slashed2

There's a reason pilots avoid thunderstorms even the heavies. I can fly through thunderstorms in FSX without much issue, not in flight. To me that's a good thing, now if we can get a weather radar or at least some form of preflight weather briefing or ATIS to avoid such things..... Ian.

Oops, I meant fuel flow. I usually pull back and watch the fuel flow needle after setting the prop to climb rpm. Seems the preferred method in constant speed props is by engine sound though, but it can be difficult to hear or not accurate in flight sims.Ian.

Use the RPM's to monitor mixture in lieu of the EGT. For effect, climb to 7000 feet at full mixture and RPM's at 2200 in the maule pull the mixture knob back slowly and watch the RPM's. They should increase then suddenly begin to drop. Pushing forward again on the mixture control (rich) to reach maximum and then slightly below that maximum is where I usually set it. As you climb you repeat as needed until you reach cruise altitude.Ian.

The general idea behind the prop control is tourque control like the gears in your car. You take off and climb with full prop for maximum tourque. Then lower the prop for the cruise phase of the flight to minimize fuel flow and engine wear. Approach and Final use full prop for as much tourque as possible in case of an emergency when the need for maximum power may be required such as a botched final where a go around would be needed.Try this, takeoff with full prop. Then, try it again with 25% or 50% prop. You should notice a difference, it's like pulling away in 4th gear in a car.Ian.

Great post by the OP.Pretty much took the same route - 1982 commodore 64 and sublogic, ATP, F18 to FS95, 98, Sierra pro pilot, fly 1 and 2, fs2004, fsx. 2009 got the motorcycle bug and haven't looked back. Started out on the ninja 250 for 3 months then bought the cousin to the dl650, the sv650. Now riding the yammi fjr 1300. Anyway, still using FSX on my 5 year old machine flying mostly in Alaska with FSeconomy so I'm curious or dare I say looking forward to seeing the new Alaska DLC in the spring.Ian.

Excellent choice to shut it down as I kept finding myself reading the yimmer-yammering back and forth and yelling at my kids to knock it off and then realizing it wan't them.Good call.Ian.

Just had to pop in and post how great that video is. Wife and I work in an office and can see several of our co-workers just losing it like this. Great stuff. Still chuckling over the guy trying to scan his monitor. Classic.

Yes, depends on whether or not that 10 gb represents the amount of disk space on the machine when they were running flight or if represents the amount of free disk space required for installation. Well, only the devs know for sure at this point and I don't think they realized the number of hypothesis that would be derived from that simple nugget of information.Ian.

Have'nt posted in awhile here on Avsim, but thought I'd throw something out there amongst all this speculation. Could 10 GB Hard Drive space reference the amount of free space on the machine? Looks like they're testing different CPU's, RAM, OS but the HD space remains the same. They don't say anything about installation requirements, just what the machine specifications were, which leans me more towards free space more than required disk space. Or it could mean required disk space. Who knows?Just thought I'd throw another conspiracy theory out there and add to the mix.Ian.

This is sad news indeed, my heart goes out to those layed off, I was layed off in September right after I bought a house, but rehired fortunately in November, and my company just laid off another few thousand employees. Losing FS is painful, but losing your job is devastating, here's hoping everyone affected can get through these rough times.Ian.

Enjoy reading other simmers positive experiences. Refreshing change from the usual discussions. Had a memorable flight last week in the new mustang on a test flight to figure out how to fly the bloody thing. Flying into Buffalo in a snow storm, first landing attempt in the aircraft, icing on the wings, buffeting winds, a really challenging weather situation thanks to ASA, couldn't see 10 feet in front me and who knew where the airport was. Captured the glideslope, fingers crossed and then ahhh, there was the runway not 200 feet away as I broke through clouds and the sweet halo glow of the runway lights welcoming me to a safe landing.I'll tell ya, it's experiences like this with a simulator on a desktop computer sitting in the comfort of my living room that make all the hassles and expense of this hobby well worth it.Ian.

Started out on the C-64 and sublogic flight sim back in 1982, made one attempt at a pilots license a few years back, but ran out of cash, hoping to try again within 5 years after I've scraped enough money together after buying a house, a pool, and paying for college for at least 2 teens, maybe 3.Okay, who am I kidding, pc simming is much cheaper, but still, one can dream.

It's funny, and this shows the diversity in the community but moving car traffic is the one thing that really does it for me. Everytime I fly real world be it a 737 out of Philly or C172 out of Chester County I see cars on the highway. 95 out of philly and route 30 out of chester county, both of which are near the airport. When flying into Philly I actually find 95 to check the traffic for the ride home.Landing at a major airport there is a bustle of activity, baggage handlers, people directing aircraft, police, passengers, fuel trucks etc.....Flying FS9 felt like flying after the armageddon, where did all the cars go? Thankfully, aircraft traffic was available.What's funny is this discussion was prevalent during the FSX release, the same points made. As long as the ability to turn off the eye candy then there really shouldn't be much of a yes it's good for the sim, no it's not and that's what makes FS such a good series, the ability to customize to ones liking.I too hope they focus on the weather engine. Imperative in my opinion and others may disagree and I can't argue that. I like chocolate ice cream and do not like vanilla and no argument no matter how heated is ever going to dissuade me from that preference.Some good points made in the thread, but put me in the immersion group.

In fairness, I can fly default aircraft in JFK at 20-30 fps in a default FSX aircraft with my current system which I purchased Nov 06, shortly after the release of FSX.You've hit the nail on the head though that each release of FS is demanding, but top end systems can handle a default configuration, but where things go awry is when we pile on 3rd party software like AI traffic, Scenery, aircraft etc... as time goes on, hardware advances, software developers get a grip on the intricacies of the SDK and most 3rd party software design improves impacting the system less and less.FSX unfortunately came during an change in path for PC's from higher processor speed to multiprocessors. Now that the growing pains are subsiding for all involved, chip makers, Aces, 3dp's and users, and as more advanced chips hit the streets, FSX should finally get the respect it deserves.Of course, just in time for FS11. :)

Real Air Scout package and the Eaglesoft Twin Comcanche tied for first.The D027 and Cheyenne by Digita Aviation a close second.The Accel P51 a close second and a half....great aircraft.And the FSX Maule and Wilco 737rounding out my top 3.