Jump to content

Jimmy Angel

  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19 Neutral

About Jimmy Angel

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines
  1. More likely: 1. Microsoft has been quietly working on a new version of MSFS for at least a couple of years, leveraging new tech. 2. Once development gets to the stage where they are ready to make the announcement, they release a trailer at the biggest computer/games event of the year. Or, you can go with a crazy conspiracy theory if you prefer.
  2. Thanks for everyone for their suggestions. I did settle on the Carenado Aero Commander for now, though there are several others in this thread that I've added to my wish list. I really like the Aero Commander! It's got a ton of character.
  3. I will add, at least based on my understanding of the UI, that you can set up timetables for passenger flights between specific destinations, and you can also fly ad-hoc passenger flights from any airport to any airport. I think this plus the cargo runs offers a nice balance between variety and being able to fly regular routes to your preferred airports. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but that's my understanding.
  4. Ah, I forgot about that one. Been around forever, I think. I'll give it a look. Thanks! What's the word on the street for the Carenado Shrike? I love the beat-up look of that.
  5. I have the A2A Piper Commanche, which I like a lot, but I am looking for something a bit less fiddly (and maybe a bit faster) as a starter for Air Hauler 2. Also have the Realair Legacy, but it's not exactly appropriate for hauling passengers or cargo. Are there any other developers who produce quality single engine GA for P3D v3? I don't need A2A level fidelity, but would like to have a flight model that feels and acts right, with a nice looking virtual cockpit. Edit: GTN 750 compatibility would be ideal, though I suppose I can live without it. I am also open to a twin, though my joystick setup isn't really twin friendly. I do know about the RealAir duke, and I am sure I will get that at some point)
  6. Thanks much. This makes sense. I can do without the extra gates and such for now, I think. I'll make the purchase this weekend (along with the new Active Sky, and maybe a plane or two, and heck it's going to be an expensive weekend).
  7. Question for those in the v2 Beta: Do addon airports not work at all then right now? For example, if I've got an ORBX airfield it won't be selectable or show up in the jobs list? Was thinking about purchasing, but will hold off if I can't fly between my Orbx PNW airports. Is there any indication of when the import function will become available?
  8. Just wanted to say thanks for this tool. I can't believe the difference it made for me. So much more vibrant and lifelike! It's got me excited about flying P3D again. Here's my before and after.
  9. Hey, this is a super-cool utility. Works great for me on P3D v2.5. Killing 200 flights didn't exactly make my FPS skyrocket (it went from mid 30's to high 30's in the best circumstance), but I imagine in crunch situations at complex airports it'll really help. I know the author hasn't been around lately, but I'll raise a glass to him anyway. Nice work.
  10. Nevermind. Invalid post. I forgot to set the damn wideview to true after disabling HT.Turns out that my results are still more or less the same.FSX is infinitely frustrating. I have no idea why my system would be a good 20-30% behind similar specs.
  11. I did. However, the tool suggested an AffinityMask of 84 under both conditions (8 cores with Hyperthreading checked or 4 without hyperthreading). Is that right?
  12. Brand new system with a brand new install of FSX. Followed the guide to the letter...I'm a bit disappointed in the results. Looking at the master spreadsheet, it seems like I should be hitting perhaps the high 30's or maybe even the low 40's as an average. I've tried hyperthreading off (which made it worse), and other minor variations without success. Does this result seem on target or should I be trying to figure out where the bottleneck is?
  13. >A few quotes from your post though is where for me, you left>your valid points and said what causes unnecessary problems>for this forum:I've been following this thread, and this is the second time quotes from Josh's post have been taken completely out of context.For example, you quote the following:"part of some corporate scheme to #### us off and take our money"Here is the actual original quote in context:"Do I think that this is part of some corporate scheme to #### us off and take our money?Hardly. FSX is the most impressive piece of simulation software I have ever seen available to the public, and that only becomes more and more true with every subsequent release."I think Josh's arguments have been reasonable, well-stated, and balanced with plenty of praise of the MSFS series. With all due respect, Geofa, I think it's bad form to snip out a bunch of pieces of his post because it tends to distort the original meaning and intent. Better to include the original quotes in full context and then comment on them point-by-point when you disagree or think he's being inflammatory.Personally, I've watched FSX from the sidelines. I've been waiting for the service patches and DX10 update to upgrade my computer to a level where I can fly rather than endlessly tweak. Now, I'm honestly no longer compelled to upgrade and may even just wait it out and see what FS11 offers.I think everyone has to admit that the DX10 enhancements are a bit of a letdown. I know that Phil and other team members have been honest and forthright in recent months. I think that Microsoft marketing really built up the potential of DX10 (and how it would impact FSX), so it's a bit of a bummer to see that that the emperor has no clothes.So, if I were a flight sim aficionado who payed thousands of dollars and upgraded to the latest and greatest hardware earlier this year, I think I'd have a bit of venting to do on the matter. I'm glad I waited it out.Finally, I have to give huge props to Phil and the team. It's been great having this open communication, and It sounds like they have a great plan for moving forward with FS11.
  14. I think that the whole idea of a new version of FS being built for future hardware is essentially broken.For one, release cycles for MSFS are every 2-3 years. If the sim was being released every 6 years, then I'd understand having a lot of headroom. It's a bit silly to release a sim and then have hardware fully "catch up" a year or so (if then) before the next release. It makes absolutely no sense to me, and I can't think of any other games/sims I've played which follow this paradigm.Which raises the issue ... should MS "dumb down" the graphics in order to achieve this? Do we artificially just make everyone happy by allowing the sim to run with all of the sliders to the right? No, but I think MS should define features and set optimization goals by a current benchmark, not one a year or two following release.Personally, I'm still waiting for hardware to catch up with FSX. It's a bit depressing, because by the time I upgrade my system, I am sure they will be announcing FS11. My hope is that they really take advantage of computing power (GPU's, multiple CPU's) to deliver awesome graphics and immersion, and that they do it in a way that can be enjoyed fully and immediately without jumping into a time machine.
  15. Here's my question ... I am considering a system upgrade but am wondering if I should even bother, at least as far as FSX is concerned.Is anyone running FSX at medium-high settings on current (reasonable) hardware.For example, one of the high-end Nvidia video cards (i.e. 8800GTS) and a reasonable CPU (such as an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600)And I'm not talking just bush flying....
  • Create New...