Richard McDonald Woods

Hi Nicolas, As a regular user of AddonsLinker, I want to start using WindSailor. However so far I cannot understand how to use it. Where do I find a user guide?😡

Can you provide details of what you dislike?😜

Very well done, Ray! I have learnt a great deal from flying all over the world and reading up with Wikipedia as I go. Next another trek with P3Dv5?

Hi birdguy! Perhaps it's because you are overlooking the idea that time is purely a sense of sentient beings and from which we can therefore never escape 😉

Bring it on 😍 I am stuck on 200mb/s

Ah! Nostalgia is certainly not what it was 🤣

I am a user of SBGL Rio de Janeiro, SBGR Sao Paulo and SAEZ Buenos Aires from TropicalSim. I have been expecting news from them of efforts to support P3Dv5. Their forum has been out of use now for several weeks. Anybody know what is going on?🙃

Hi Dominique! It has occurred to me that LM might be readying a migration from the ESP base to MSFS2020. Migrating all the current aircraft models and sceneries to the new base would relieve LM from much of the maintenance of the current sim code and enable them to concentrate on the training roles. 🤣

Hi Oliver, I am afraid that I am all at sea 😧 Your documentation has not helped me to understand what is wrong. Many of my around 40 airport sceneries show only the GSX2 ground vehicles and SODE jetways. No airport buildings, Obrx OpenLC or FS Global Ultimate 2020. The interface shows that all except one item are green and therefore active. The exception is of FlyTampa-Toronto_LC which is purple. I have run the Packages>Activate all option and saved the changes, but to no effect. What should I do to enable all of sceneries?

There is a Mr Ghoti, pronounced Fish, proposed by George Bernard Shaw as a joke about English spelling. Explained as 'gh' as in 'enough', 'o' as in 'women', and 'ti' as in 'station' 🤣

I don't wish to split hairs, but I used to work for a major leasing company. Software copyright, by its very nature, remains with the copyright holder. This may be sold on to another new copyright holder. When you purchase a CD, for example, you are only buying a piece of hardware AND a right to hear/view its software contents. You will notice that there is a EULA document which forbids reverse engineering of the software as this would violate the copyright. If you wish to sell the CD then that is allowed but, in law, the new owner is agreeing to be bound to the terms of the EULA. However, trying to prove violation of copyright in the retail space is not easy. In the wholesale space, though, companies are very careful of the copyright terms as a court judgement against the company can be extremely expensive. HTH😉

Because of the great variations in country populations, I created a spreadsheet to determine the ranking of respondents per million inhabitants. The results quite surprised me as shown below: Norway 71.2 Switzerland 44.0 United Kingdom 41.0 Austria 35.6 Sweden 33.8 The Netherlands 31.4 Australia 30.8 Belgium 27.9 Canada 25.4 Germany 19.3 United States of America 14.7 Spain 9.5 France 8.0 Italy 6.5 Brasil 1.5 I am very surprised that Germany and the USA are ranked so lowly. I can see little reason for the variations in responses. Can you? 🤔 What could be done to increase both the involvement in simming and the response to surveys?

My mistake! I was confusing avsim with aerosoft. Apologies.

Support by Christian Grill to PFPX appears to be completely inactive. No future development plans have been announced.☹️ May we have an update by AVSIM about why they continue to list PFPX as an available product without there being any product support for it (other than by Steven Cooke)?

I remain confused about future flight simming with MSFS 2020. The function split between FS2020 and other commercial flight simulation developers is quite unclear to me. We have now had reveals regarding scenery (including elevation data), aircraft models, aerodynamics and cockpits, apparently leaving 3rd party developers to develop only aircraft models, airports and associated functions. There can be little doubt that Microsoft intends to support 3rd party developers by giving access to a new SDK. So it appears to me that Microsoft could take one of the following three routes in their development: Develop their own aircraft simulators largely to demonstrate and test the new SDK To provide a library of all required simulation objects that developers require for embedding in their own aircraft simulators To develop their own fleet of simulated aircraft in partnership with at least Boeing and Airbus. Can anyone caste light for me?

I am planning a project to provide simmers with a flying ground school based on the lessons available from the Aviation Training Network. This exciting project requires additional interested members to join the development team. If you would be interested in joining, please reply to me at speedbird747[at]ntlworld.com stating your interests in developing educational materials, your simming experience and experience in working within a software development project. We shall be developing within a pre-packaged learning management system and you will not be required to have prior knowledge of the software. All necessary training will be provided. Applications should be submitted by the end of November 2019. Looking forward to hearing from you,😄

It would seem that in order to support the B777 from GFO, there will be the need for an update, at least.😎

The latest announcement looks very impressive😃 It appears that compatibility will be assured for airport scenery and aircraft simulator developers. However, IF things are as they appear, there is likely to be major market disruption for Prepar3D and Orbx. The future looks very interesting.😎

The latest announcement for the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 looks very impressive😃 It appears that compatibility will be assured for airport scenery and aircraft simulator developers. However, IF things are as they appear, there is likely to be major market disruption for Prepar3D and Orbx. The future looks very interesting.😎

Tony, There is a need to support CPDLC in our sims in order to mirror real-world developments. The aviation industry is investing a great deal into the roll-out of CPDLC so your claims appear to show that you have not yet understood the major advantages of the programs. CPDLC will significantly reduce voice interactions between ATC and pilots and enable auto-updating of FMC flight details. Pre-departure clearances can become commonplace among other things. A comprehensive description of the CPDLC facilities are given here. I hope this helps😃

I don't use acceleration at all. On long flights over water, I usually do other things whilst keeping watch. Over land, I love to surf Wikipedia. Looking up descriptions of the places I am overflying, their history, populations, industries, etc. I feel that I have learnt a lot about the world this way.😃

As a long-hauler only, I have to choose the so far unmentioned PMDG Global Flight Operations. This product, I hope and believe, will make a fundamental difference to our sim flying. We should get CPDLC and an interface to VAs. With CPDLC we shall see a significant drop in en route voice comms, as well as pre-departure clearances, arrivals and weather updates for participating vendors. This hopefully will include FlightSimLabs, PMDG, Aerosoft, TFDI and QualityWings qualifying aircraft using the new GFO modules. With an improved VA interface, flying with your favourite airline will be much more automated. These additions will bring simming much more into the modern age.😍

Hi Keven, Would you consider providing a default set of settings for each of the most popular aircraft models that showcase all of the considerable features of ChasePlane? I, among many others, are probably only using a basic subset of what is possible. Cheers, Richard

Probably a slightly interesting presentation if we had been able to hear what was being said And the FSElite technology just wasn't performing again

Many users of the OldProp products are very happy with them. You are basing your argument on 'the product doesn't work as it should'. I am not sure that you are the best judge of how it should work. Comparing the product's function to the the advertised functions may be the only way that you can win. I am not aware of what you are claiming is the mismatch.