Jump to content


Commercial Member
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

235 Excellent


About crosswind

  • Rank
    Antiguan by birth, Anguillan by blood

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Audio Engineering

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

6,045 profile views
  1. Speculating what developers are doing or have not done is a bit of a far reach, as I am sure most of you (along this mode of thinking) do realize that there other aspects of beta testing that v5 itself required before it could be released by Lockheed Martin. It allows developers to see how their projects are affected and provides an internal timeline to determine when they can push their updated projects (at least for us) based on other projects that are currently in development, and based on the amount of work that will have to be done. MJC has always pushed the updates after the first or second LM update as it allows for underlying issues from the initial release in some cases to be exposed by a wider group of users. Developers are not bound to have projects on the front-line upon the immediate release of any simulator platform, nor will they likely do so without validating that the addon works to their satisfaction before releasing it. Developers are also not bound to provide a status of if/when an addon would be available, but we do. MJC's statement does not speak on the behalf of other Dev. groups, nor should it be speculated why other Dev. groups have not said anything at this time. I am sure they will in due time. LM and the Dev. groups have been working quite well together and v5 has a lot of potential which will eventually come to light. Cheers
  2. Possibly reaching out to the MJC development group might be of some help....guess I'll put this aside until fixed, lots of potential though. Cheers
  3. I have made several unsuccessful attempts to get the push-back initiated using the Q400 (and yes, I have attempted using any other aircraft which work as they should). Attached is a video showing the issue that I am having. I have also made adjustments to the aircraft offsets to make the nose gear connection as close as possible, still no luck. Any ideas? https://gaming.youtube.com/watch?v=86l1-OThFBA&feature=share Cheers
  4. The coastal regions should not see winds exceeding of 40 - 50 mph
  5. Thanks for the comments. @Rob_Ainscough Yes had two days off and figured I'd do just that, spend some time between both SIM platforms and it was well worth it. I also determined that it's time to change out some flight control hardware, may end up picking up a VF TQ6+
  6. Been a while since I have posted in this forum. Blasting out of Darrington Field 1S2 Looing out over Washington State:- en-route to Anacortes Parked at Anacortes 74S Getting strapped in at ENSD Approaching ENNK Descending into LOWI Innsbruck Climbing out over LOWI Phenom close up Enjoy
  7. Sounds like you do not have your SIM set to "Use System Time for Default Scenario" which can be changed via the Options - General - Applications tabs
  8. RELEASED.....website is a bit slow though!!
  9. It would also make sense that they make the 500 variant since MilViz is currently developing the 600, which makes folks who want both variants, of course, some folks won't be too pleased with the quality of Carenado's variant being less of a systems developed aircraft. It would be an awesome offering if a company like SimCoders for XP did something with Carenado/Alabeo models for FSX/P3D
  • Create New...