djhorton

Because Cessna hasn't made a turbo RG since the late 70's - early 80's. Current Cessna 182 turbo model is fixed gear.

Better to use FSXMark07, as it's more widely used, and it uses High Global settings uniformly. FSXMark11 actually turns down some scenery settings compared to FSXMark07, to achieve an artificially high frame rates. Also, FSXMark11 is an adaptation (copy) of FSXMark07, with no credit to FSXMark07 author Gary Dunne. We should discourage use of "copied without credit" software. In either case, it will be necessary to adopt a set of standardized settings for P3D2, similar to FSXMark07's Global High standardized settings for FSX.

Yes, that's me writing for Computer Pilot magazine for the past five years.Doug HortonChicago Aurora KARR

One other point that I didn't see in responses above. MSA, MVA, MDA, IAF, and FAF on approach charts are all related to altitude above sea level - MSL, as read on correctly set altimeter. Cloud heights in weather reports are related to ground level - AGL. Approaching Denver, for example, a METAR or ATIS reporting "3000 overcast" is indicating clouds at 3000 AGL, but this would be 8000+ MSL, and descending on an instrument approach, you'd expect to be in the clear below 8000 on the altimeter.Doug

JD,Glad this will be fixed!Note that it also occurs with short distances if the direct-to track is off the original track by greater than your current lateral spec. Example: depart from KMCO enroute northwest to CTY VOR, then SZW VOR, and beyond. Before CTY, request direct to SZW (a track change of about 22

I'm experiencing what seems to be a bug related to RC4's detection of an "off-track" condition when the GPS is used for "own nav." Here's the scenario:1. After "resume own navigation," use the GPS to manage heading - GPS/Nav switch in the GPS position and enabling Nav on the autopilot. The GPS and autopilot nav function will manage the track according to the loaded flight plan.2. Use RC4's "Dir Ckpt" feature (on Next menu from main screen) to select a future waypoint for direct-to clearance and receive requested clearance.3. Use the GPS to activate the flight plan segment beginning with the direct-to waypoint (intersection or VOR). (On the GPS, click FltPlan button, press cursor knob, then use outer knob to move cursor to first waypoint beyond the direct-to waypoint. Press GPS Menu button to get popup box offering to activate segment beginning with direct-to waypoint, then click Enter to confirm. This will move red bracket to segment that begins with direct-to waypoint.)4. The GPS will now navigate a great circle route from the present position to the cleared direct-to checkpoint, which will likely bypass many original airways and waypoints, which was the objective of requesting the "direct-to" clearance.4. Soon after the GPS begins managing the great circle route to the direct-to waypoint, RC4 will respond multiple times that the aircraft is "off-track," with the controller becoming increasingly irritated by the seeming disregard of the original track.5. Bottom line, RC4 does not recognize that the plane is following the direct-to clearance along the great circle route generated by the GPS.6. Another small bug during this process: if the list of waypoints on the RC4 "dir ckpt" screen overflows to the next screen, you must press 9 to see the remaining waypoints, though on the initial Dir Chkpt screen, the "Next-9" option does not appear as it should.Doug HortonP.S. Example *.pln file and direct-to requests available.

>i've made the correction.>>jdCorrection need to be made throughout tutorials, everywhere it says pause, save "tut xxxx", etc.dh

>I hope this is true. FS9 has been around for 18 months ...>time for a change :)Add a year! FS9 was released in mid-2003, with most internal files dated April and May 2003, so it's been out for 2 1/2 years now!Doug

Three suggestions for new survey:1. Use cookie or other means to prevent repeated voting by same persons.2. Current question about video cards leads to misleading characterization, as it makes ATI look like majority card, because there are separate categories for nVidia GeForce cards. Idea: one question for nVidia, ATI, or others, and separate question(s)for which models.3. For each response in survey summary display, color bar should be below percentage, or better, in a third column. Colar bars currently in line above responses is confusing.Thanks,Doug Horton