tasev1

If PMDG charged for the 737 upgrade...you can bet your bottoms they'll do so for the DC6 if it ever comes back!

If it's nice, then old shouldn't matter I suppose. Better than the black hole we had by default. I love Korean Air liveries, but never flew them as I didn't know this scenery existed.

search RKSI gates?

Oh man, I wish I heard about this scenery a long time ago. I've been waiting for RKSI for a long time on all the major purchase managers and didn't come across this one. I have a few sceneries bought from independent sources, but it makes it so hard to keep track of when MSFS requires so many. I'm converting over to MSFS2024, and it's only 2 planes and Chaseplane left. KSLC was another one I really needed - again from this dev. Can I buy these two and safely use in 2024? Do they work right with the install hack?

Wow, two threads and still I don't see a solution. For me, it was default planes and default scenery causing issues. A32N at default JFk - same plane at Flightbeam KSFO not possible. On the A350, the moment I would look to the cockpit door, frames went down the drain. This is a totally fresh install....just decided to buy it this week!

Ok, thanks. So just guestimating then. I'll keep going with my usual weights. Is there at least an average number of baggage weight to passenger?

Hey there. I am using SimBrief for my planning software. One thing I never knew how to do properly is knowing how to load cargo on the 777 and 737. By default, I use 40 to 60 pounds per passenger, and spread the load evenly between front and rear holds, plus a bit to account for carry-ons. I know that the baggage containers weigh, and though not so much on the 737, the 777 undoubtedly carries additional cargo loads to destination. So, how can I figure out realistic cargo loads?

Having the same issue. Tried deleting in windows minimal service safe mode, and it does not work either.

FlyTampa toronto isn't doing well in P3D - I've had OOM errors and far lower frames than I had in FSX. I suspect it has something to do on the P3D side, not FT. PMDG 737 on my FSX setup has gone no lower than 12 fps, but never had OOM. I was getting OOM in P3D with their 777.

So why the PMDG over ifly? I have used ifly, and I get so much more for the money I pay. In fact, I feel as though the ifly 737 (and 747 at that) feel much more immersive in sound and environment.

Here is my problem with the 182: it DOES excessively float on landing because it does not bleed speed off rapidly enough. First notch of flaps has huge effect, the other notches barely felt them. I am approaching at 60 knots with full flaps - I can land it just fine, albeit waaaayyyy down the runway. Here is a link to a Youtube video that shows the pilot of a T182T landing. If you watch his speed, he is actually on approach at 80 knots, and doesn't begin to slow down until very short on final. He hits 60 at the fence, and once he flares the speed comes down quick for a nice touchdown - no float. Try THAT it this sim? Good luck!

This game is silky smooth on my PC with max settings. I've never experienced this in any previous FS incarnation and that smooth frame rate does indeed give better immersion of 3D and motion than any before. If only FSX could be that smooth for me. The aircraft included are super easy to fly, so much so its like sitting on a comfy couch with a trim wheel. I don't have enough addon to judge sounds and flight dynamics though. After all, does anybody actually own the A5 yet? That being said, Flight didn't last an hour on my PC before I got rid of it. LOL....FS9/FSX, I'm coming home. Sacha.

You can't say I don't know what I'm talking about when I am merely stating an opinion / fact from ONLY my point of view, not anybody else's. Value is RELATIVE, so spending $100 for something I will rarely touch may not be worth it, whereas using it heavily it IS. I certainly DO agree with what you say (and it is all about 'value'), but you missed my primary intent - to see why they chose to release 800/900 first (since I thought 700 was more popular), and that question was answered long time ago.Everything is becoming more expensive these days - games, food, transport, etc....PMDG is no different, except that they are making HUGE imporvements, and nobody else is. Just because the value of the product is good, does not entitle me to like the price.

Only in that you don't need to touch the pedalst!!! In a real plane, if you set autobrake 3, you will decelerate at a specific rate - using the reverse thrust only helps save the brakes, but it doesn't slow you down any faster!! You won't 'feel' any difference. If you don't touch the brakes in a real plane and only open reverse thrust (on MOST aircraft), the deceleration won't be as much as you think, because it is not true 'reverse' thrust - it is sideways or slightly forward thrust. All they do is cut off any foreward thrust, and provide a 'wall of air' that helps aerodynamically slow the plane down. The few exceptions might be planes like the DC-9/MD- (which can push themselves backwards), or the clamshells on the Airbus. In FS, this is not the case - where reversers actually reverse and stop the aircraft. The landing distance in FS will be influenced with reverse thrust, but not in real life.

All the 737's I flew before this one (including the previous PMDG iteration, and seeing it on film), had the ability to set full thrust by firewalling the throttles, and they would automatically set max N1 without going over. This 737 does not seem to do that. What am I missing? I know about the TO/GA button, but I've never had to use it. I flew in a full 737 simulator, again there, TO/GA not required.Sacha

Sure MS Flight might not be for us - be glad that we still have FS9 and FSX to suit us just fine!!! I may understand what MS is doing and why, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. The ONE thing I DO like about it is (hopefully), it WILL bring flight simulation - in whatever manner - to larger masses of young people and old. The technology is there to develop highly detailed aircraft, so I'm sure FLIGHT is capable to handle the demands of a PMDG product, but it is BETTER able to suit GENERAL AVIATION in my opinion. Just like all other games today - they release a minimal product, and ask you to pay for DLC's, etc... - that is now becoming the norm. If they want to make FLIGHT a game, let them....we still have FS9, FSX, and X-Plane.God Bless PMDG.

Hey, no doubt I agree with all your statements - the value is there, but relative. For those that dedicate their simming time to mostly 737's sure. I have a wide range of aircraft on my platform, and I like to jump back and forth with as many realistic as possible airplanes (GA and commercial). It all depends on my mood / mission. As a result, there's a lot of planes I bought and rarely use (some now impossible with win7-64), so justifying THIS purchase is only possible knowing that the new MS Flight will not be compatible with anything, and I don't plan on using it at all (except the free part perhaps).

So, I'm just curious why the 800/900 was released first instead of the 600/700 like the original versions in FS9. For me, I would have liked to have a choice of which pair I want, then pay for the other if I want an expansion. 90% of my 737 flying is on the -700, then the -600 (due to the fleets I use). With the original release, I did get the 800/900 package, but rarely used those products. I don't like the idea of throwing a whopping $70, then another $25 just so I can get the more common models. Perhaps on the whole it may make 'business sense', but I think something like that may also retract sales too.All I say - in this day and age and with the prices that we pay for things, we should be able to choose which package version we want. That opens the door to everyone's tastes, and may even increase sales.Just my thoughts.So is it worth it? I have the iFly 737, but $70 is a massive investment to switch to. For that price, PMDG should be releasing a trial-version (limited area/functionality/time).

Ok Bryan, I got it to work. I un-installed FS2Crew, ran the repair tool, and ran the FS2C installer again as admin, and all worked ok (no need to remove the 767). I wasn't expecting the need for that registry repair tool since my PC and all my installs are brand new, and I checked the registry myself all was ok. I guess there's something 'hidden' in running that tool after all. Strange....

Hi Bryan...Same issue here as well. During the install, I got an error message citing a problem making a file/modification because I am on a 64-bit system and that operation was incompatible except on 32-bit. The panel.cfg files were not modified, so I did them myself from the provided files in the FS2Crew folder structure. I did save the LVLD config, and I ran the start center as well as added the lines to the panel cfg file. I know about the registry repair tool, but I'm not sure if that would apply in this case? I'll try it anyway and see what happens when my current flight is over. (I am running windows 7-64 with FS9.1 and the winglet update for the 767). I have yet to test FS2C on my PMDG 747...but I did check and all the files seem to be correctly installed.

Ok, a little confused here. I know that the original RXP gauge package will not work with Win 7-64 because of the format it was built in. The A36 and Baron were my favourite aircraft of all time, and I'd hate to loose them.I have tried to install the A36 without the RXP pack and simply remove all references to the GNS430 gauges in the panel.cfg file. The plane loads up, but NOTHING works. All gauges blank, no sound, etc.... What do I need to do?I am finding it difficult to find good solid information on what to do with these planes. I certainly am not planning to dish out all that cash to purchase all these gauges just to get these planes working like original.What is Dreamfleet up to anyway? How come updates aren't being made?Sacha

Actually, they are stretched - look closer. Bring up the bitmap images in the 172's panel folder and you'll see better.That's why I personally don't care about the stretched 2d, because it's hardly significant. My res. is setup at 1080, so I have just a wee bit more stretch than you.

I agree with Bert - there is no way around the stretched gauges on the 2D panel because the size the BITMAPS were created in, while in VC it is a depiction of a 3D environment. Hence, 'normal' and 'widescreen' panel options. Now, for me at least, this stretch is so insignificant, I really could care less. Once I make a setup using FreeTrack, I hopefully won't need 2D panels much (except for old planes with cheap VC's).As far as the wide aspect in the CFG file, I believe it has to do with FSX opening up in windowed mode, and that's about it. Just like the VC, the environment is directly rendered to the image (your set resolution), and I doubt the view angle is affected by this. But I will check it out myself.

Thanks for your good words guys. It's nice to know people think so highly of FS2Crew.From what I've seen, I would have to be entirely responsible to 'pretend' to make cabin announcements, departure/approach briefings, etc...none of which I would normally do in FS anyway (and none of which would really affect the simulation). Does the documentation by any chance come with templates for that sort of thing?

It is my opinion that FS2Crew should come up with a demo for the voice commander series of addons. Something simple, such as enabling pre-departure events only, perhaps at a specific airport (like DBS walk and follow demo, or the AES scenery).I find it difficult to decide if I should buy the VC edition because there is more at play with this adon than your basic FS2C packages from the past (and I have a couple). I don't know if I would like using the voice version (because I already love the button version), yet I am a real world pilot. I don't know how well my hardware will work (and I don't plan on spending more money to upgrade my hardware). And there are those people with heavier accents too.So I think it could be quite valuable to have a demo available so we can have a crack at it. I will confess, I tried to find a free copy of one (don't worry, the only one available is the maddog, it's hard to find, and it doesn't work). But if it did work, and I liked it, I would have bought the 747 or 767 VC version that day (both of which I purchased the original versions). But not having tried it, I stopped myself from buying a new version of a product I already have - $15 or otherwise.Sacha