fan for years. For this reason, I have an Airbus RMP device from CockpitSonic. In the old days, I have developed a plug-and-play driver so that the device works seamlessly with the Wilco Airbus Series I have developed with FeelThere. It obviously does not work in MSFS. Today, I have developed an external software that manages the RMP and it works with MSFS, with any aircraft. If you have that hardware device and you are interested in that software, I will be happy to share it. Just contact me. Eric

I think Alvega is right, the bug described there corresponds to what I see, with a level of detail that keeps increasing as I fly closer and closer, while it should be at maximum already. I don't think it is related to internet speed because I have a very high bandwidth, and I set the rolling cache to 16 GB on SSD.

I don't know... Where do I see this?

I have just got an RTX 3070 and I am really happy I can fly in ultra with very good frame rate. Nevertheless, I have a minor issue, even if it is not really serious I would like to know if there is a possible solution. My problem is that when I fly to scenery I want to see from a close distance, the level of detail increases as long as I get closer, this is normal. But when I get so close that I can see a lot of details, I see "last second adjustments", which means I see the scenery and the shadows adjusting to look good. Indeed, it looks perfect, but I would be even happier if these adjustments could happen a little earlier, before I arrive on top of it. For example, I was flying to small islands off Marseille, mainly made of small mountains. As I was flying above them, really close, I could see these last moment adjustments, I think it was in the mesh and in the shadows, not sure. But What I am sure about is that the mountains were looking like "moving" as I was flying above them... Is there a way to increase the viewing distance so that the scenery is fully adjusted 1 or 2 NM before I arrive above it?

After several flight with the latest update, it seems the logbook is now working very well. Among other improvements, this is a good news and I am very happy about this update. Thank you Asobo 🙂

I remember that with FS2004, FSX and P3D, the bank angle used to reach the AP target heading was the angular difference between the current heading and the target heading. For example, if you were heading 10° and set the AP to turn right to a 20° heading, the bank angle would be 10°, then 9, 8, 7, ... as long as you get closer to the target. This was very convenient and it worked very well, providing a quick and smooth behavior. In addition, it was very convenient for me, as a developer, to control the bank angle 🙂 I don't know why they didn't keep that part of the code. It was working perfect for years, why did they need to change this? As cepact said, they should open the doors (= provide a comprehensive SDK) to let us, add-on developers and moders, do this part.

Maybe the logbook will work fine on the Xbox version of MSFS 😄

If the logbook is so important for most of us, maybe it would be worth writing an external app that does it better and stores all the information in a database. I should be able to do this 🙂

I have just done this, excluding the whole FSX folder, and it seems to work. More testing may be needed to be sure but it looks OK. Thank you !! And congratulations for your expertise 🙂

I don't think so. As far as I know it is not stored locally, it is on the Azure Cloud.