ESzczesniak

They're mild upgrades to default airports. I think they use a lot of objects from the Orbx Scenery Libraries that themselves are a fair bit bigger. Better than default, but far from the full blown Orbx airports.

There is no autoland. You'll have to land it yourself. There is an ILS that will guide you and you can couple it to the autopilot in approach mode, but it is not authorized below 200' AFE and will not flare/rollout, etc. Also there is no autothrottle.

What simulator are you running? On FSX, it is flirting with OOM's. Add a complex aircraft or Orbx scenery and you will likely experience them (although not absolute). P3D v3 has much better VAS and it is not so much an issue, performs well, and looks amazing!

Don't let me be the only opinion in your decision. With that said, I think the GPU is the place to look regarding this decision. FSX and P3D are heavily CPU bound, but P3D with DX10/11 has managed to offload a good amount of the demand to the GPU. I have a GTX 770 and am wishing a bit I had an 970/980. A weak CPU will do you no good on either. A good CPU with a poor GPU will be best served on FSX. A good CPU/mediocre GPU will be a gray zone. And a good CPU with a good GPU will benefit from P3D.

I'll add strong support for P3D. Just tonight I removed the last traces of FSX from my computer (VRS TacPack and Bug in open public testing for v3.2). P3D runs smoother with better graphics for me. I can't speak much for Win 10. I recently got a new laptop with Win 10 and overall like it, but haven't been convinced strongly enough to switch from Win 7 yet on my flight simulator machine.

Makes me thing of a TCAS resolution advisory, The lines aren't quite parallel, but I could conceivably call them "goal posts".

I'm not the expert either, but it was my understanding that FTXG overwrites default texture, not core, files. These are replaced in the scenery update instead of the content update. I am sure from what I've read you need to reinstall FTXG with a scenery update. I only did a client and content update. Unfortunately, I've used FTXG since day one, so while this looks like what I had, I'm not overly clear what default P3D v3 looks like to compare.

Thanks for the input all. To help me clarify, this is how I understand the procedure. I can update any individual component by uninstalling and installing the new, restarting the simulator between. The individual components: Client: The "meat" of the sim engine. Most of the changes probably come in this and this package is the critical component for the update. This probably adds most of the new features (i.e. waves), tweaks (lighting, etc), and optimizations (VAS, etc). Installing this should not change my add-ons and the exe.xml and dll.xml files should be unchanged. I might have a small chance of having to reinstall FSDT GSX. Scenery: Heavily new textures and .bgl files. I will have to reinstall any package that overwrites textures (Orbx FTG, REX), but should not have to reinstall add-on airports. Content: Less clear on the extent of this. Probably changes to default a/c, maybe autogen, etc. Like the client, should not have to reinstall much, if anything. Is this fairly correct? It sounds like just the client probably gets most of the fixes? Thanks for any help again.

I'm pretty new to P3D. I started with v3.1. I understand we can update only components of P3D such as client, scenery, etc. I was wondering how this plays in to the upgrade procedure and reinstalling of add-ons. I am heavily installed with add-ons, primarily Orbx (regions, airports, plus FTXG), FSDT, PMDG, and FS2Crew. A full reinstall is quite a process. Can anyone enlighten me as to what components of P3D I can reinstall without any need for reinstall? Or limited reinstall? And what about the AppData folders with the dll.xml and exe.xml files? Do I need to save any of these files, or are they not overwritten. I appreciate any help.

I'd too have to look at the FCOM to fully remember/know, but the top left corner of the lower overhead has reversion controls. Get the APU up, and take a look in to that panel.

I think I get you're point, but what are you expecting? I ask, because in real life the taxiway is often quite indistinct without the taxiway lights and a/c taxi light to help discern.

Completely unrelated to aviation. Orthopaedic surgery with focus on adult hip and knee reconstruction.

I've been trying fill a void with business jets in my FS. I know the Citation X is very good systems wise, but the graphics are marginal. And the I have the Flight1 Mustang, but honestly feel it's a bit more of a VLJ than business jet. The formal reviews of the Phenom 300 were a bit unfavorable in my view. In particular, the lack of SID/STARS and VNAV the mirrors the actual aircraft were issues to me. I've been hearing a lot of people who a really liking the aircraft with the GTN 750 mod though, and understand Carenado has polished some functionality with the autoflight systems. So, I was wondering if someone could give me an idea on what the a/c is like with the GTN750. How complete is it? I know it's not the PMDG 737/777 or Majestic Dash 8 that I normally, fly. However, can you now do a cold-and-dark to cold-and-dark flight as you would in the real thing without too many problems, or is this still very limited? Thanks in advance for any feedback.

I am not aware of any way to do this right now (would love to know in case I'm missing something). AES would allow this at proper airports and gates. I understand, as you do, that SODE allows this, but I thought this was a developer side thing and the jetbridge thing was a fairly new addition...not too sure if I'm correct or not though.

That's good to know. There's only one review on the website and it says it didn't allow fixed derates. I'm guessing now that may have been for an old version.

Well, it's a bit difficult to say with the weather themes. Many of the default P3D schemes are built around more stormy weather. Cold fronts could very well have some more dense clouds with moisture that would return, and the others such as heavy snows, thunderstoms, etc., could as well. Additionally, the WXR is supposed to only really work with ASN and not default weather, so there may be something confusing this as well.

It absolutely is simulated. A couple key things to remember though. First is differentiating between TAS and GS. Your PFD displays true airspeed (TAS). This is the speed of the aircraft relative to the air it is flying through. This will not change with head or tail winds. Ground speed (GS) will change (+ for tailwind, - for headwind) and is displayed on the ND depending on your settings. Regarding your ETA, you have to think about the magnitude of the effect. If you GS in 0 wind is about 470ish kts, a 20 kt tailwind will shorten your 2 hour trip by only about 5 minutes. The effects can be huge when you get a 120 kt tailwind across the Atlantic, but are often much smaller. Cost Index (CI) is an even smaller effect, often changing by only a few kts. The biggest effect CI changes can have is by changing your climb/descent profiles so that you descend at say 280 kts instead of 250 kts. Also understand your ETA's on the FMC doesn't have circuit time built in for a vectored approach. So unless you're on an RNAV approach transitioning off a STAR to FAF all entered perfectly in the FMC, there's usually 5-10 minutes of vectored flying for your circuit that the FMC isn't counting. So you're ETA of 2:00, should really be 2:07 or so...so when you land in 2:02 you actually are ahead of schedule even though the FMC said 2 hours. There are a few ways of making the FMC a bit more accurate regarding ETA and vectored approaches, but for the moment I'll leave things here.

What do you mean by "selecting one of the themes from the drop down menus"? Are you talking about the preset weather themes in P3D? Also, why are you thinking the WXR is not working? I ask because of a fundamental misunderstanding that most people have about weather radars in flight simulators. Early WXR simply gave a cloud map, and as such many people seem to expect that if they see clouds, they should see WXR returns. This is untrue and in fact most clouds (depends a little on gain settings) will not show on WXR. WXR looks at precipitation/moisture content, so as a generalized rule, you really only see storm clouds on WXR (very generalized, not totally true). Additionally, WXR looks in a beam forward of the aircraft. This can be adjusted some by the tilt, but the WXR will not show returns of towering thunderstorms right over head when 20 NM straight in front of your a/c is clear. Generally speaking, except for some light cloud returns and ground clutter/noise, an airliners WXR will often show nothing on the screen. It is my knowledge and experience (only been through a couple storms with the NGX/777) that the PMDG WXR actually simulates both the beam direction and precipitation return (over cloud mapping).

Your point is partially understood, but there's a lot more to reduced thrust than just fuel savings and maintenance. 1. Immediate, real time, risk of engine failure is reduced. This effect is probably close to negligible, but engines are relatively more likely to fail near their maximum power output. 2. Reduced power takeoffs improve controllability in you initial climb phases. Full power in a near empty aircraft will likely leave you blowing through V2+20 and in a rocket like climb (particularly in a 777). 3. (Fixed derates) May make your Vspeeds more favorable. By fixing the derate, the yaw moments in the event of an engine failure are reduced. This improves your controllability again and can raise V1, giving you a better chance of addressing serious issues on the ground. And while not strictly from derated thrust itself, calculators help you: 4. Understand if your takeoff is legal based on your TOW, runway length, and environmental conditions. Try taking off from a high altitude airport (Like Aspen, CO (KASE)) in a heavily loaded turboprop on a hot day. The aircraft may very well be physically unable to get airborne. 5. Understand if you are field or performance limited, which has important considerations for obstacle clearance and your initial climb.

I hadn't known about those. They look reasonable, but not awesome. At least in regards to the 777, it has all the models, but does not allow for fixed derates (TO1/TO2), only assumed outside temps. It's a good start, but it would still be nice to have the fixed derates too for their effect on Vspeeds and the fact that assumed OAT can't be used in degraded braking/surface conditions.

I'm wondering where people are getting their takeoff performance data from, particularly in terms of derates. I have forever and ever used TOPCAT, but as a result am limited on being able to get data sets for all aircraft. It has the right airframe/engine combo for the 737-800WL and 777-200, but I'm missing the right combinations for the rest of the NGX fleet and have been holding out on getting the 777-300 since I don't know where to get takeoff performance data. I know that the real data is pretty locked down, but I was wondering if there are new apps or something out there that I'm missing that could fill in the blanks for me. I'm not set on it being 100% accurate to the 0.1 N1 place, but want something in the ballpark that I can follow a realistic process for (i.e. actually looking at takeoff performance).

I wonder if the OP is not differentiating checklists and flows. Checklists as alluded tend to be quite short and concise...and while I've seen variations, tend to be very close to the Boeing SOP ones. Flows however to set up the appropriate panels seem to be the most varied. In particular, what is divided between PF and PNF can be quite different. Look for user made checklists for the FS2Crew NGX Reboot. The 3 different SOP's are based on real world flows and checklists (SWA, Virgin, RyanAir). A good way to see where the major differences lay. And if you have the NGX, consider buying the FS2Crew program. It makes a much more immersive world.

I know, hence the comment on I'll be waiting for those updates before being completely transitioned.

I've been looking at the Milviz F-4J/S a bit recently, but am wondering on what the feedback on this one is like. The reviews I've seen are generally favorable, but look more at the early release of the F-4E. I assume the F-4J/S is very similar, but at that these were reviews of earlier releases of the F-4E I think. In particular my interests are 1) systems depth and 2) flight model (particularly low speed behind the boat). The only 2 military aircraft I have kept around much have been the VRS F/A-18E and Aerosoft F-14X to give an idea of the depth and realism I am hoping looking at here. I am moving to P3D v3.1, but have not had any other version of P3D, so I will be waiting for the TacPack update and F-14X update for a while before being fully moved over. However, if anyone has news on future TacPack plans for the F-4J/S.

The title implies this will be for Windows 10 only. Anyone know if this is going to actually be true? I'm not a fan of Microsoft trying to push Windows 10 on everyone, even though I get their interest in supporting only one platform.