Jump to content

Mike T

Members
  • Content Count

    1,683
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

201 Excellent

About Mike T

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

4,894 profile views
  1. A couple of inaccuracies here. MSFS doesn't use IPv6 so whether you have IPv6 enabled or not doesn't matter. To test if MSFS uses IPv6 simple turn off IPv4 and try to connect - it won't. Second, Teredo has long been deprecated and is not in use. If your ISP supports IPv6 then it will use dual stack native IPv6 and native IPv4 - no encapsulation is done. With that said, most web resources that support IPv6 *prefer* IPv6 if it's available on your host, but if it's not then it will simply use IPv4. There is no "IPv6" encapsulation in use unless you decide to use an IPv6 tunnel broker like Hurricane Electric's popular service. If you want to know if IPv6 is actually being used (not just enabled) type in "what's my IP address" in google and it will show you an IPv6 128-bit address. If not it will show your IPv4 32-bit address. Either way, it makes no difference to MSFS servers. So if you're having connection issues there is something either misconfigured on your router or on your PC. HTH, Mike T.
  2. P-Factor and torque are not a factor at taxi power settings. They are only a factor at high RPM and low speed such as during takeoff and climb out. At low taxi rpm no right rudder is required in a tricycle geared aircraft.
  3. Soooo.... The commercially available VPNs allow you to hide your identity by connecting you from your computer to their VPN concentrator (router) which then proxys your requests to the Internet. So your IP address is hidden and trackers can't track you and anyone trying to spy on what you're doing can't do so. However, your ISP can still see that you're passing encrypted data between your IP address and the VPN concentrator, they just can't see what data it is, which they really don't care about anyway. If your ISP is throttling bandwidth due to excessive usage they don't care about the source of the bandwidth, they just want it to be slowed down and a VPN cannot stop them from throttling your bandwidth, so your connection to your VPN is slowed down too. It's as simple as that. As a matter of fact, a VPN is going to slow down your bandwidth anyway. Instead of going from your computer along the most optimal path to the Microsoft servers, you go from your computer along the most optimal path to the VPN server, and then from the VPN server to the Micrsosoft servers. AND since most VPNs are all about privacy they may or may NOT take the optimal path and bounce your traffic through other data centers to further hide your identity. So as a rule of thumb a VPN reduces your throughput speeds. I have a 1Gbps fiber connection to my home and typically get downloads at 200 - 400 Meg. Using Express or Nord VPN - rated the fastest - I get 20 - 40 Meg. So 10x slower than naked Internet. So...Can a VPN prevent ISP "throttling"? Absolutely not. If anything your ISP may stop throttling you because you are restricting your bandwidth yourself with the slower VPN! Does a VPN help you with bandwidth issues? Absolutely not - it makes them worse. Regards, Mike T.
  4. Yikes, performance is pretty bad and that's with NO AI traffic.
  5. Wow. I see you're familiar with Google. 😀 So a couple of things. Please show us the chart with the v(Ground Speed) calculation required for take off and landing. Don't waste your time, there isn't one. All the speeds to which you are referencing are IAS speeds not Ground Speeds. Of course if you take off with a tail wind your take off / landing distance is increased and you risk stalling which is why you don't do it, much less with windshear. In the OPs scenario, in real life you would not have landed at that airport if the WX required you to attempt to land a Cessna 172 at 80 kts IAS. Here's why: Let's say the winds give you a 30 kt headwind and you are calculating that you're only moving at 50 kts over the ground (GS) and use your logic. Your GS is 50 kts but since you're not driving a car, your WINGS have a relative wind of 80 kts! When you attempt to put the aircraft on the ground at 50 kts GS (80 Kts IAS) it is NO where close to finished flying (which is why a proper landing in a C172 includes hearing the stall horn at touchdown) so you will sail down the runway and off the end just like the OP did. I don't know how to make it more clear to you. You worry about what the wings are doing at a given speed, not what your speed over the ground is doing at a given speed (unless you are calculating legs and navigating). Which is also the reason that Cessna never saw fit to put a speedometer in there - just saying. But you fly as you see fit sir!
  6. We land and depart into the wind because it increases the relative wind over the wings (IAS) - you don't base rotate or landing speeds based on ground speed. In a C172 with a rotate speed of 55 kts and an approach speed of 65 kts with full flaps I've got no reason to calculate ground speed unless I'm coming into a short field where I'm worried about rollout distance. If you touch down where you are supposed to then rollout distance is not a factor at 45 kts and a 1300 ft roll out, given a typical airport runway of 3000 feet or more it is not a consideration. For flying legs and navigation it's a different story.
  7. 80kts not a speed for landing in a C172. Also ground speed means nothing, it's indicated airspeed you need to worry about. Come across the threshold at ~55kts IAS, touchdown when the stall horn sounds (40 - 50 kts). If you're landing at an airport with a 20 kt wind sheer then you shouldn't land at that airport whether you're in a C172 or a B747.
  8. For some reason Microsoft / Asobo is afraid to say what we already know - MSFS 2020 is a dead end platform and investment in it will be limited and then ended. They should just rip the Band-Aid off and state the obvious. It's time to accept the reality of the situation and move on. MSFS will be out next year so we've got about a year to be mad, and then buy it on day one.
  9. I was an alpha tester for MSFS 2020. Much to my horror they released that alpha for sale. I purchased it anyway the next day and then went right back to P3D until 2022 when at least the glaring bugs were addressed and high fidelity airliners became available. With the release of MSFS 2024 a year away and a lot of promises being made, the question is like asking what you plan to wear on vacation next year - the answer is: it depends, but definitely not something I'm thinking about this year.
  10. I, for one, will not pay good money for a white dot simulator unless it is study level.
  11. It didn't tell you to do anything. It informed you if your drivers are not recommended and if you don't care you can click don't show me this again. Certainly nothing to be riled up about. Mike T.
  12. It's not slowly turning into a game, it IS a game, no matter how much people want to pretend it is something that it isn't. It's a game. And as a game it can be anything that anyone wants it to be. Sorry to break it to you but pretending to be a B787 is no less valid than pretending to be a Dune Ornithopter pilot. But if you don't believe me than call the FAA or EASA or CAA or any other agency in charge of certifying flight simulators and ask them.
  13. Yes. I'm not a pretend airline pilot, so I don't care about the irrelevant minutia. And since Microsoft wasted millions of dollars rendering the entire PLANET, I figure I would enjoy some of those "arcane" visuals. I'm a high fidelity aircraft snob like the next guy, but am I not blind to the other 99.999% of rendered visuals because the landing gear compression ratio is off by 17mm? No. I'm not. The irony of complaining about unrealistic V1 cuts and engine performance, while unrealistically sitting at a desk, in a office chair, on a home computer playing a game is pretty monumental.
  14. Oh for crying out loud. ITS A GAME. A game. It's not a level D simulator, it's not FAA certified, it's just a game - like World of Warcraft, like Star Wars The Old Republic, like Pac Man - A game. And in that game, Asobo, MS, and yes FENIX have given us things that we could only dream about 3 years ago, but never mind that - their wonky airplane can't do a V1 cut right now - what a pile of garbage huh? I tell you. If you people won a million dollars in cash you'd complain that the picture of Benjamin Franklin on the $100 bill is inaccurate because everyone knows he had a mole above his right eye and it is not depicted properly on the money. Wow. V1 cut (SMDH). I think the BIGGEST mistake was naming it "Flight Simulator". If it was named "Flight Game" then people would just have fun. You know? Fun? Mike T.
×
×
  • Create New...