deetee

Members
  • Content Count

    1,471
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

114 Excellent

About deetee

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    LFPN

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

4,040 profile views
  1. More payware is coming that’s for sure, but my point was that from an tubeliner pilot’s perspective there is no necessity to buy 3rd party airports for XP as the airport layouts and frequencies are generally kept quite up to date, unlike it’s competitor’s which are stuck in the early ‘00s. As for scenery that’s down to personal taste. I don’t mind popping down $$ for something that provides cosmetic improvements over a large area, or for an accurate global weather system, but $30+ a pop to have a correctly laid out airport is getting silly.
  2. deetee

    Active Sky for X-Plane

    First screenshots of Active Sky XP https://www.thresholdx.net/news/asxphf
  3. Unfortunately P3D has become a payware provider’s paradise, a black hole down which people regularly throw money to replace the default airports which are often way out of date (runways, ils freq). You need to shell out on those expensive add-ons for it to have any semblance to current charts. The X-Plane airport gateway on the other hand was a stroke of genius, I can fly into most large airports and be confident things are more or less up to date with the current charts. If we move on to the default P3D scenery textures and coastlines, again the wallet has to come out to remedy this (it needs FTX Global to look half reasonable). Compare if you will then these two sims, but I know which one has real consumer value in 2018. 😉
  4. deetee

    Gatwick for XP?

    PP EGKK is a good and faithful rendition but I find it too frame heavy for my tastes. On my rig a healthy 25 fps with the default drops to 8 fps with PP’s.
  5. Ryan that’s most interesting, do you have a link to some info on that rain tech? Google was not my friend when I tried trawling the web.
  6. Do any GA apart from Aerobask these days come with rain effects? There was a time when quite a few planes had them in XP (even Carenado) but alas not any more it seems. A retrograde step surely ? Fingers crossed this new Lancair will have them.
  7. Agreed those shift-key assignments are not easy but the customisable Quick Views for the NumPad keys are a stroke of genius.
  8. deetee

    Zibo mod n1 limit

    Hi Len, have you input the outside temp into the N1 page ? e.g. /15
  9. deetee

    737 MAX for X-Plane

    Fantastic, look forward to this one! X-Plane is just great. What with the gateway airports, HD Mesh, and the B738 Zibo mod, one can now easily get into high-quality flightsimming without spending a fortune. Not so long ago people used to berate XP for the lack of airport buildings and the quality of the default aircraft, and now just look how far things have come! I’ve lost count of how much cash I’ve burned away on add-on airports for P3D ! 😉
  10. I usually get my local QNH in either FSGRW or Pilot2ATC. The X-Plane map or Atis will also give you it, albeit in Inches and not Hpa but that is an inconvenience rather than a showstopper.
  11. Have to agree the XP view system is far better than FSX/P3D. I use the SimpleCam program in P3D because it actually imitates the XP view system (ability to assign Numpad keys to specific views). 🙂
  12. deetee

    Switching to xplane?

    Pilot2ATC works great with X-Plane. 😎
  13. Did you install the v11.26 beta? If so go back to v11.25, or pay $18. http://x-vision.pro/get.html
  14. deetee

    Why is FS Tramp so unknown?

    Took one look at the pricing model and just walked away. Sorry just a big turn off. 😬
  15. Thanks Dave, I have sent you the log file. The problem is that I was vectored not cleared at 5600 ft, and by the time I was cleared to final I was too high to successfully make the approach at 2000 ft. For this flight P2A did not choose a STAR; ideally it should have been BONEK 1A or 1R via LCA then VOR DME X Rwy 04. As it was it chose a direct vector from BONEK to VOR DME Z Rwy 04 straight in at D12 at 2000 ft. As for the missed approach, ATC said "Execute the published Missed Approach for VOR_DME to runway Zero Four Approach". The published MA says I should hold at AMAKO and contact ATC, but once in the hold I was at a loss which option to choose next. Upon reflection I should have probably just reported my position so that's perhaps my bad, I was expecting more hand-holding.