betelgeuse

Thanks to all. I forgot about that completely. Will check it out. This is great news. I have the Cub and love it but it makes slow progress especially in a headwind... John

Can anyone recommend a payware or freeware PA28 type - Warrior, Archer, Arrow? For either FSX or FS9. These planes are commonly used for training in UK and all over the world but for some reason they haven't been modelled by the usual players (Carenado did an Archer a long time ago - it needs updated). What about it A2A, Real Air, Lionheart? We've lots of Cessnas already. John

Just in case anyone is thinking of AES. It only works for certain airports and you've got to buy 'credits' for these. I bought a lot of credits both for FS9 and FSX but found out eventually that you can use the same credits for both sims. More importantly, although AES works with default planes it doesn't work with all addons. John

Ah! Now that is very useful information, Joe - I should have realised it myself. I moved the Addon Scenery way down to near the default stuff. Already, I've cured an old problem with the TropicalSim addon for Porto, LPPR. Magic! Thanks again. John

Thanks, Joe. This helps a lot. I understand about the Addon Scenery Afcad thing - been caught out by that a few times. Most people use the Addon Scenery/scenery folder for Afcad only airports and I believe it's the recommended folder for those. There's something not quite right about that in view of possible conflicts. I'm keeping my Addon Scenery folder high as that's the location of almost all my Addon Sceneries. If/when I get Afcad conflicts I either do a manual search or a scan for the offending file and then remove it. I have more problems with addon mesh and addon terrain than Afcads so getting those in the right place should improve things. Regards, John :smile:

Sorry to resurrect an old chestnut. I'm using Bill's suggestions from an earlier thread on this board. forum.avsim.net/topic/399575-scenery-library-order/ Priority 1 Addon Scenery All of my individual airport addons Photoreal scenery / MegaScenery etc Landclass files / MyWorld etc Terrain mesh Ultimate Terrain Default FS9 folders But where should I place these other items in the FS9 Scenery Library? - jetwaywh, jetwayqy, jetwaybn EZScenery Library, Rwy12 Library, Static Objects Library Roads and Grass for specific airports e.g. AK23ROADS, AK23GRASS: MerrillFieldPAMR, MerrillGRASS, MerrillDELETE Objects of various kinds e.g. RKSI_Cars, ANO Obstacles AESLite for various airports (AES base goes at the top) Quite often an installer will place a landclass file above its respective scenery file. For example, FlyLogic's Sion Landclass is autoinstalled above the Sion scenery. Should I leave it like that, or move the landclass down below the airport addons as in Bill's list? I guess there are few hard and fast rules but any advice would be welcome. John

vololiberista/Peter My word! This is a great thread for anyone interested in the VC10. How did I miss this gem for so long? I knew that the Trident had autoland (the first in the world I think) but not the VC10. Your description of its FBW system is fascinating - as usual we Brits made the hard ground but failed to capitalise. Never mind - European planemakers are all in it together these days. Competition is good but cooperation is good too! I think I might not fly the basic model much more. As you say, vololiberista, I'll install the updates a few at a time and learn as I go along. Thanks for the advice and good luck with all those complex hydraulic and electrical systems. If that all goes as planned I might need a second yoke for Christmas - one for pitch and one for roll! Now, that would be fun..... John

Thanks. I'll check that gauge entry when I get to that stage, Peter. All good so far, test flights on basic plane going well. I think it handles well but I guess it's not authentic. Works well with GoFlight throttles and CH yoke. Next I'll test the workings of the autothrottle and autopilot. Seems they are a little idiosyncratic! II was very surprised to find an autoland system. Should be fun! John

Thanks again. The plane looks magificent. I can't wait to get airborne. I like the well used look of the panel too. What next? Should I install the 7 updates listed on the link at the top of this thread? I have the 5.1 CIVA INS. John

I need some help here. This is the VC10 download page on DM's website. Which VC10 update should I download? I checked these and none have 5 sub directories. Maybe I'm missing something obvious. John

Thank you very much, vololiberista! It's very kind to take so much trouble. I will work on this later this evening and keep you posted. John

Interesting information on this thread. I'm installing the aircraft for the first time and am in difficulties. I understand about the \Aircraft\DMFS Shared Files arrangement. I followed the readme files and installed the 1101 version as I thought correctly but the plane isn't showing up in the sim. I checked and found that the .air file in the folder is VC101.air to match the model.1101 folder. But, the aircraft.cfg refers to sim= VC105 and model=1151. Obviously something has gone wrong somewhere. I have all the various updates needed to create the 'new' all singing version of the aircraft as detailed on this thread. I think I must have chosen the wrong starting point. I'd be grateful for advice. John

That's a risk, of course, but it happens all the time in business. That's where good project management comes in. The project would be managed by someone appointed by a 'DC3 Development Trust Board'. It would be phased and funds would be released only to achieve agreed milestones. Bonuses could be awarded for any betterments. This approach would minimise the risk to donors and would encourage project completion. In the case of complete project failure, contributors might agree in advance that unused funds be donated to the International Red Cross, or American Red Cross, or similar. At least we would have tried and some good would have come out of it. John

The answer to the orginal question is that there are several 'good' DC3s out there, including the MAAM versions for FS9 and FSX, and the X-plane version, not to mention the FSX DC2. 'Good' being a subjective word doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. The OP perhaps meant something more than merely 'good', something special along the lines of a PMDG or A2A product. PMDG are already working on the DC6. A2A have other priorities. Both companies must have calculated in their different ways that they can generate higher profits from those projects than from a DC3. I have a lot of sympathy for the view of at least one poster, that those of us who would like a really top-notch DC3 should do something about it. The MAAM FS9 DC3 was superb and, although the port-over to FSX leaves a lot to be desired, that plane is the closest we now have to a 'special' DC3 (apart from the X-Plane). MAAM has stated that it's not going to develop a purebreed FSX DC3, presumably because of the cost involved and the likely return on investment. On the other hand, they might be open to suggestions. Given the amount of support there seems to be for the DC3 on these boards, why not set up a trust to receive donations with the aim of commissioning a new FSX/P3D DC3 built to A2A levels of fidelity? AVSIM might even lend a management hand. If MAAM doesn't bite, maybe MILVIZ or someone else will. One way or the other, if we want that kind of DC3 we'll have to pay for it. This way we pay up front. Risky? Maybe but with good project management that risk should be small. I guess this idea is a long shot. But if we want a new DC3 there's no use just grumbling that we don't have one - we need to make it happen. Otherwise, nothing will happen. Will we settle for that? John

Let us hope so but framing this kind of legislation could take a long time.

Sorry, Carenado, I have to agree, even though I've bought all of your 'new' FS2004 aircraft. This business with the scroll wheel for turning knobs is a major irritant and totally unnecessary. What was wrong with having the mouse cursor turning the knobs? I'll be steering clear of Carenado until such time as this issue is sorted. What they say is not true. I've just been flying the much-loved freeware Project Fokker F-70. You can switch off its landing lights and keep its panel lights on. How long ago was that plane designed? 8 years? But then the PF team was a class act. F-70 panel lights

Thanks, Dillon. I'm easing my way towards Zinertech Water. Not too sure about that freeware file, though. Justin (owner of FSG before the recent sell-off) was plagued by requests to make a fix for the FS9 airport plateau things. If there'd been a fix out there I guess he'd have known about it. Regarding the mesh, in fs9.cfg it is controlled by, amongst other things <terrain_max_vertex_level=>. I've played around with that setting from 19-21, currently at 20. Any less than 20 takes away from the mesh IMO, whilst not doing anything to correct the awful plateaux/holes near airports. It's not the fault of the FSG mesh whose coordinates are correct but to the incorrect coordinates of many default airports in FS9. If anyone knows of a file out there which will sort out this old FS9/FSG problem please post details!

I run both but I prefer FS9. I run it with GE Pro, REX (water textures), FSGenesis mesh, and Active Sky Evolution. I set it up with Nvidia Inspector and I don't seem to get 'blurries'. I do get flickering in chain fences and the like but I can live with that. My main gripe is with the FSGenesis generated plateaux and 'holes' near many airfields. It is most marked using the newer 19m and 38m meshes. Has anyone found a way of dealing with this, short of disabling the FSGenesis mesh? I'm reluctant to do that because, apart from the plateaux, FSG adds a degree of realism to the landscape way better than default FS9 mesh. System Spec: Q9650 3.0GHz, GTX 260 896MB, 3GB DDR2, Windows XP x32bit ( I run FSX in W7x64bit on the same PC - dual boot). John

Kael I've no experience of running four monitors. Attaching up a fourth monitor for gauges shouldn't be difficult as long as the monitor has a port for your fourth graphics card output (HDMI or DisplayPort). Bear in mind that the more you load on to your system, the greater the workload for your CPU and the less smooth your simulation might be. I don't know your system spec but if you are running Windows 7, with an i-7 chip and plenty of DDR (at least 8GB) then your 680GTX will probably cope. Regarding the panel cfg tweakings. These can be awkward to set up with third party aircraft. The principle is not hard to understand but it is a bit hit and miss. For example, I've never been able to resize the ATC popup panel. Thankfully, this doesn't result in the spinning cursor. And then there's the question of positioning the popups. The links I sent you will explain how to do this but you have to remember that with three screens the middle position is either 1 (top of centre screen) or 4 (middle, centre screen) or 7 (bottom, centre screen). Folks on those other boards will help if you post there - there's a lot more knowledge out there than I have. Please don't feel I'm trying to talk you out of a three screen set up. If I can set this up anyone can. But best to go into it with your eyes open. If you run into problems you can PM me. I am away quite a lot so might not manage a fast reply, but I will reply. John

Kael Oswald (Hungarian?) There's been a lot of discussion elsewhere on this topic. I think you will find these posts helpful: Ronski http://www.simforums.com/forums/triple-monitor-2d-cockpit-problem_topic43932.html GeorgeT93 http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?200623-Configuring-FSX-With-TripleHead2Go DB93 http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?24395-TripleHead2Go-2D-Panel-Fix-for-FSX George Trovato has updated all the panels of the FSX default aircraft so that they can be used in FSX in Nvidia Surround mode. These can be uploaded from the AVSIM library (fsx-triplewide-panels_defaultac.zip) and also the simouthouse library. If you only use a few aircraft regularly it helps and in fact this is what I do. I fly these in Surround Mode (6003x1900) - for the others I just use the centre monitor (1920x1200) for cockpit and outside views, and drag and drop 2D popups etc to the side monitors. Before you pay out hard-earned cash, I strongly recommend that you make sure your monitors all have the same screen resolutions and are the same screen size. Check that they all have DisplayPort inputs as one of the three outputs on the graphics card will be DisplayPort. All that I've read (and I've studied this stuff in depth!) tells me that NVIDIA Surround in FSX will not work off the GTX670/680 cards unless the monitors have identical specs. John

Haha! :smile: No worries. Glad to help. John

Howard, err....actually it is done! http://www.flickr.com/photos/77703665@N05/8676806230/ There's a list of repaints here. I agree the info is not easily available on the Just Flight site. You need to go to the Majestic page - Products - under Additional liveries. http://majesticsoftware.com/ John

I set up a three monitor system using GTX670 with NvIdia Surround. As another poster said you must adjust the bezel (side frames) so that the view aligns across the three screens. This is not to difficult to do but you must remember to set the screen resolution under Options/Display to the new values - mine are 6003x1920. Although the panorama which results is impressive there are some drawbacks. First, any 2D popups on an FSX plane will be grossly stretched and you will get the ghastly spinning cursor. When this appears you will not be able to fly in the simulation. The only solution is to go into the panel.cfg file and resize any 2D popup windows (e.g. GPS). This must be done for each aircraft individually and is a right royal pain in the 'you know where'. Obviously, you need some knowledge of the panel.cfg and how to change values. Second, the outside view gets stretched out towards the sides of each side screen. Most folks seem to get used to the distortion. I find it very annoying and nausea-inducing. Third, Nvidia Surround only works for virtual cockpits. Fourth, all your monitors must be exactly the same - this always means they must have the same native screen resolution, and usually it means the same model number. Taken all together I find these issues so irritating that I rarely use my triple monitor set up for viewing the cockpit and outside view. Instead I use the side screens for dragging 2D popups, and any other programs that I am running at the same time e.g. FSCommander. I've no experience of Track IR but if I were doing it all again I might try it first. John

I've been using GE Pro for many years and like it a lot. It has seasonal textures and can be run in conjunction with Active Sky Evolution. ASE first, then use the link to load GEPro, then fire up FS9. That's the way I do it. I've never 'fiddled with tints'! I run both ASE and GEPro on a laptop via Wide FS. I've not used BEV so cannot make a comparison.

Thanks WR269, zoran. FS++. Seems like I can't go wrong with some test flights. John