Jump to content

wsmeier

Members
  • Content Count

    534
  • Donations

    $25.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

115 Excellent

About wsmeier

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Portland, OR

Flight Sim Profile

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

About Me

  • About Me
    Legal document translator. Former AMT, AET, lawyer, and instructor.
    TV watcher, reader and, of course, flight sim and aviation enthusiast.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'll jump in here again. In my case it's always 300 feet. FS2Crew will call an altitude that is 300 ft below the actual altitude. So it won't call, for example, 5000 ft until my altimeter shows 5300 ft. For this reason, I never get the call that I've reached cruising altitude because FS2Crew still sees me as 300 ft under that. As I mentioned in the OP, I don't think this issue is limited to FS2Crew. I also see this with other add-ons connecting through Simconnect, such as ProATC/X. So I do think that it's FSLabs who will have to figure this one out. I've opened a ticket with them as well.
  2. I love the FSL Bus; it's still my favorite airplane to fly, even after the release of the NGXu. But this is one aspect I'd like to see FSL improve on. Like you, I often feel that there's a sense of depth missing. It's better under certain light conditions, but in general it does seem a bit flat to me. PMDG airplanes look better to me in this sense. Strictly my opinion (and maybe a product of my display/settings). Others may experience it differently.
  3. Another vote for AIG here. They're simply fantastic: comprehensive, beautiful models, frequent updates, easy to use... you name it. I've relegated utLive to the sidelines but still use it for GA traffic and for the (very) few airlines that still don't have an AIG one-click installer (e.g. Korean Air). I do hope AIG will find its way to the new MSFS without too much difficulty. I find AI traffic essential to my simming experience.
  4. It almost works as is. It connects and keypresses are recognized. But the display is blank.
  5. It is. Thanks for pondering, though, Bryan. I knew it was a shot in the dark. I was hoping you'd come back with an "Oh, I've seen that exact thing before!" 😀 Anyway, I'll keep troubleshooting. Maybe in the end I'll take some more drastic measures. Thanks again!
  6. Yes. Positive. If it were a pressure discrepancy, I imagine the offset would not always be exactly 350 ft
  7. Hi Bryan, Loving the Crew for the Bus, but I have a small problem I thought you might be able to help me with. FS2Crew isn't seeing the correct altitude I'm flying at. There's always a ca. 350 ft offset between my actual altitude and what the Crew is seeing. For example, if I'm climbing up to FL 350, it won't announce "1000 to go" until I'm passing 34350 and it will never give me the "cruising flight level 350" callout unless I cheat a little and push my altitude up to 35350 feet. This happens with every flight and it was happening before the latest updates to the Bus and to P3d. I have to be honest; I don't thing it's an FS2Crew issue. I just thought it may be something you've seen before. I do believe it's something limited to simconnect addons (if in fact, FS2Crew uses simconnect). My altitude in ProATC/X, which uses simconnect, also displays an altitude that is 300-400 ft lower than my actual altitude. Addons connecting through WideFS don't have this issue. They show the exact altitude I'm flying at. In addition to figuring this out, the only other troubleshooting I've done is to kill ActiveSky while in cruise (to no avail). I'm really at a loss as to where to turn. If you have no idea what's causing this, I'm hoping you can point me in the direction of someone who might. I'm reluctant to turn to the P3d forum because they're don't seem all that enthusiastic about helping with issues involving addons. Regardless, I'd be very grateful for any help you can provide. In the end, this isn't a showstopper; it's just incredibly annoying. Thanks, Bryan! Regards,
  8. Done! They no longer have a forum, but they do have a "contact us" page on their website. Edit: Just heard back from Mateusz at MK Studios. He's aware of the problem and it will be fixed in v. 1.01
  9. I found an answer to this issue after Ray pointed me to the fault finder (Thanks, Ray!). I was on the right track when I created the new taxi links, but in doing so, the holding point ended up too far away from the runway start point. After moving things a bit closer, I now have AI taking off from 28. I hope others who may encounter the issue will see this.
  10. Thanks for the advice, Ray! I'd forgotten about the fault finder.
  11. Speaking of the AFD, I'm finding that any AI assigned to Runway 28 for takeoff are taxiing to the holding point and just staying there, regardless of whether there are other aircraft on the approach path. I've watched it for a long time, and so far I haven't seen a single AI aircraft take off from that runway. They simply disappear when their time runs out. Runway 34 departures work fine. I've tried modifying the AFD to add some taxi links to the start point but haven't had any luck. That's probably because I don't have all that much experience with ADE. Anyone else seeing this?
  12. Brings to mind the old adage: "You're entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts..." or something of the sort. I do empathize with you, Rob. It's hard to see one's work and profession denigrated and subjected to the Dunning-Kruger effect. But I do suspect there are far more people who respect and appreciate what you developers do. Many simply will not speak up in support because of the attitudes that you've described. We're labeled fanbois, enablers of high prices, and other not-too-flattering descriptors. 3rd party developers are really the only reason I'm into flight simulation at all right now. In fact, the only manner in which I ever used the out-of-the-box MSFS before PMDG made their NG for FS9 was as an earth simulator to have some outside views while flying the old PS1. So, on behalf of all the silent ones, let me say thank you for what you and so many others do to bring us true joy in this hobby.
  13. For me things are quite simple: any sim that doesn't have PMDG Boeings AND FSLabs Airbuses (or their equivalent) is a non-starter for me. If PMDG and FSLabs aren't on board, certainly there are others who are able to create equivalent add-ons, but will there be anyone else who is willing to go through that kind of development cycle? I'm open to being surprised but, in the meantime, I'm really enjoying the variety in my P3D experience like never before.
  14. I tried out VR at the Expo in Vegas last year. Loved it! But I did start to feel queasy after only a few minutes. I imagine the frame rate had something to do with that (together with my weak composition 😀 ). I'll definitely be jumping on it once the technology improves a bit, so I'd hope to see it in the new sim.
×
×
  • Create New...