mikegrr

In the video by Fielder, I actually like the AS sky better. It looks more like what the weather indicates, the cumulus look is wrong as shown in native MSFS weather. Whether the effects are generated correctly, it's hard to tell.

Spitfire for sure, but the best looking GA plane is the V35.

Ok, I tried it today...what a blast! I fired up the free Milviz F-86 Sabre and flew around Yosemite at high speed. It's  cool to see the other planes react to your every move and you can set how fast they react and where they are in relation to your plane. The interface is a little confusing and it's hard to know what each parameter's effect is, but it was fun to play around. I flew inside and outside the cockpit and enjoyed them both, Tried numerous barrel rolls and the planes did it but they got a little confused. I also landed and the planes convert from a diamond formation to an inline one. Same as when you take off. They even led me to the terminal.

Fun and different from the realism and procedures of something like the Comanche.

On 4/1/2024 at 4:41 PM, Tuskin38 said:

Where are the dinosaurs located beside the one race area? It says where they normally would be...where is that exactly?

 

Of course, In the dialogue box...I never looked at it as the program automatically connected.

Thanks so much for your help, and the program is a marvelous piece of software.

I don't see any traffic on the map and the options in the view menu to enable traffic are grayed out. I tried flying over KLAX, a busy airport with lots of live traffic. I see the traffic on the G1000, but not in LNM. I just downloaded and am using the the newest version. The map shows my current location and my plane icon, and I disconnected and reconnected to MSFS.

I looked at the options but didn't notice anything.

How do I turn on traffic on the map and enable the view options?

I'm using online traffic and flying over KLAX. I see plenty of traffic and it shows on the VFR map and the G1000.

For some reason the option to show traffic is grayed out in LNM. I looked through the options and didn't notice anything obvious to turn it on. I disconnected and reconnected to MSFS and it does show my plane and location. Also,  I tried Dev mode and tried simconnect to enable LNM, still no traffic or the option available.

What am I doing wrong?  I'm using the latest version of LNM. Is there a way to fix this?

The second video changes the four settings, but the first one only ultra. I guess in VR these changes may be more important. I'll have to try VR Zome day...hehe

Ahh, but the video changes the settings on 4 different quality settings, not just ultra and you're supposed to choose the one you can work with.. ok, on my 34 inch monitor I have guess I'm not that discerning. You're right, it's individual perceptions. Using FG, I choose the highest quality anyway.

Directx 12 with FG using a 3080. I'm old school...been simming for over 40 years, so my expectations are different than those newer to MSF. I'm willing to put up with occasional glitches for higher frame rate and sharper display. It's amusing to read all the minor complaints like unrealistic bolts on the wings or LOD not perfect on the horizon miles away, or live weather not precisely correct,  etc. When my wife comes in my office and asks me to do something...that kills immersion a lot more than any rare stuttering.

I having trouble understanding this video. It's changing a few settings by a tenth or a hundredth? And this is supposed to be a noticeable difference in smoothness or sharpness of the sim when there are so many other variables?   I can't believe anyone is that discerning and you can choose any of the choices which fit in the middle of the settings.
what am I missing?

IRl, the obvious choice is the SR22, really a great plane for a personal use. But it's so automated, not as much fun to fly in MSFS. That's why a lot of folks chose planes with more traditional instruments, more of a challenge and easier to read the gauges.

I have to put in a word in for Half Moon Bay, Khaf. Just a short trip over the hills to San Francisco. Several nice payware versions out there. IRL, it's always windy there and makes approaches and landings difficult.

And the various Bonanza 36's for small GA planes.

Bonanza V35 and the airport is Vilshofen, EDMV. It's a beautiful spot along the Danube with a scenic town, church steeple,  and a castle on the hill and an interesting approach along the river.. Available at https://flightsim.to/file/19937/edmv-vilshofen-airport-germany. Here's a video of a circuit around the real area in a DA62. The Comanche is great and a more complete plane,  but the V35 is sexier.

Can someone remind me if the the .90 version works better than the earlier versions? I am using an earlier version.

This only applies to the profiles for the keyboard and Joystick profiles, not other settings like LOD, etc.

I believe so.

When I downloaded the Dune update, all the control settings were set for the Ornithopter profile, I had to go back and restore the original ones in the profiles I had made for myself. This included the keyboard and joystick settings.

With the mrtommymxr mod (https://flightsim.to/file/2733/da62x-project), at flightsim.to, the DA62  seems very similar. They both use the G1000nxi, have similar cockpit, Fadec, a similar interior, and similar exterior profile. The flight model and the systems for the DA62 have been improved by the mod including ECU test funtionality. So the differences mainly boil down to working circuit breakers and doors that open, and I guess wear and tear. It appears that the DA42 may have better visibility, one of the downsides of the DA62 IMO. I've never been in either so I can't begin to judge the flight model. IRL, the 62 has more useful load and a roomier interior...and costs more.

I'm sorry...venting and heating?...what are they talking about? and why do I care?

Somehow I don't  see them as much as I used to anyway. I think some airport mods remove them. I agree it would be nice to place them just as you pick a spot when you first create a flight plan.

Ok, I guess 1000 feet is enough. I don't  think RNAV 31 is used very often but I did look it up. Most common RNW at KFMY is 05 anyway. sort of parallel to 06 RSW.

I happen to visit right under the flight path to RNW 06, and planes land in many different configurations and different speeds. 1000 feet doesn't seem like much. Especially with the jetwash coming off the planes. And they sometimes land every 5 minutes or so.

Thanks for the precise info Ryan,  I'll try it tomorrow night. I have to learn how to set this up in the approach part page of the  G1000.

I'm looking at the RNAV chart for Page Field, KFMY, Runway 31, and as I read it, the FAF is almost on top of KRSW, a large local airport in Fort Myers Florida. And not only that, but it appears right in line perpendicular to  RSW runway 06 at 1500 Feet. I will look up the airspace for KRSW, but it sure seems like this is right on the approach for commuter jets landing on runway 06, which is a very common approach. There is only one runway at KRSW.

The chart is here: https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2313/00154R31.PDF

So before I work on setting up the approach to runway 31 on the SR22 NXi , I'm wondering if I'm reading the chart correctly. MSFS atc vectored me to use this approach.

Thanks guys, I guess the Learjet has a nostalgia aspect too. Sounds like both good choices.