Janov

Members
  • Content Count

    600
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

317 Excellent

About Janov

  • Rank
    Litjan
  • Birthday 09/13/1970

Flight Sim Profile

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

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    50km north of EDDF
  • Interests
    Aviation, computer games, sports (active, not passive), science.

About Me

  • About Me
    Flightsimming since the days of FSII on C64. Member of the IXEG team. Laminar Research contributor (scenery development).

Recent Profile Visitors

3,318 profile views
  1. Janov

    Scenery

    You did not only miss a word, you missed many words, comprising a clear description of what you are trying to do and how you failed so far. In comprehensible english, if possible. Jan
  2. Janov

    Holy smokes!

    Hey Tony, I would like to talk to you about the airports in the enclosed area (as the guy who has done default EGLL) but I can´t PM you on here... Cheers, Jan
  3. Hey John, happy to hear its working for you! Happy landings (and in the case of this problem: Happy parking! 😋) Cheers, Jan
  4. Hi - and just to elaborate on the answers given: There are five (5) types of aircraft you could see in X-Plane: 1.) The users (your own) aircraft 2.) Multiplayer aircraft 3.) AI aircraft 4.) Dynamic static aircraft (parked at ramp start positions) 4.) Object based static aircraft You can control 2,3 and 4 by making the apt choices in the settings (i.e. have no multiplayer going, limiting the number of AI aircraft or unticking the "display parked aircraft" box. Your own airplane (just mentioned for the sake of completeness) is always shown, and the option 4 aircraft are part of some (older) airports - just like buildings, lights, trashcans and windsocks, etc. The only way to get "rid" of those is to: A.) Hope for a future update to the airport B.) Write to the designer and ask him for a future update C.) Use WED to remove those objects yourself. Hope this clarifies it, Jan
  5. You are right, Von Target, it is indeed very easy to get a secondary stall. The first one usually happens in a one G (or close to) situation, when the pilot(s) do not pay attention to the airspeed. When the critical AOA is reached, the plane will stall and usually (this is a certification criterium) drop the nose. With aircraft that have a stall warning, this "nose drop" is usually done by the pilot in the recovery maneuver (before actually reaching stall AOA). Nowadays they teach "reduce AOA right away, altitude loss is secondary". But eventually during the recovery maneuver you need to adjust the flight path of the now (rapidly?) descending aircraft, and that requires a lot of lift => higher AOA than you had initially - therefore it is easy to enter stall conditions again on the "pull out". Example: A normally loaded 737 in clean config will probably stall at around 160 knots in level flight (1 G). If you want to pull out of the subsequent dive with 1.4G, you need at least 190kts to avoid stalling. Cheers, Jan
  6. Yes, of course a secondary stall is exactly the same as a "primary" stall - it is just called that way because it usually happens after the pilot recovers from the initial stall but then "pulls too much" to get the nose back up when airspeed is too slow - therefore going over the critical AOA again. X-Plane models the secondary stall just fine - exactly like the first (or primary one). The creator of the airplane can determine (with airfoil maker) what the lift over AOA curve of the wing profile looks like. You can make it loose lift very abruptly (this would cause a strong wing-drop in even the slightest assymetrical flow condition), or more gradual. Also be aware that the 737 has built-in aerodynamic features that assure the inner wing section stalling first, so that the nose will drop, and additional features that assure airflow staying attached over the ailerons. So you WILL have lateral control in a stalled 737 (at least a few good degrees over the critical AOA). Jan
  7. There is often a debate about how realistic a simulator pilot should be forced to play - I used to be in the camp of people asking for pretty realistic conditions, but have recently moved a bit to the middle. I have found out that many people play simulators not to learn about flying or even "training" for it. They like to sit in the cockpit, watch the scenery go by and pretend that they are a pilot flying across the countryside. After all, it´s THEIR way of having fun, and if they incline to do so, they should be able to. The case of the "B" key is a good example. In real aircraft - even the most modern airliner types - it is a crucial and life-or-death step to have the correct altimeter setting dialed in. Modern planes will "flash" the subscale if you are below the (databased) transition altitude, but the transition level can change with pressure, so its still very much up to the pilot to set the subscale. In addition, the aircraft has no way of knowing the correct altimeter setting (QNH), so it is totally manual work to obtain that (either listening to ATIS, getting an ACARS Direct-ATIS or asking the controller). If you mess this step up, separation to other aircraft or the terrain (ESPECIALLY on a non-precision approach) may be compromised, possibly resulting in a mid-air or CFIT accident. The chore of getting the altimeter setting is pretty boring and repetitive, so its a good candidate to replace it with a single keystroke in an entertainment simulator. You STILL have to remember to set the subscale, but you don´t have to go through the steps to obtain it (even though its as simple as having the dataref displayed on-screen in X-Plane, no need to even open the map). So if you want to know what its like to really operate a plane - you need to get the altimeter setting the way real pilots would. If you simply want to fly some procedures, the B key (or a plugin) would be appropriate. If you just want to watch the scenery, set the weather to standard ISA and you don´t have to worry about that at all... Cheers, Jan
  8. Janov

    My 1st VR Flight!!!

    Hi Howard, this pretty much exactly compares to my first flight in VR. There are a few Naysayers, and maybe VR in its current form still leaves a bit to be desired (display resolution, interaction, comfort, etc.) - but I also believe it is an absolutely unrivaled experienced. You will (like I have) likely come back down a bit after the exhilaration of the first flight when you explore VR more. There are some things that are cumbersome or need getting used to - just try to fly cross-country for an hour and you will see what I mean (can´t even find your cup of coffee on the desk ;-)). But having flown real aircraft for 26 years now I can only second your observation - VR feels real, everything else is cool - but just play-pretend. I find myself using VR the most in Aces High 3 - where the ability to look around, track your enemy, judge distance, closure and relative motion just makes a huge difference. Cheers, Jan
  9. I hope your hardware is not the problem. This is what it should look like, give or take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOEz7tY-P4s Cheers, Jan
  10. I have never seen that on my installation - it is true that they added night lighting "textures" to extend lighting where the dynamic lighting stops, but it doesn´t look like that for me at all. My hunch is that you are running some third party add-on or scenery that may be causing this. I would suggest to remove them all and see if the issue persists. Another possibility is that you inadvertantly turned down your rendering settings so that you are not getting HDR anymore. This will totally demolish the night-flying experience, too. Good luck, Jan
  11. Janov

    Helicopter flying

    Amen to that - the previous VRS implementation was very easy to enter and absolutely deady if caught low. I chalked that one up to "Austin thinks its more fun this way" type of modeling (like the turbulence, for example...) Jan
  12. Janov

    Helicopter flying

    Hi JTW, thanks for sharing your enthusiasm. I also enjoy flying helicopters very much, and I try to add more realistic helicopter landing sites around the world. The Wall-Street Heliport was done by me, for example, and I like adding hospitals and such as well. The single largest improvement in helicopter flying for me was the implementation of VR. Until then, hovering with precision was a hit and miss, with VR it has become second nature. Have you tried that? Cheers, Jan
  13. I think we have gotten some solid updates and improvements in the 11 run, and with Vulcan slated to be in 11, I don´t think its fair to expect another major improvement like weather, seasons or ATC. We get a new X-Plane version every few years, which provides the necessary cashflow for the company to keep hiring and paying good developers. Everyone likes freebies, but to my knowledge there is no software suite out on this planet that gets free support indefinitely. Jan
  14. Janov

    AI & ATC

    The third option would be to get an airport diagram (skyvector.com, for example) and print it out or show it on your smartphone or whatever. Then navigate by this map and the signage like real pilots do. The black signs with yellow letters say "You are here" (i.e. A means you are on A). The yellow signs with black letters and arrows mean "for that taxiway, go that way", i.e. <-A means turn left to get onto A. There are follow-me cars on airports available to guide aircraft around, but they usually only send those out if some aircrew appearantly can´t find their way (and the whole airport is already in tears laughing) or they ask for one (which results in the same... 😂) Cheers, Jan
  15. As one of the IXEG team members I think I can state that sales have been pretty much uniform on a satisfactory level over the last years. I am actually surprised about that - my thinking was that at first most people that would like to buy the product would buy it - and then sales would slow to a trickle. But that is not the case. There doesn´t seem to be a customer "pool" that is eventually saturated, its more like a constant stream. Probably new people adopting the hobby, people that have been on the fence, people just discovering the add-on and so on. The intitial surge was there, of course. We DO believe that the 737 in it´s current form is a very worthwhile product and does not miss anything "vital" (YMMV) to enjoy it. As you know we have always been open to what we still consider missing in our product, and you can see that list - like any prospective customer can as well - in our forum. We fully plan to continue working on the product, the reasons why we have done little in recent months is also explained in the aforementioned forums. I am online in our support forum usually several times a day and provide support and background information to new and old customers alike, so it´s not like we have turned our backs at all 😉. Cheers, Jan