bdenni

>http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/notams06/fsx0104.htm>>Half way down, next to the ultalight picture - >>"You can see from the screen shots that we are going to get>some exciting new aircraft in FSX. The Grumman Goose and>DeHavilland Beaver look especially tantalizing. Other new>aircraft include DG sailplanes, ultralights, and the Airbus>A321. The Boeing 737 has been upgraded to the model>800.">>I rest my case :(Good reference but if you look carefully the section regarding what aircraft to expect in FSX is lead off with this:FlightSim.Com analysis, commentary and expert punditry about FSX.First of all, let me assure you that we do not have any insider scoop on FSX. If we did, we probably could not publish it because we only publish the facts that have been checked and confirmed by Microsoft or other reliable independent sources. After all, we have been told repeatedly by our flightsimmer friends that you all prefer accurate reporting to tabloid sensationalism. No two-headed geeks, alien abductions or Elvis sightings here. What follows is the collected wisdom of this writer plus the rest of the FlightSim.Com editorial team as opposed to the rumors, gossip and myths you may encounter in other media.

>I read in the "PC Gamer?" article flying round the internet>that FSX would include an A321. Can anyone confirm this?>>-Paul>>(I'd be on cloud9 if that were true!)>I thought "taildragger" replied in another post (don't remember if it was here or [heaven forbid]another FS site)regarding the A32x and said it would not be in the release

>>The announcement is supposed to be released this week and>>coincidentally, the International Consumer Electronics>>Association (CES) show is in Las Vegas this week, could this>>be where the announcement is made?>>Good eye:>>The CES runs from January 5-8. Looks like Microsoft is an>exhibitor, along with a seperate display for Windows Vista.A number of the blogs by the Microsoft crew have mentioned that they were heading to CES. Then with the notice here that there would be some form of an announcement about FSX this week, it made you wonder if MS would use the CES event to originate their message.

The announcement is supposed to be released this week and coincidentally, the International Consumer Electronics Association (CES) show is in Las Vegas this week, could this be where the announcement is made?

>Is that a Windows computer I see? Hope it isn't used for>anything critical:-) Maybe the pilots can run fs for some real>flying on those long stretches. >>But seriously, it looks like Airbus is moving their cockpit>design forward.>>-

If they cleared the highway so he could take off, why was the semi and the emergency vehicle still on the right shoulder of the road? The news reports all say he was attempting to takeoff from a four lane highway, in reality, it was only two lanes that he had to use since there was a grass median between the opposing traffic lanes. That should have been wide enought it those vehicles were not there.**Just read a follow up story that said the authorities were getting ready to move the emergency truck and were trying to find the driver of the semi to move their truck. The pilot, not aware that they were not finished clearing the highway for him, reved his engine and started his takeoff run, clipping the sideview mirror from the cab of the semi and then hitting the back of the emergency truck. The second impact broke of a section of the wing and veered the Cessna to the right, where it left the road and came to rest in a grove of trees.

I thought the vertical speed component was only valid when there is a difference between current altitude and target altitude in an active autopilot. The autopilot controls the climb (or decent) of the aircraft to the set altitude using a target vertical speed (a default is set in the aircraft.cfg)[autopilot]autopilot_available=1 flight_director_available=1 default_vertical_speed=1800

I belive that you need to add a connector from the first point past the parking spot directly to the taxiway. The way I see your connecting points, if the plane departs the gate straight out (like you have it planned) it follows the blue dots past the other gates before taking the diagonal taxiway out to the runway end at the southwest corner of this picture. If departures are from the northeast end, the shortest route to the runway is the way the plane came in so that is why it does a pushback. (FS strategy is that a plane takes the shortest route to the end of the runway. The way you designed the entrance into the "drive-thru" gate adds the extra distance to usually force it to go forward.)

I don't believe the problem is with Microsoft's website. I just checked the National Weather Service website and their updates are currently over 2.5 hours late. When the NWS does not update, MS's link to the weather fails and you get the error message.

I check the weather occasionally at the NWS website and the updates are about 7 hours behind. If Microsoft is using a feed from this NWS website, it may not be able to supply current weather since the NWS site does not have the current hour stats. That may be the reason why you cannot get online updates through FS.The page I use for KPHX is http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/current/KPHX.html

deleted

I've searched through the SDKs from Microsoft, in particular the Aircraft Container SDK and cannot find any information on this. In the FS9.cfg file is the following entry:[AIRtoCONTAINER]SIM1=Cessna Skylane 182R RGSIM2=Learjet 45SIM3=Schweizer 2-32 SailplaneSIM4=Sopwith CamelSIM5=Extra 300SSIM6=Boeing 737-400What is the significance of SIM1, SIM2, etc.? Why are there only 6 aircraft listed here not SIM1 through SIMn? Is the SIMx used anywhere else like an .air or .cfg file?Thanks for any insight that you can provide.

In the Dash 8 aircraft folder, copy the panel folder and rename the copy "panel.2". Open the aircraft.cfg and change the entry as below:[fltsim.0]title=de Havilland Dash 8-100sim=DH_Dash8_100model=panel=2 <-----(This selects panel.2 for this aircraft)sound=texture=kb_checklists=DH_Dash8_100_checkkb_reference=DH_Dash8_100_refatc_id=N700MSatc_airline=Airwaveatc_flight_number=1123atc_parking_types=GATE,RAMPui_manufacturer=de Havillandui_type="Dash 8-100"ui_variation="Airwave Airlines"Then you can modify the panel.2 layout using one of the programs mentioned in the earlier posts. If it does not work like you want, you can change the aircraft.cfg back (panel= ) and the original panel will be used. In the case above, I only change the panel for the first aircraft listed. You need to make the same change for each additional plane in this config if you want them all to use your new panel.Good Luck!

If I'm not mistaken, this is a common theme implemented by Microsoft in their applications. My Documents is a subset of Documents and Settings which is where MS places many of its config and backup files. It puts commanality amoung all of the MS applications.

Haven't been on the forum lately but just saw this article regarding the reduction in vertical separation at FL290 and above that starts today. "http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2005-01-12-vertical-air_x.htm/From the article in USA Today Jan 12, 2005:At 4:01 a.m. ET next Thursday (that would be Jan 20, 2005), the required vertical separation between planes flying in a range from 29,000 to 41,000 feet will decrease to 1,000 feet from the current 2,000. The required horizontal separation will remain unchanged at 5