Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. I just came here to look for the same info. I had Windows Defender quarantine the GTN750 so I installed Norton and it wouldn't even let me run the installer. Is there no way to run this software without making an exception to antivirus? I'm not saying it isn't a false positive, but I'd prefer to run only software that passes a virus scan.
  2. Solved this myself... In the plugins menu, I had to select the option to use the north american DB. Now it matches what is in the PC trainer.
  3. I bought the RXP GTN 750 for XP10 yesterday and it works pretty well. However, I have some problems with nav data. Some airports are missing when running in the sim. For instance, try going to KFME. KFME is available just fine when running the PC Trainer standalone. It's also available from xplane's default Garmin 530. I've seen this with a few other airports as well. Is there something I need to do to fix the database?
  4. Why do people think FSX has to be placed in such a specific category? Why put it in a category as either a sim or a game?You asked our points of view, so here's mine.I think FSX is BOTH a game and a true simulator.I've made several posts about how I use FSX as an aid to actual flight planning. Every time I fly FSX either before or after a real-world flight, I'm amazed at how it recreates the actual flight environment. Navaids are where they are supposed to be, I can practice procedures, instrument approaches, etc. The views even match the real world close enough to make it feel like I've been there beforeOther times, I start up FSX to just play with it... Actually, for a few years in FS2004, the only thing I would do was load up an X-Wing fighter I downloaded and shoot across the sky at thousands of miles per hour. I loved doing that. That was how I turned flight sim into a game.It all depends how you use it. It's both a sim and a game, and I love the fact that we have such a great tool at our disposal when it's time to get serious.It's a fact that the real world has animals in it. I actually wish FSX simulated more birds. On nearly every real world flight, I'll get a little too close to a bird than I'd like. I just don't understand how people think that by having animals (something the real world actually has) FSX is more of a game. Sure, MS could have spent more time improving more hard-core areas of the sim, but the fact that they chose to spend time on other things doesn't make it any less of a simulator.Use FSX how you want to. Make it as real as you want to. It's up to you whether its a game or a sim.
  5. I actually love going crazy in FS and flying from the outside views. This might sound like it contradicts something I said in a previous post, where I talked about making FS as real as you possibly can, by planning out the flight and flying it as you would do in real life. In that post, I was responding to the concept of using FS as a training aid, in which case you should be careful. As much as I love keeping things "real", I'll often just load up an external view and start spinning around and doing all sorts of crazy things. I'll think to myself how amazed I am how much FS actually simulates and recreates. Then, out of nowhere, I'll switch to a helicopter and dive down and start weaving through trees or mountains and just start playing around. I'll wind up going into Instant Replay and watch everything I've done from the outside views.One big complaint I have with FSX is that not all buildings are "solid". I was really disappointed the other day when I tried landing the helicopter in a baseball stadium, only to find that I sunk down through the turf into the ground below the stadium. That ruins some of the fun :)
  6. Sorry, my post was slightly confusing. :) I meant there's not much lighting around around the airport because its surrounded by all trees, which makes the radius around the airport look pitch black for several miles. The airport itself has runway lights, taxiway lights, a beacon, papis, etc. What I meant was, these lights look like they're floating in the middle of a huge black abyss.
  7. The real world at night is usually very dark. In fact, flight sim can look the most realistic at night since you can't see much detail besides the lights. The airport I'm based out of (real world) is surrounded by several miles of trees... no lights. Landing there at night is like descending into a dark black hole with runway lights floating in the center.
  8. This is a bit off topic, but I feel the need to update some comments I made about Voyager versus ChartCase. Over the past few days, I spoke to sales and technical support at both companies and have new information.As it turns out, Voyager and ChartCase share the same data and approach plates. A problem in one will show up in the other. Both companies verified this, and I demo'd ChartCase (30 day trial) and confirmed that the same geo-referenced chart problems exist in ChartCase as well as Voyager. Seattle Avionics support responded quickly and actually fixed the charts I brought to their attention, and will also be working with the data provider to have it fixed at the source.Given this new information, I can truly recommend Voyager and their excellent support. After demo'ing ChartCase, I'm sticking with Voyager. In my opinion, Voyager wins, hands down, as a flight planner. ChartCase has some nice things in flight, but the new 4.0 version of Voyager coming out soon (and included as a free update) will pretty much make up for anything I see that ChartCase does better.Anyway, just wanted to clear that up since I made it seem like Voyager's data cannot be trusted in my earlier post... when infact, the data between each is from the same source.
  9. I use an LS800 with Voyager GlassView (Seattle Avionics). I was actually just looking at the ChartCase website tonight... I'm getting a little frustrated with Voyager. It's slow and the approach plates and taxi diagrams are not georeferenced reliably. It's hit or miss ... the GPS overlay of the plane on the plate can be in the wrong spot, moving in the wrong direction. I've had to turn this feature off out of safety concerns.Have you experienced anything like this with ChartCase? How is the performance?
  10. Flight Sim is as realistic as you make it. I often use FSX as part of my real flight planning. It's actually a lot of fun. After doing everything I'd normally do for a real flight, I'll sit down with my charts and everything and fly the flight using FSX. I even have the Tablet PC I use in my plane connected to FSX so I can practice using that.I say all this with one big disclaimer. I agree with the people who say you need to fly in a real plane first, to then be able to make the most out of Flight Sim. In fact, I think you need to have several hours of real flight instruction before FS "clicks". A "discovery flight" will give you a taste, but not enough (my opinion). I've been flying Flight Sim since FS2, and I finally got my private certificate in 2006 and my instrument rating in June '07. My Flight Sim experience was forever changed after flying for real. Did the years of flying FS help during my actual flight training? You bet it did! I already understood the basics of straight and level, climbs and turns, etc. Does this mean my first landing was a greaser? Nope! One thing I absolutely did NOT learn from FS (after all those years) was how to properly land an airplane. It actually took me quite a long time to finally be able to land without having a sore back the next day (ok, it was only THAT bad a few times...) If anything my KNOWLEDGE of aviation was a huge advantage. I already understood most of the flight instruments, the radios, how to intercept and track a VOR, etc. What I really lacked was all the supporting knowledge, such as FARs (regulations), procedures, staying proficient, being a safe pilot, checking weather, decision making, etc, etc... "Flying" is really only part of being a good pilot. To me, FSX is just another part of the equation, as an excellent tool.There's nothing like going on a flight to somewhere new in FSX, practicing a few instrument approaches.... then the next day doing it for real. Once your mind is able to make the mental bridge between real-world flying and Flight Sim, it's amazing how easy it is to swap one for the other. In fact, this past weekend I was on a short (real-world) flight. I flew it in FSX the day before. I had my autopilot on in heading mode... As I turned the heading bug to the heading I wanted, I actually thought to myself, "Hmm... this feels like flight simulator." I had also practiced a few instrument approaches at my destination in FSX. I filed IFR (in good weather) for my flight and requested the ILS. The whole approach was fresh in my mind from practicing in FSX the day before... The view of the airport was exactly what it looked like in FSX. I felt like I had already done the flight... in fact, in a way, I really had.In summary, FS is extremely helpful as a training aid if used correctly. After you get your certificate, FSX becomes even more useful -- especially if you're instrument rated.-Mike
  11. What were you attempting to do? You only need a DUAT account to take advantage of the services it provides (weather briefing, filing flight plans, etc). I'm pretty sure Voyager should still function as a standalone flight planner without DUAT or DUATS configured. I'm fairly certain you shouldn't need an account. I could be wrong though, as I don't use the free version since I've purchased it.
  12. I use Voyager from Seattle Avionics for part of my real-world flight planning. They have a free version, Voyager Freeflight. It lets you export to FS.http://www.seattleavionics.com
  13. Why do you caution not to use it for real flying? Obviously it should never be your primary means of navigation, but I'm curious what you feel is wrong with it.
  14. Last week, my wife and I were planning to take a nice day trip flight to Luray, Virginia from Tipton Airport (FME) which is just outside of Baltimore. Since this would have been my first time heading west over some mountains (I'm used to flat land), I spent a while longer than usual doing my flight planning last Friday night. The weather forecasts weren't looking too great, however. Clear skies, but a lot of strong winds... I figured I'd wait till morning to make a final decision. Saturday morning, the winds on the surface were dying down pretty nicely, but were still strong aloft. I figured it may be a bit bumpy while we're climbing out, but I don't mind. We decide to drive to the airport to see what other people who may have been up there already thought. We walk into the FBO where several pilots had just come back from flying. All of them were talking about how bumpy it was up there. One shaken up student looked at me and agreed. That convinced my wife and I that we should wait to go another time... Disappointed, we left the airport in hopes next week would have better weather (unfortunately, it's even windier today, so I'm posting this instead of flying).When I got back home, I decided to fire up FSX and fully carry out the entire flight that I had planned. I had never seriously done this before in flight sim. I brought my flightbag to the computer, strapped my kneeboard on my leg, got my TAC and Sectional ready and opened up the navlog I had just printed up that morning intending to use in real life. What happened over the next hour completely took me by surprise. The entire experience felt so real that when I landed in Luray in FSX, I wanted to get my logbook out and put an entry in. The Garmin GPS functioned almost exactly like the panel-mounted Garmin I have in the real plane I rent. I usually monitor VORs as a backup, which I did as well. The most impressive part -- in real life, even though I have GPS / VOR and a handheld backup GPS, I like to still primarily fly via pilotage (looking out the window at landmarks and following along on the chart). Every single landmark I correlated from my chart, I could find in FSX by panning around in the virtual cockpit. Slight bends in rivers, the small rolling mountain ridges, even smoke stacks with antennas around it on the chart and little towns along the way. Basically, I was able to find all the landmarks I expected to find when I was doing my flight planning. While arriving in Luray, I entered the pattern as planned and had a smooth touchdown. Everything was where I expected it to be. I'd like to add a note here that I am using Cloud9 XClass USA, which probably helped the arrangement of towns, etc.I still had a flight plan in my kneeboard from a flight I did a few weeks ago in real life. I decided to recreate that flight in FSX to validate the experience... I wanted to compare the experience of a flight I had never done (Luray) to one I've done several times. I departed Tipton airport and headed up north to a small airport in New Jersey. Again, I was amazed at how real the entire experience felt. There's a cooling tower in NJ sitting on the Delaware Bay that you can see from 50 miles away on a clear day... sure enough, it was there in FSX. Just about anything interesting enough to be on a TAC or Sectional chart was there in FSX. I flew the entire flight to NJ in FSX via pilotage based on my real life experience. Again, I wanted to log the time... too bad I can't.For my flights, I used the default 172 SP, which is one of the planes I fly in real life. The performance and handling was close enough, although I hate the ground handling in FSX (only real complaint). I'm using a CH Yoke and rudder pedals. Also, I've made several tweaks to FSX and am getting decent performance, but I look forward to SP1.A little more background info for those still reading :) I've been flight simming since FS2. I recently obtained my Private certificate last year and am coming close to my 200 hour mark. Before flying in real life, I used to just fire up flight sim and do whatever I thought was realistic. During my flight training and up until recently, for some reason, I took a break from Flight Sim and never fired it up. Now that I've been flying for a little while, it is amazing to come back with such a different perspective. Since FS2, I saw flight simming from the perspective of someone who just wonders "is this realistic?" ... the answer is... it's as realistic as you make it. The problem I see is that someone really needs to experience real life flight training to get the most use out of FSX. I don't mean just going up in a Cessna and going home to compare the experience. It's the entire experience of being a pilot, from obsessing over the weather, to drawing lines on your sectional chart, pulling all the radio frequencies together, and so on. For the first time ever, I did all this and then used FSX as my tool to tie it all together. All this provided such a real experience for me, that once I do actually fly to Luray, I'm going to feel like I had done it before. In fact, I'm going to make sure I recreate any new flight in FSX just to familiarize myself with a new area before I go (in addition to my other planning, of course).Anyway, after years of "lurking" on the Avsim forums, I thought I'd just share this experience.
  15. Here's a good tip, slightly different from those already mentioned.If you alt-tab out of FSX, then click it or try to alt-tab back in and it does not come back, don't give up. It isn't frozen. Simply click the FSX icon in your taskbar to "activate" it. It may look frozen since it doesn't come back. Even though it doesn't maximize back to full screen, it is still listening to keystrokes. Hit Alt-ENTER to put it into Window mode after you click it in the taskbar. It will become a window. Hit Alt-Enter again, and you're back to full screen!
  • Create New...