Jump to content

oldbear

Frozen-Inactivity
  • Content Count

    757
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by oldbear

  1. Yep, have to agree. Flight Environment is one of those add ons that on the face of it doesn't seem quite as exciting as a new plane, yet really does make a difference.I was trying out FlyTampa's Miami airport scenery demo the other night. It happened to be an early morning flight, and as I climbed out over the Atlantic the sun was just coming up reflecting off the clouds and sparkling off the water. It really did look fantastic - so much so that I called my wife in to take a look. 'Yeah, great..are you going to get off that machine or what? I need to send some emails..'Oh well, at least some of us can appreciate it:D Ian
  2. There's plenty of info in the 'MS Tips and Tricks' section of the forum above.Your FS9 config file is in:C:documents and settings[username]application datamicrosoftFS9fs9.cfgTo get access you'll need to enable 'show hidden files'.RegardsIan
  3. I love the third shot of the Mesa - or is it a Butte? Nearest I've ever got to one was in a geography textbook (and just about every Western movie of course). How lucky you are to be able to fly over such wonderful landscapes. RegardsIanEGLL
  4. Hi MikeYes, this is an interesting thread.I'm the wrong side of 40 and work for the British Government. I've been simming for only 3 years, but find it fascinating - especially the community of like-minded souls who gather on forums such as this. I started real flying lessons a while ago but at 160 quid an hour (that's about 300 dollars - yes that's right, 300 dollars an hour) I couldn't afford to continue. Hope to rectify that in the future, though.My other hobbies are riding motorbikes and annoying my wife. I've got a little boy who wants to join the Royal Air Force one day.Best wishesIan
  5. Hi LouYou appear to have got completely the wrong end of the stick after a recent comment of mine. The offending statement was just an attempt at subtle humour, which seems to have missed the mark by several miles. Of course I don't think that you, or indeed anyone, could fund their real flying from producing FS addons. My real thoughts were a few lines above if you care to look - that no-one gets rich on it and that it's probably a labour of love, as they say. Sorry for bringing it up again, but as you've mentioned it in another thread I just wanted to put the record straight. Does it matter? Well, yes it does to me because even behind the mask of anonymity that is the internet, I don't like causing offence, especially when the intention was quite the opposite... Anyway, you seem to have got a good laugh out of it in the end :-)Take careIan
  6. CavemanI'd agree with the above comments. You can't go wrong with UT. I have the same CPU as you and frame rates are not a problem. I usually have it on 100% when I'm flying to and from small regional airports, where there's not that much traffic anyway. On the other hand if I'm at, say, Heathrow I may play with the settings a bit, especially if I'm in a complex aircraft - but even on 70% it's perfectly flyable. You can simply pause the sim and set whatever level of traffic you want, at any time you like.Beware though, once you start downloading repaints for obscure airlines you'll get hooked!Ian
  7. Er, you do realise that was a joke Lou? Pity there isn't an 'irony' smilie. You know - irony. Wot us Brits are famous for..See youIan
  8. Well in that case I'd guess that no one gets rich on it - or everyone would be doing it (assuming they had the talent). I've always imagined it to be a 'labour of love' type of thing, with a smallish financial remuneration for all the hard work that's put in.Alternatively, Lou Betti and others could be funding their real world aviation activities off the backs of us simmers!!!:-) Ian
  9. To Bob 'if it ain't Boeing I'm not going'Can I ask, if you were going on holiday,turned up at the airport and your flight was an Airbus, would you just turn round and go home??Just curious..Ian
  10. Current FS addons are cheap when you think what you're getting. I mean, look at the LDS 767, PMDG 737, DF 727 - you could buy one and spend months (or even years!) really getting proficient, so that, for example, you can do a manual VOR approach with one engine out in bad weather without using the pause key and without screwing up. There's real depth to these simulations and the more you put in the more satisfaction you can derive. And that's good value in my book.Alternatively you could buy a new one every week, check out the features, do a few automatic landings, and move on to the next!!At the end of the day it's your choice of course but I'm amazed that the price for most of these things is so reasonable.Ian
  11. DaveI haven't been at this 'hobby' for that long, only since FS2002 and your original Stearman was my first download - well, actually it came on a CD with PC Pilot mag, I think. I remember I spent ages with it, and was very impressed. So I am very pleased to here you've made it available for FS9. I plan to reacquaint myself with an old friend.Can I just say that I do appreciate installation programmes. I'm not that knowledgable when it comes to fiddling about with FS files, so if an automatic installer is supplied I'll use it. I'd hazard a guess that the silent majority of simmers are the same.I don't download freeware much these days as I'm trying to really get to grips with some of my payware toys, but I'll certainly be adding the Stearman to the hangar for those 'wind in the wires' moments.Thanks for a great aircraft.RegardsIan
  12. I suppose Airbus would refer you to incidents where pilots of traditional aircraft have refused to believe their instruments or systems, or deliberately exceeded the design limitations of their aircraft, and thereby flown themselves - and others - into disaster. Is that a fair point? It sounds plausible to me. And surely pilot error is the chief cause of accidents. So isn't keeping the pilot out of things the way it's going to go? One-pilot planes? No-pilot planes? No, I wouldn't get on one either.Ian
  13. HolgerThat problem isn't restricted to fly-by-wire. Many an aircraft has left the factory or maintenance with cables wrongly connected, so that everything's reversed. But yes, you don't expect a modern airliner crew to miss something as basic.Ian
  14. You know, I've never really been able to get my head round the ATR. It's a superb simulation and I'm very impressed with the whole package, but I've just never got round to learning to operate it properly. I take it out from time to time and fly a few manual circuits (accompanied by various bleeping noises), but haven't yet sorted out a proper flight. A certain 767 has become the latest toy, so the ATR doesn't get much of a look in at present. It's a problem with all these wonderful complex addons that keep appearing - my ageing grey cells can't cope with more than one at a time. Such a hardship eh?Ian
  15. AndreasInteresting stuff. My point about pushing buttons was that you can operate an Airbus and 777 in a similar fashion - press AP (or CMD) as you're climbing out, and cancel it after landing. During the flight both crews need not touch the sidesticks (or yokes) at all. All commands are made using buttons and switches. Behind the scenes of course there's a lot of difference in the systems.I too await the definitive FS Airbus, but I fear it will be a long wait.RegardsIan
  16. Well, I don't think you'll find they just 'press a button for auto take-off', or for landing for that matter. This idea that Airbuses are automated robots and Boeings demand 'real' flying is nonsense. Airbus have a different design philosophy but the current aircraft from both manufacturers are not that far removed. The 777 is just as much a push-button plane as an A340. Your RFB 747-200 is of course from another age, so hardly comparable. But you're right, it's a good photo. And I've always liked the A340. Many evenings I catch a view of the Virgin flight coming into Heathrow as I wend my way along the M4 in 'go home mode'. Marvellous sight..RegardsIan
  17. Yes it's Filton, with poor old Concorde on the ground and the Severn (with an 'r') Estuary in the background.Ian
  18. JimGood site. Not the one I was thinking of but it works just as well. ThanksIan
  19. Oh dear, it's such a shame when threads descend into rants, name calling and smart alec remarks. Monsoon, I have to agree with you. I had the PSS A340 and it never really worked well on my system. FPS were well down and I could never get the thing to land properly either. It was a pity because I had the A320 on FS2002 and that worked flawlessly - I got a lot of fun out of it. I too would love to know what happened to the PSS Airbuses in FS9 - a lot of people reported a lot of problems, but then again some have been OK. Who knows? But for me, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter too much. The A340 became a hangar queen, while I had fun with the PMDG 737NG and recently the wonderful LDS 767. The new PMDG 747 is on the horizon - now you know that will be stunning - and PSS themselves are redoing the B777, which I hope will be just as good..I know this post doesn't really answer your question, but it's just that I think you're going to have to accept the situation and move on.I've just read the interview with Lou Betti in PC Pilot magazine and he said that if we want complex FS addons to remain as keenly priced as they are then we've got to buy more of them - so buy another aircraft to cheer yourself up!RegardsIan
  20. To Jim (or indeed anyone)As a matter of interest, what do you think of the Flight1 C172R's landing behaviour? It seems quite good to me, but then I've never flown one in real life (and I can't remember much about my three landings in a Piper Warrior..)ThanksIan
  21. Blimey, I wish you lot would shut up. I've just bought the Flight1 Cessna C172 and I reckon it's the best GA aircraft ever done. It's quickly become my default aircraft. Now this A36 has arrived. I'm sure it's fantastic, but I daren't buy it - at least not yet...Ian
  22. HeatherWhat a wonderful resource. And thanks to your site I've just learnt that the UK is 'slightly smaller than Oregon'.Well, that puts things into perspective...!!Brilliant stuff, for which many thanks.Ian
  23. Does anyone know what happened to the thread about the chap who was having problems landing the Real Air Spitfire? It just disappeared. Ian
  24. RicardoGreat post. I too can't bear the groupies, wetting themselves as they out-do each other with hysterical praise. And you're right about the PMDG 747. It's going to be like the Second Coming..IanReserved Englishman
×
×
  • Create New...