srburger

Jimmi,I use the VC exclusively when flying the Scout, and I get very fluid graphics on my system with all the sliders maxed out... P4, 2.8 GHz, ATI 9800 ProKen

>>What about just jumping into a heavy and learning from there? the way I figure it, if you can learn to master a jumbo, everything else is a step lower.<

Actually, Orcas IS official GeoRender. It's just not LAGO. I assume Richard Goldstein must hold the rights to the GeoRender label.As for the question about USA Roads, I don't know since I haven't bought it yet. Maybe someone out there with both can answer.Ken

I downloaded Scott Gridley's FSX-ionals after seeing a screenshot in the recent USA Roads thread. If you like to fly VFR, this brilliant little freeware program fills a huge void in flight simming, and it works great! You can download it from the AVSIM file library... fsxional.zipThanks Scott!Ken

It runs great on my system with everything maxed out (2.8 GHz, 1.0 GB Ram, 9800 Pro), so you shouldn't have a problem. It's not as demanding as FS9, but you'd never guess by looking at it because the graphics are great. As others have said, the Ace Expansion Pack really adds a lot.Ken

Use the virtual cockpit. Move back behind the pilots' seats, then go down underneath. Crawl through the tunnel, and you'll end up in the bombardier's seat. It's fairly easy to do if you have keys assigned to front-to-back and side-to-side movement.You can't do this with the medium and light versions... only the full version includes the nose with the virtual cockpit.Ken

Peter,I haven't tried either of the aircraft you mentioned since I tend to be partial to G.A., but based on your reputation, maybe I need to give them a try! Here are my favorites:Freeware:RealAir C172... It handles beautifully.Trans Global Aircraft's Virtual Schneider Trophy (it's a real hoot to fly at 300 mph, 100 feet above the water, and this package has obviously been put together with tender loving care).Payware:Bill Lyons' Golden Hawaii and Classic Goose... Instead of just modelling an airplane, Bill creates an entire world (kind of like "Myst" for pilots).RealAir Scout... As is typical for RealAir, it handles beautifully.RealAir Decathlon... DittoRealAir SF-260... DittoDreamfleet Piper Archer IIDreamfleet Cessna 310 7CMMAAM B-25... Another Rob Young success story.(Prepare to insert MAAM R4D/DC-3/C-47 here.)Project Sierra Hotel T-37 TweetCaptain Sim MiG-21Best regards,Ken

I just went over to check, and I got into the forum and the shop. I don't know why you can't get in, but do you have your browser set so that it won't accept cookies?Ken

An item about the freeware Schneider Trophy Air Race package appeared on the Avsim home page yesterday. Being a fan of classic aircraft and the Supermarine S6, I had to give it a try! As soon as I unzipped the files, it was apparent that this package was put together with loving care... the documentation, the included scenery, and the aircraft are absolutely first-rate. And it's a real kick to fly the race course 100 feet above the water!There are separate downloads for the race course scenery, an RAF seaplane base, and the Supermarine S6 (with both 2d and virtual cockpit). And the flight model for the S6 is fantastic... it feels just like what you'd expect for an airplane intended to compete in a closed-course race at 300 mph (in 1929!). According to the web site, an additional aircraft, the Macchi M67, will be released shortly.If you're into aviation history, this is an absolute must-have! Go to http://www.transglobalaircraft.co.uk/10130/index.htmlEnjoy,Ken

Bob,Great post, with a lot of good information!>>Even in the dead of summer, I flew with a glove on my cyclic hand. It dampened out some of the hand motion. You might try that in the sim.<As new helo students do in the real aircraft, when simming we tend to focus very close in and often times, 'right between our virtual feet'.<

>>yes -- I have been using these lessons and enjoyed the early ones and found them very useful. But the only problem is that they seem to have been recorded by FS2002 and I use Fs2004. So I get LOTS of vibration and jumpiness and the torque gauge seems to stay put at one setting regardless of what the a/c is doing.<

Barry,Check out the following site:http://members.shaw.ca/hoversafe/Hoversafe.htmDownload and read through the lessons. They're very helpful. Also, note their comments on the realism settings... They have a real world helicopter pilot on staff, and they say that moving the realism slider full right is unrealistically unstable. They recommend one click down from full right as most real-world like.I'm a real world fixed-wing pilot, so I feel qualified to judge airplane flight models for myself, but I'm willing to trust them on helicopters!Ken

Hi Jaap,Yep, that may be, but it threw me because the Aero Commander's VC is very bright with the lights on.KenP.S. It just occurred to me that this may be a VC that I edited to 1024 x 1024 to improve clarity. Not sure, because I'm not currently on my home computer...

I believe it was intended to be a private business transport.Bob Hoover had a great airshow routine in an Aero Commander. He would do a barrel roll right after takeoff, and then commence a series of very smooth and relaxed loops and rolls. On approach to land, he would cut the engines, glide in, and taxi power-off back to his starting point... a real showman.Ken

If you're referring to Milton Shupe's recent releases, they already have cockpit lights. Press Shift-LKen

The classic acronyms are:CIFFTR (for takeoff) and GUMP (for landing)ControlsInstrumentsFuelFlapsTrimRunupGasUndercarriageMixturePropsKen

jfri/Manny,That's a pretty open-ended question... what kind of twin are you looking for? Some of my favorites:MAAM B-25Project Sierra Hotel T-37Bill Lyons' Goose, Sikorsky, and Piper ApacheGreg provided several light twin links in his post above.If you're looking for a propliner, MAAM is about to release its R4D/DC-3 package.If you're looking for a jetliner, many here seem to like the PMDG 737.So "What is the best twin..." covers a lot of territory.Ken

Hey Michael,I'd also like to take this opportunity to publicly thank you for everything you did for me. Not to mention your flexibility in dealing with my schedule!MSFS in all its glory is a sight to behold!All the Best,Ken

Elrond, during the course of this discussion, you've said the following (and I apologize for using your words this way... I realize that you responded to a lot of comments on many sides):<><>I trust that you see the irony here. You don't want me to question your motives because I "don't know (you) from adam". But you seem to think you know what FSGS does, even though you don't know them from... You get the point. The fact is that FSGS' privacy stipulation doesn't restrict the free flow of any information that has been going around in these forums because that's not what their service is about. FSGS' clients can discuss yesterday's, today's, or tomorrow's fad till the cows come home... no problem. The things that they do just aren't, and haven't been, discussed here.There's more irony at work in this thread as well. Isn't it interesting that the only people who have a problem with this are those who haven't utilized FSGS' services? A 100 percent customer satisfaction record has to be the envy of anyone who provides a quality service, including such respected groups as PMDG, Flight1, RealAir, Captain Sim, and (dare I say it?) MicroSoft. In a way, this discussion may well have served to promote FSGS' business, though that was clearly not your intent.In any event, although I disagree with most of what you've said here, I respect you for maintaining your dignity in a heated discussion.Best Regards,Ken

Ryan:Congratulations!Elrond and Rhumbaflappy:Amusing thread... The more you type, the more obvious it becomes that you are SCARED TO DEATH of this concept. You're in good company... every time a new idea comes out, there's an esteemed group of people who see their world crumbling before their eyes. What's really so "disturbing" to you is that you're coming face to face with the realization that you DON'T know all there is to know... how sad.

Bruce,Location is not a problem as long as you can get a cheap headset with microphone. Michael does all his work with you via an internet connection and MSN Messenger.Ken

<I have Traffic set to 100 percent, and in general I have no problems. For example, Seattle-Tacoma with default AI looks good and feels good. But I can definitely tell if there are frame-rate eating aircraft in the mix.Ken

Ken,I've had my PPL for about 10 years... you're going to have a blast!As for the aircraft, I can't recommend the RealAir 172 highly enough. The flight model is a work of art, and it's free! Even though I have many very high quality payware aircraft, I still fly RealAir's 172 often. But like the Splash One said... get the FS2004 version. It's on RealAir's site in the Downloads section.As noted, the panel is stock MSFS, but being that the 172 is a simple airplane, that's not a bother. If you want a panel that has the same equipment as your trainer, you'd have to create your own since every real world panel is different in some way or other. In fact, if you're renting, you'll probably be using more than one airplane anyway, and the panels will more than likely be different as well. The point is... there are only a few instruments you'll be paying attention to in your training: the 6 instrument cluster plus the tachometer, temperature gauges, radios, and a couple of VOR's. That's pretty much it. On top of which, the instructor will be encouraging you to keep your eyes outside the cockpit... so the flight model is what counts, and Rob Young has a gift.The one big difference you'll discover is the amount of muscle required to overcome trim. But that's the fault of the sim controls, not the flight model. And no one to my knowledge makes a sim control that feel realistic in that respect. Again, not a real bother since it's the pitch, power, and airspeed settings that you'll be working on. MSFS does fine for that. In fact, when I did my PPL training in the early 90's, I practiced on an early version of MSFS for Macintosh. The airspeeds and power settings were completely wrong, but it really did help anyway!Best of luck, and have a great time!Ken

<>Have fun, Ryan! I hope you enjoy the session as much as I did!Ken

You're absolutely right, Jimmi. Weather and autogen seem to have the greatest affect on frame rates.I typically don't fly with the frame counter on, but I knew that's what people would want to see in the shots. So I turned it on, and I was surprised to see what kind of frame rates I was getting. At one point, I was in the mountains with fairly clear weather, and I saw the counter go over 100. Of course, that was an anomaly... but it sure shocked me! I didn't include a screenshot of that because I don't think it's very representative.Ken