Jump to content

clements

Members
  • Content Count

    61
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No
  1. Wow, I just took the M20R up for my first flight, tried low-level cruise, slow flight and a couple of take-off and landings. I loved it. Is it perfect? Heck, no, but it is better than the default props by a long shot. The controls are a bit twitchy as others have pointed out. The VS indicator seems to race up and down with small corrections to the controls. Elevator trim seems a little heavy handed. She does seem to sip a little less fuel than the performance charts indicate. And, I wish she had checklists built into the game. But, these are minor things that I expect will be updated. Here is what I really enjoyed: Taxiing and ground control. I find the default aircraft unrealistically stick to the ground. It requires tremendous power to get them moving. Then, once they get going, they want to taxi (and accelerate) at unrealistic speeds. This makes turning and breaking difficult. No such problems with the Mooney. I'd argue that the ground steering may be too touchy but I'd prefer that over what I get with the default C172, G36 or B58. Gauges and instruments. I learned to fly on "steam" gauges but I am not a purest. I am happy to let technology make flying easier. Still one of the appeals to the M20R was the panel and it did not disappoint. I really appreciated the movement and control of all of the gauges (honestly, I do not know which ones are default and which ones are Carenado's). Aside from the "weaving" when tracking NAV that others have reported, I liked the AP and enjoyed the Altitude Preselector. One note: there is a "defect" (I'll call it that) with the transponder. The plane does not automatically display the squawk code in the transponder but ATC seems to recognize the code it assigned to you. Flight Characteristics. I was able to fly the plane to the expected performance tables. Slow flight was acceptably squishy, the airframe started shaking and I got a stall warning when I would expect it. I did not get into a full stall exercise. So, I cannot comment on the stall characteristics. The plane accelerates like no prop I have ever flown. Getting her up to speed is easy. Slowing her down is a challenge, which is why it has a speed brake. Once you do settle her down, approach and landing is nice (as long as you handle the twitchy flight control inputs). It was nice not to bounce on touchdown - which I find the default aircraft do regardless of VS and speed. With that said, I found that the plane may "glue" it self to the ground a little unrealistically on touchdown. Some more experimentation is required. I am a pilot but have not flown an Ovation before. So, take my feedback here with a grain of salt. Sounds. The rumble of the engine and sounds of the plane were terrific. I expected them to be a retread of the default sounds but that is absolutely not the case. The engine sounds great at all stages of flight. Again, I have not flown the Ovation. So, I cannot say if they are correct but they are fun! I look forward to many hours in this bird.
  2. You don't need the original aircraft.cfg. MSFS introduces a great system for adding variations. There is a good thread about it over at fsdeveloper.com. You can find it here.
  3. For what it's worth, Microsoft support has posted this article about moving your installation (https://flightsimulator.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360015910560-Can-I-choose-or-change-the-installation-path-). I do not know that this really works because I am still installing.
  4. I started to fill out your print magazine survey but stopped. You're asking the wrong questions. You ask if I subscribe, or not, and if not, do I borrow a copy from a friend. I do neither. I buy virtually every issue of both PC Pilot and Computer Pilot from the newstands. Also, you give me a radio button asking which publication I read. This is not a binary answer. I read both magazines regularly. Your survey doesn't capture this concept, and I suspect many people are like me. Bob
  5. You can download an unlayered bitmap frorm the User Edits page on the PSS website. I'd love to have a layered version, myself.Bob
  6. I'm looking for textures for the Dash-8-300 for Air Canada Jazz (I have a red one from the PSS site but I'd like the other colors) and US Airways. Does anybody know where I can find them?Bob
  7. Your navigation database (referred to as an AIRAC) is out of date. It is really no big deal. You will find discrepencies with sceneries that have been reflect changes to airports since the Dash was released. For example, O'Hare recently renamed 9L/27R to 9R/27L and R9R/27L to 10/28. Your database won't reflect these changes but it doesn't matter unless you've updated your AFCAD/airport scenery to reflect these changes.With that said, you can fix this problem by visiting www.navigraph.com. For a few bucks you can download the latest AIRAC and update the Dash engine.Bob
  8. >Not to change the subject, but I am buying FSgenesis mesh and>Ultimate Terrain for all of North America. Which is better to>install first; or does it matter?>It does not matter unless you are also installing the FSGenesis landclass. If you are installing the landclass, UT offers a fix that allows you to sandwich the FSG landclass with UT landclass to give you the best of both worlds.Bob
  9. >My interest is the Eric Cantu EMB-120. Not OSS.OSS and Eric Cantu are the same thing. Well, not legally, but for the purposes of the model and the configuration files they are. :)With that said, I agree with the sentiment expressed here: It would be great to get some side views to make the cockpit feel a bit more complete.Bob
  10. >Radar Contact v.4 for realistic and immersive ATC.You took the words from my mouth. I understand that JD and team are close to having a patch that works with FSX. I forgot how bad the default ATC and how good RC4 is until I started playing with FSX. >The words 'Chocolate Teapot' come to mind.Now, that is a great expression. I never heard it before but I'll remember it.Bob
  11. I've noticed this too, especially with labels. For example, when flying the C172, the labels for the toggle switches (i.e., fuel pump, lights, etc.) are unreadable. Any ideas on how to fix that?Bob
  12. I need a little help or insight. I finally started diving into FSX this morning. To get started, I decided to record a flight video so that I could play with various display settings. The video was simple: take-off, fly over a densely populated area, and fly back to the airport for a landing. Trying to execute on that plan was difficult. I ran into to problems.In the first attempt, the flight went really well; however, when I watched the playback, my C172 started sliding sideways on the tarmack and eventually flipped over. Any idea what could cause this problem?Given that the first video was unusable, I tried it again. In the second attempt, the video played back well; however, when I looked at an external view, the camera shook violently. It bounced up and down and forward and back. I am running a nVideo 6600GT with up-to-date drivers. I have not experienced this problem during normal (non-video) flight and did not notice it in Tower or VC mode. Is anybody else having this problem? Any ideas how to solve it?Thanks for any insight in advance.Bob
  13. My best guess is that your flight plan doesn't match up with your expected route of flight. For example, it sounds like you have a VOR-to-VOR flight plan loaded into RC4. Have you loaded the flight plan into the GPS or looked at it in FS9 or some other flight plan viewer to see what the stated flight plan is?While RC4 is telling you to resume your own navigation, you do not have the freedom to fly anywhere in they skies you'd like. You're still expected to fly what has been filed.Bob
  14. David, thanks for a great response.Bob
  15. Fair enough. I guess my question is broader than just FS. Go to http://www.naco.faa.gov/digital_tpp.asp?ve...&end=05-11-2006. This is the government website. Search on PHJR. No result. Search on KJRF and you get John Rodgers. According to the government, there are no PHxx airports in Hawaii. What's the disconnect?Bob
×
×
  • Create New...