ckyliu

Dash 8s do not have counterrotating props, at least Q400s. They very much pull to one side, to extent that I'd usually dial in one needle widths of rudder trim before takeoff and progressively reduce it as airspeed increased during early climb. I would look at fuel and payload balance if you've categorically ruled out trim and erroneous control inputs

Those shopping for a 4070 may find handy, the chap has compared the noise levels of various 4070 cards and the quality of their components.

I remember when files came with Readme.txt that explained what addon version it was for, how to install, where you'd find it in your game. Everyone just seems in a race to package stuff up and throw it on the internet now like it's some kinda race.

I hadn't to be honest. Just looking now they're selling on eBay UK used for about £430-530 but I have some qualms about how they might've been used previously so may as well have a new 4070 for £570. Everyone was raving about frame generation in MFS so I hung about until I could afford a 40x card that supported it, now I think I regret doing that. It should be noted I have a very quiet PC apart from the graphics card, so the thermal efficiency of the 40xx appeals too. Also it's an mATX case some of the bigger cards may not fit, especially on the 4070.

So in a change from seemingly constant topics asking if a 4080/4090 and 13700K/13900K are fast enough for MFS (well yes DUH, they're top tier, stop bragging about how much you're spending!), here's a thread about something us mere mortals can potentially afford! I was hoping the Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti would be the GPU sweetspot of this generation but it has left a large gulf in performance and price before the RTX 4070. The professional reviews all pretty much draw the same conclusions and were fairly negative: Isn't as fast as an RTX 3070 Only offers single digit percentage increases above an RTX 3060 Ti It's overpriced at $400 for a 1080p card, you would be better buying: - a used 3060 Ti. Only real reason you'd get the 4060Ti over that is for nVidia's AI features like DLSS3 and frame generation - Radeon RX6700 XT or RX 6570 XT that would deliver the same performance for less money with more VRAM (12GB) but you lose the above AI features. Plenty of stock as they've been out over a year Marketed as a 1080p card by Nvidia, probably because the 8GB it comes with isn't really enough for 1440p these days. - There's a 12GB version coming in July that really should have been the base spec. But it's going to be $100 extra (so total MSRP $500) and that just pushes it too close to RTX 4070 pricing. I've held onto my GTX980 4GB throughout all the GPU mining nonsense and upgrading to an i5-12400F, having pinned my hopes on the 4060Ti, so I'm very disappointed. I hope the 12 GB will get better reviews and end up costing about $400 as I really want to use DLSS3 and frame generation with MFS. But as it stands I may as well wait until 4070 reduces in price (or I save money) or see if I can find a used one.

That's because the DH Comet wasn't one of the worst aircraft in history 😠 Aside from metal fatigue issues with the Comet 1 causing several hull loses (research into which probably gave Boeing a huge advantage in jetliners) they were trailblazing and perfectly capable. The Comet 4 and Nimrod remained in service for a long time. If you want a bad Comet, look into the Messerschmitt Me 163.

The source article I linked to below the diagram I found really interesting, I learnt a lot as weather radar simulation in the vast majority of flight simulator products is patchy at best and that's the only experience of WXR I have. I think with the current Asobo implementation (such as on the ATR) is more like a satellite feed into the cockpit; you don't get things like radar shadow and tilt doesn't make any difference since you're looking from top down (plan view) rather than horizontally?

Isn't that how weather radar works, return precipitation, not cloud (water vapour)? https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/optimum-use-of-weather-radar/

Not sure that's SOP but that's how I've generally operated all my turboprops, IAS hold for climb and descent and adjust thrust to get desired rate of descent. Quite a few only had advisory VNAV (if they had VNAV at all) so it wasn't coupled to the AP. If there is a VNAV calculation I usually specify a slightly steeper descent than the default to allow the engines to almost idle as I believe this is more fuel efficient. The ATRs VNAV seems quite a bit more sophisticated than what I've used on Universal UNS-1 and Honeywell GNS-XLS systems so I should probably let the aircraft manage things... but the lack of autothrottle means I will need to keep a closer eye on the ASI!

Nothing wrong with Firefox, I use it fine with FlightSim.To and I run an adblocker plugin (which I disable for FlightSim.To). Edge is built on Chromium, essentially it's polished Chrome but your data goes to the Big M rather than the Big G. Firefox is a little bit more memory heavy right now than the other two at this precise moment, but it has better privacy functionality. I was with you all the way until you mentioned WoT... they sold identifiable user browsing data on to third parties and got banned from most app stores for violating their terms and conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOT_Services#Sale_of_user-related_data might be years ago but I have no trust in that organisation any more.

Majestic had this sussed long ago on their FSX Q400. They used an almost one-for-one font copy on the pop-out displays, but for the typeface in the virtual cockpit they made the stroke weight heavier and possibly enlarged it a bit too so it was readable without zooming in lots. Hans could learn from this.

That video has a 500 callout! Plus "approaching minimums" and "minimums minimums", 200, 100, 50, 40, 30, 20, 10. I suspect it's an operator option.

@blueshark747 400 XP or 800 XP? Two different aircraft types. EDIT: It's the 800 XP (BAe 125-800 derived from the HS 125) https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/hawker-800xp-by-cockspur/544106 A lovely business jet but completely different and a lot bigger than the Beechjet Hawker 400

That's bang on the money for an ATR. It's a economical but dumpy looking turboprop. You've spent too much time in jets!

It wasn't "trashed", it's a list of legitimate and verifiable discrepancies from reality for a product loudly marketed as "expert". Interviews with Hans Hartman, Asobo and Microsoft indicated the simulation would be quite deep and the accuracy quite high. Yes, DeceivedJaguar5 is obviously annoyed and some of the wording around their list indicates that, but fundamentally it remains legitimate criticism and informative to those of us who care about accuracy. Some of the items on the list are nitpicky and I may be happy to overlook (carpet in the cabin), but others are important to me as they affect regular operation of the aircraft (behaviour of the prop brake, prop feathering, automatically hydraulic axillary pump activation, red IAS tape not moving with AoA, NH and ITT behaviour during start, ACW behaviour during GI operations). I'm overjoyed you are happy with the £13 you spent, but that doesn't mean right for you is right for everyone (or even the majority of the userbase here). I am glad we have accurate information from DercievedJaguar5 to make our own assessments with.