Jump to content

klamal

Members
  • Content Count

    1,578
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

272 Excellent

1 Follower

About klamal

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

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

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think any are truly "fully working", are they? In any version of any sim. 😜
  2. I am using it. It works mostly well. I say “mostly” because my only complaint would be that there are occasional strips where, for some reason, the ugly land class scenery peeks thru. I don’t know why that happens but it does. Other than that, it’s more or less point and click. Add on top of that, you can use it with scenproc so that it will generate 3d buildings/vegetation based on OSM data on top of the photoreal so you’re not in just a completely flat world. Overall, it’s great and way faster/easier than fsearth tiles.
  3. No. This is not possible. They are two different ways of showing scenery. However, you can get what you are looking for if you want to do some work. You can check out Ortho4XP for P3D/FSX and use that. It will generate photorealistic tiles and, based on OSM data, add 3d buildings and vegetation to those tiles. This is the "easiest" way though still requires some work on your part. You can also use the annotator tool that comes with the SDK and manually annotate the scenery yourself. A much more manual process that you'd only want to do for small areas, like immediately around an airport.
  4. Truer words were never spoken. This and just flat out lying on top of it!!
  5. Because that is(with few exceptions i.e. Dell offering Ubuntu) the only choice of an OS when buying a PC. NOT because it is a great OS or that 1 billion MS users chose MS. I'm not necessarily trying to bash MS here. All the big tech companies have their pluses and minuses. But I just don't agree that users prefer or chose MS. Some do and some love MS. But, a good percentage of those billion users also had no choice in the matter.
  6. This can happen if you fly near a payware scenery that has to "load in". FSL doesn't handle the long pause of scenery loading well. That's when I get a disconnect. Even flying at cruise level. If I fly over a payware airport that causes a long pause while loading, the AP will disconnect.
  7. Bert should get at least 50% royalties from Carenado. If it weren't for his work, their aircraft really would just be pretty flying pixels. Thank you for all your hard work and help to all of us here!!! Truly one of the best in this community!!
  8. Just because Carenado is the only “game in town” for any particular aircraft doesn’t make it good. If it fits your needs, great! Consider yourself lucky that the little things don’t matter to you. For me, I want to know that an aircraft I’m flying in my virtual world replicates the real thing as close to is humanly possible in a simulation. Does that mean that the likes of FSLabs or PMDG are EXACTLY spot on themselves? No. Absolutely not! But I trust that they are a heck of a lot closer and more capable to do so than Carenado by a LONG SHOT!!! And that matters to me! As to the have I flown the real thing argument? No, like 99% of us on here, we are all pretending. Most of us here have never flown a real airplane ourselves. Instead, We are all putting our trust in said developers to give us the closest representation to the real thing as possible. And, as is evidence by the overwhelming statements about this not working and that not working about any Carenado product and them requiring work from people here to fix their bugs to get them at least somewhat better, I have NO trust in Carenado to deliver on that! As has been stated many times before too, they are pretty pixels that just fly in the most basic sense. So it all comes down to TRUST. Flying every airplane in real life to compare is not possible.
  9. As already stated, that is exactly why. It takes way longer to develop a quality aircraft(FSLabs, PMDG) then it does to create one that simply flies but no where close to how the real thing would(Carenado). If all you care about is that it looks like the actual plane, Carenado is probably good enough. But if you expect the buttons and controls in the airplane to act like they would in real life, then you have to wait for that(and pay some more money).
  10. Thanks. I was thinking of Flight Sim World. I never owned that but wasn't it an FSX variant that was 64-bit?
  11. Ok, my mistake. I stand corrected. Then exactly what Dave said...definitely make sure to not just enable a large amount of photoreal scenery. For example, if you bought all the MSE for the entire US and tried to enable it all at once, you probably wouldn't even be able to launch the sim. This is due to the fact that ANY photoreal scenery that is enabled in your scenery library will load. No matter how far away it is from you.
  12. Yes. Exactly. For FSX, which is 32-bit. This is exactly true. However, the user said he is using FSX-SE, which I believe is 64-bit, right? So then it really doesn't apply so much.
  13. I would say you don't need any extra "Oomph of CPU" for just photoreal scenery. Actually, usually running just photoreal, you usually get better performance because the CPU is not having to figure out where to put autogen. If, however, you have photoreal that has autogen with it, that's when you would still have to be careful and want the extra "Oomph". Looks like your CPU is not able to be overclocked. Otherwise that would be one relatively easy and free way to help there. But, again, my first question back is if you're running just photoreal by itself or photoreal that has some sort of autogen with it.
  14. Welcome to the Internet, Social media and Main Stream Media. We can't find the truth any more if it slapped us in the face. What's even worse, the people that don't even care about truth any more!!!
  15. I don't think there is a tool anywhere. You can also just add the lines via a text editor as well. But, this is something I talked about several years ago now. I took some slack for stating it but I'll say it again. If the people that create the paints just took that extra 2 minutes to do it once, that would save 1000 other people from having to each do it too. This is not meant to burden the painters with more work or to belittle their awesome work that they do in providing the community with these beautiful works of art. But, still, it seems to make way more sense to me to have it done w/ the paint - 1 time and done. People also argued that the parking codes weren't used. And, here is an example of yes, they still are used.
×
×
  • Create New...