Chock

Reviews Administrator
  • Content count

    9,095
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    94

Chock last won the day on December 24 2017

Chock had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About Chock

  • Rank
    Reviews Administrator
  • Birthday 08/27/1965

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Her Brittanic Majesty's Kingdom of Englandshire
  • Interests
    Cake

Recent Profile Visitors

14,352 profile views
  1. XP11
    109

    Nice pics. The 109 is a very striking aircraft when you see one for real, no doubt helped by the interesting camouflage German warplanes typically wore, which was pretty advanced in terms of graphic design as evidenced by the fact that similar camouflage paint schemes are often seen today, whereas one is unlikely to see the temperate land scheme of the opposing Spitfires and Hurricanes etc on anything modern. One of the sad things about such depictions in simulators however, is that aircraft such as the 109 are often depicted not wearing the Swastika on the tail, which we know they did indeed wear. Of course there are some reasons for that, notably that in many countries it is illegal to display the N@zi symbol, but that ruling is often misunderstood in how it applies, whereby it generally is not illegal to display the symbol so long as it is for things such as film-making, historical education, artistic works, computer games etc, i.e. the ruling is intended to cover uses where it is not 'glorifying' what the N@zis did. I don't think anyone with any sense could credibly disagree with the contention that the N@zis were bad, but revisionist history in the practice of removing references where the Swastika appeared historically, rather than educating people on the matter, is not a good idea, or as George Santayana famously said: 'Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it'. And we would certainly not want a repeat of what the N@zis did, but the fact that I can't even type the word on this forum without cheating and using the @ symbol, even when referring to it historically, is another example of where such censorship is not helpful when discussing or referring to history! Camouflage and military markings is an interesting subject and I do often wonder if anyone is ever going to have a crack at putting Yehudi lights on an Avenger or or F4 in FSX or P3D. Those light apparently did work quite well even though they weren't widely adopted. Anyway, love the pics. Hope you don't have as many landing accidents with it as the real thing did!
  2. You can do either, but to be honest it is kind of hard to tell the difference if you dont choose to interact with anyone. It isn't as if it is full of people being annoying, actually most people you chat to are pretty nice, although that of course doesn't mean they wouldn't blast your word not allowed to pieces if you had a bounty on you lol, which is probably why you don't come across anyone being a dick, the game tends to regulate itself well in that regard because the ships are quite complex to operate with a lot of systems, so it isn't the kind of game you could play well by being a dick about it as the AI combat is quite tough as well. It has two main play modes (open world and solo), solo is where you play it as a standalone game (but you do still need an internet connection to do that because the in game economy and content is updated constantly) the other - open world - is where you are online with everyone else who is online. So in one play mode you will meet and interact with only AI characters, the other is like that too (I.e. there are still lots of AI characters about), but also with other online players in the universe as well. So, you can do things like team up with friends or have a friend be a co pilot or a gunner in a turret etc if you play in the open world option. Unlike a lot of online games however, your character can switch between both play modes, but what happens in your 'offline' solo play will be reflected in the open world online because the game saves to a server for both play modes. In other words, if your ship got blown up in online play, it would be gone permanently regardless of which mode you carried on in, so you can't 'have a do over' by loading up an old save game; if your ship was gone either in solo or open online play, then it is tough, that ship is gone. But that's not as bad as it sounds, you can kind of 'insure' your ship and all its equipment if it gets destroyed and rebuy all that you had previously possessed providing you have some in game credits, so your character doesn't 'die' even if you get 'shot down'. It is a good fun game with lots of things to do, certainly worth a look if you like space which is simulated in a believably realistic fashion but in a fun way too. Not least because it has a realistically modelled Milky Way galaxy which has been speculatively populated based on reasonable and intelligent guesses, I.e. all the stars planets and such from our real galaxy are there, but with things such as Mars having been terraformed and many planets having orbital space stations as well as terrestrial bases. Thus stars which one could reasonably expect to have planets and moons and asteroid fields etc around, have speculatively had those added. The vast majority of those can be landed upon and explored too, this being for our entire galaxy, with everything having a believable ecosystem, so the game is literally massive in its scope and content, which is somewhat educational actually, but without being boringly nerdy.
  3. Thanks for the interesting comparison. I know that sort of thing can be a bit of a faff to do! I think it's fairly clear that ASCA is doing the best job of things there in pretty much all of the pictures: The clouds in the ASCA pics do seem to appear to stretch over a distance and also look to be the most realistically lit too.
  4. FSX-MS

    LOL. Well, perhaps a little unfair. But it will absolutely automatically be a big ugly fat biffer of an aeroplane with a face that only a mother could love. Funnily enough, I was in my girlfriend's garden early this morning and an Emirates A380 flew over, having just lifted off from runway 05 at Manchester which is just a couple of miles away, and even though I see the things quite often, it still struck me how ugly that thing is, which is ironic because the other big EADS airliner - the A340 - is absolutely beautiful with incredibly graceful lines.
  5. Sounds like some sort of graphics glitch then, presumably a patch will sort it if lots of people are seeing it.
  6. Hmm, that's a bit dodgy then, distributing payware gauges in a freebie, and ironic putting a password on something that's nicking gauges lol. Might wanna delete the link although I'll leave that up to you, depends on how much it bothers you.
  7. Not true at all. It will run just fine on a card with way less than 4Gb of Video memory. Even Lockheed Martin put this on their own minimum specs page for P3D, and we know how conservative such spec lists usually are and in fact they only upped the minimum requirement for P3D to 2Gb on the latest 64Bit version of P3D, prior to that, the previous two 32Bit versions were listed as only requiring 1Gb of video memory, and the first iteration of P3D actually only required 256Mb of video memory as a minimum spec. P3D V4 is not Call of Duty, it's a tarted up version of FSX and it will run just fine on a computer which can run FSX. Thus Lockheed Martin's minimum specs requirement for P3D V4.1 is listed as 2Gb of video memory and 4Gb of main board RAM with a 2.2Ghz processor. Which means the OP's computer is well within the specs required to run the latest version of P3D, that being 4.1. I can confirm this is true too, because I have run P3D V4 on an ATI Radeon HD6950 (I just looked on ebay, and one of those is for sale for 37 quid it's so old). That HD6950 only had 2Gb of VRAM and was not even DDR5 (it's DDR3), which the OP does have, so the OP's GPU is far more capable than my old card was, having 50 percent more memory and faster at that too. The only reason I swapped that HD6950 out recently was not because of P3D (it actually ran P3D okay), but rather because of FSW when it had trueSKY implemented and started to run choppily on that older ATI card, so now I have one with a lot more memory, but it's not as if that makes much difference in P3D since the old card was handling it just fine. So, yes, it absolutely will run P3D V4.1 okay. Now of course okay might mean you cannot swing all those sliders over to the right for all the fancy graphics options, because LM recommend a GPU with 8Gb of video memory (which I have, but I can't see it makes much difference compared to what my old 2Gb card did as far as handling it is concerned to be honest), so if your GPU was running FSX okay, then it will sure as hell run P3D okay because P3D is a bit better optimised. There is nothing stopping you running P3D v4 on that machine, trust me, it will run okay.
  8. Clouds appearing like a street running for miles actually is a realistic phenomena, could you be witnessing one of those? Such cloud formations are sometimes called a cloud street, but would more correctly be referred to as a horizontal convective roll vortex. Here is a satellite picture of one having formed over the Eastern US: Beyond this phenomena, cumulous clouds do tend to form in 'streets' anyway, as they drift downwind from whatever heat source it was on the ground which was causing the clouds to form. It's actually a good way to locate the source of a thermal when gliding if you see such a cloud street, then head upwind along it until you hear the variometer tone rise.
  9. FSXRV-10oimd
  10. FSX-MS

    It will depend on which cockpit chronometer you are referring to, and what you are trying to achieve with it. Generally speaking, you'll only need to have the chronometer display minutes, since a chronometer is typically used for timing IFR maneuvers and if you are using it to log hours, it's easy enough to work out anyway. There are some specific things it is used for though... For example, you can time the legs of a holding pattern by starting the chronometer when you pass over the nav aid which marks the hold, fly out on the hold heading radial you have been advised to follow, and then make the 180 degree turn for the racetrack holding pattern when your chronometer reads one minute, using a standard rate turn (use one minute legs if you are below 14,00 feet, if you are above 14,000 feet, your legs should be one and a half minutes long). This is also why your turn and slip indicator has a needle which will (typically) read 'two minutes' unless it is something like a fast jet. That's telling you that if you perform a properly coordinated turn using the calibrated markings on your turn and slip gauge, it will take you two minutes to perform a complete 360 degree turn, since the gauge is calibrated to line up those markings when you are turning at a rate of 3 degrees per second. So if you make a rate one turn in a hold, your turns will be one minute long and your legs will be one minute long as well. If you want to know how good or bad you are at making precise turns (note that this is also one of the ways to test if the flight model is any good on an add-on aeroplane), start the chronometer and commence a rate one standard turn, (i.e. keep the ball centered on the slip indicator and keep the needle pointing at the main turn marking, if you have autorudder on in your sim options, the sim will do this for you). If it takes you thirty seconds to turn 90 degrees, you are flying a rate one turn accurately and the flight model of the aeroplane is probably pretty good if it does a rate one standard turn properly. You can, if really stuck, use the chronometer to time a descent for a landing when at the proper three degree descent angle if you are flying toward or away from a recommended nav aid in poor visibility, to ensure you will clear any raised terrain or obstacles marked on a chart as you come down. Commercial flights and test flights will occasionally start the chronometer when commencing the take off roll in order to facilitate accurate record-keeping for log book purposes. Of course that doesn't really matter in a flight simulator, but you might want to do so anyway.
  11. You might want to take a look at Panel Studio, which will allow you to create your own panels for FSX. It's not that expensive and pretty easy to use: http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?product=FSP-ESD-001
  12. General?

    Welcome to Avsim
  13. I am fairly sure I installed it straight to P3D by manually pointing the installer at it, however, it was a while back, so can't be certain of that. I do have FSX-SE and P3D on my computer, so I might have done it by going to FSX. In any case, it sounds like you got it done.
  14. I really think not having a STAR at Liverpool Airport named RINGO is an opportunity missed, although if you fly a certain entire SID out of the nearby Manchester, you end up doing the full MONTY. Here's great fun one too for Star Wars fans: The FEDRA RNAV departure from Louisville Kentucky includes the waypoints LUUKE, IAMUR, FADDR.