mnmon

After SU3 I downloaded the default 737 in order to improve its flight model. However I can't find the appropriate cfg files anywhere. I also have the PMDG777 and the Aerosoft CRJ and their cfgs files are readily accessible in their folders in the community folder. The 737 is there but those files seem to be nowhere. In the PMDG and AS folders those cfg's show up under the airplanes folder, but not with the asobo 737. Any suggestions? Or unlike previous editions of MSFS I'm out of luck? Thanks. Mike

I'm really sad to read this. I just skipped over 2 generations of FS thanks to the generosity of my family who gifted me with a new computer and MSFS 2024. For the last 20 years I've only been using FS9; and quite happily. Part of my satisfaction is that I have become very proficient at editing FDEs for aircraft. I've been heavily involved with Historic Jetliners Group where, along with Mark Cranston, I've been doing most of the flight dynamic modeling. When I looked into the generic Flight_model.cfgs, I see that they are essentially the same as in FS9, so all the tools to get a plane to fly close to its specs are there. So far, the planes I've flown in 24 are in great need of modification. This is from the C172, Cirrus Jet, and even the 707 (which I know how it should respond intimately from my work with HJG). The scenery, weather, etc are really quite good, but so far the planes, well frankly, suck. They could be much better if we just had access to the cfg file. Mike Monce

"Eating away the sim? That sounds permanent. Eating away from the disc, or eating what's already installed?" No I didn't lose any files from the disk, only from the FS9 installation on the hard drive. But I lost enough to have to do a complete reinstall and rebuild :mad:

A wanring on this .... I didn't find out about this issue until I had tried multiple other "fixes" on my system, such a virus scans .etc. Every time I subsequently tried to run FS, apparently Windows ate away portions of the FS installation. scenery.cfg, teraain.cfg, and worst of all my entire Modules folder. I now am doing a total reinstall of FS9, and of course there are payware issues that I'm sure will be a big problem. What the H*** was MS thinking? At least warn people of what an update does before resleasing it.

AS6.5 is now downloading weather again for me. Suspecting the latest W7 updates, I used CCleaner to clean out the registry, and voila! AS is now working again. HiFi does still need to work ontheir website registration as the CApTCHA image and text entry box are not appearing. Mike

OK, this is REALLY frustrating....I go to submit a ticket, but I have to register (my old registration has obviously been erased as it was over 6 years ago), only I can't register because the CAPTCHA image and required text box don't show up either in Firefox or IE. The only thing the AS log file (text file inside the AS folder in FS9) shows is: Log Cleared and Initalized at 08-13-09:08 which is when I tried AS again this morning. My computer WAS updated by MS before this happened. Could something MS downloaded have caused the problem?? Mike

I'll open a ticket, however I'm having trouble finding session logs...used the guide on your web site but no luck (Win 7). I'll send what I have. Mike

For the entire day I've been unable to get a weather file (AS6.5). AS first tries each server and gets about 10k of data then stops. Is it me, or somewhere else. I last used AS about 3 days ago with no problem. Mike

Is it just me, or is this list exactly what is already in FS9 and FSX, aside from the more game aspect suggestions?? Mike

Well, for me it is either/or. I understand that for a lot of people that's not the case. The game aspect of Flight just seems down right silly to me... but again, that's just me. I don't like in general any of the console type games, so it's really an aspect that has zero appeal for me. If I can do in Flight what I am doing now in FS9, but with better scenery, smoother frame rates (they really have cleaned up the graphics code as far as I can tell), then I'll make the switch. If I want a break from complex jets, I just hop in the great freeware C152 I have.

After spending over a week playing (and I mean that literally :( ) with Flight, I came back home to FS9. I was determined to give Flight a chance, and be objective about it.Yesterday, I did a flight from Orlando-Sanford to Salisbury MD using an Allegiant MD-87 (an actual route Allegiant uses). Did the flight planning, fuel planning, checked the weather. Loaded up Activesky, Radarcontact, FSPassengers, ran my checklist, and took off. Experienced an truly awesome sunset at FL330 (thanks ActiveSky!!), and had a challenging visual approach to Rwy 23 which is a bit narrow and short for an MD-87, but if Allegiant can actually do it, then I should to. I did, and finished 2 1/2 hours of pure enjoyment. Not a gold coin hanging in the air anywhere.I don't begrudge the people who are enjoying Flight and the gaming aspect, and maybe some day after it matures it will be something I will look at again, but for now... like I said, I'm back home. Just had to get this off my chest to an audience that knows what I'm talking about :(

Jeroen, Yeah, fun is in the eye of the beholder. What I consider fun in simming is basically doing a "real" flight: Yes, I pick a departure point and a destination. I then set up a flight plan, usually IFR. I go to ADDS to get the weather enroute, destinations, winds aloft. Back to spreadsheets I have set up which allows me to input the weather data to do fuel planning and time enroute. Now, I'm finally ready to fire up MSFS along with ActiveSky so I actually get the same weather I just based my planning on, and also RadarContact, for reasonable ATC. Get in the plane, start FSpassengers to add some "ambiance", run the checklists, and do the flight. An hour enroute flight will take at least a half hour of planning, and depending on the plane 5-15 minutes of check lists, and then the actual flight, and then shutdown. I am recreating actual flying, which if not done properly will "bite" you. Flight seems more along the line of what is appealing nowadays in the Light Sport division in real flying: small plane, minimal prep, short local hops. For other levels of GA, all the stuff I mentioned above must still be done if you want a level of "realism". Mike

These comments are very interesting as it seems to be a trend across this forum. Flight definitely is appealing to those who want, for lack of a better term, "more structure". The comments about Flight bringing in people at a more basic level, i.e. make it simple at first to draw them into flying, is also true.What is weird for me is that all these things existed well before Flight in MSFS. Maybe the trouble was that to do these things in MSFS took a lot more "digging". I've been using Flight since it came out, free version only. I haven't even signed up for an account so I only have the Icon. I don't really like that plane. I can't even read the instruments... why would they do that?? However, it does seem to have a decent FDE. Yesterday, I went back to my trusted FS9, loaded up the freeware C152 from the French group... because it has a fantastic VC and it is equivalent to the Icon in terms of speed, etc. After more than a week with Flight, I was so much more happy with the C150, though obviously disappointed with the old FS9 ground terrain. So, right there in FS9 is a great low and slow learning plane, but unless you knew where to download, and how to install, you would never see it.You want missions, challenges? Try FSEconomy (free), or add FSPassengers (relatively cheap). But like I mentioned before, to get those "additions" it requires some "digging". However, I think those add-ons are much more "realistic" than what has been offered so far in Flight. The $100 hamburger run with the "passenger" commenting about how "cool" flying is was very annoying to me.I will keep a close eye on Flight, If it develops into something more, and with a more open architecture so that all the great developers can add to it (like a freeware superb C152), then I might in the future give it a second chance.For reference: real world flying way back when...( don't ask :Just Kidding: ) C152, C172, C182, Aero Commander; became too expensive for my salary. Simming since Sublogic/Bruce Artwick(yeah, an old fart), member of Historic Jetliners Group, (simviation.com/HJG) FDE specialist. Mike Monce

Just got the ifly 747 this past week, and after spending much time getting the startup procedures down I finally rolled down the runway and experienced the exact same characteristics. I went into the cfg file..... boy is it messed up!! The weight and balance section is a total disaster. If you look at the station loadings they all have NEGATIVE longitudinal coordinates which means they are BEHIND the reference point; some of themn being over 200 ft aft!!. No wonder the plane sits on its tail on takeoff. I'm reworking the entire cfg (there's many other issues such as wrong geometry) from scaled 3d drawings, data from Boeing and the FAA.The panel and systems are so good, but with some rework I should be able to get a much better FDE.Mike

Just wanted to announce that Historic Jetliners Group has a major update for the holiday season :( . This includes the release of the L1011 with about 90 textures and a upgrade/modification to the Ken Mitchell panel. Go to simviation.com/hjg/main.htm more details can be found on the forum link from the main page. Mike Monce

Just to let everyone know: Historic Jetliners Group issued their summer update yesterday. Includes many new textures for most of the aircraft, and panel/FDE updates for the 727's among other items. www.simviation.com/hjg Mike

You need to go over to HJG; more than enough classic airliners to suit you, and for free. simviation.com/hjg Mike

That's really up to Erick, as well and Mark and Tony. My best suggestion is to post the request over at the HJG forum. The topic did come up recently as to availability of the L1011. Mike

Thanks for pointing that out. In my haste to post I forgot to mention that. Yes, HJG is hosting the Vistaliners 727's and also the Richard Probst panel for the 727. While the models are definitely Erick's, the FDE's have been modified by us at HJG, and now we also have the talents of our many painters coming out with all sorts of great textures for these models, as well as the sound packs by Aeromusica. Mike

Just wanted to let everyone know that Historic Jetliners Group has a major update on its site. It includes updated FDE and textures for the 727-100, new textures and FDE for the 727-200, and Super 727; plus a few other items. As usual. all free :-) simviation.com/hjg Mike

Looking for recommendations to replace my P4 3 GHz computer for use with FS9. I'm on a budget so one system I've looked at is an Intel Dual core 2.0, with a 512 MB GeForce video card, XP installed for around $900. Ideas? places to go to look for such a system? Will the system do well with FS9? thanks. Mike

"Is there some "rule of thumb" as to how the various values entered in the fields you mentioned above affect the yaw response of an aircraft, or is it simply a matter of trial and error?manos" Mainly trial and error, though the air file editors I use (aired is the simplest) have some basic info on the parameters that were put in after years of experience by Ron Freimuth. Mike

If you are interested, you can go into the air file to table 1101 (primary aerodynamics) and then edit the first entry under yaw which is weathervane stability. I've found that entry crucial in terms of how the plane reacts to crosswinds. The yaw stability parameter in the flight tuning section of the cfg also has an affect, but the air file entry seems to help (or hinder :( ) more. Mike

80 smackeroos is a whole lot of dough :( , but I'm thinking about it. My main concern is how will it run on my 3 GHz computer? I NEVER use the VC, so that wouldn't be an issue. Most planes run well at my locked fps of 26 except when I run into heavy overcast using Active Sky. I also run RAdar Contact, and FSPassengers. Mike

Try decreasing the sensitivity in the Settings-Controls menu for the rudders. If it is a problem specific to a particular airplane, then you can modify the contact point which MIkegives the steering angle. Many are set way too high which gives uncontrollable steering on the ground.