bdincer

to be clear fsx crashes middle of the flight for me. Usually seems to happen during click even to pullup the cdu. FSX stop responding and fatal error restart. I am trying the third flight right now.

tried twice crashed twice

Thanks

there is a flight plan directory for 747. There is none for 737, so how can i load the the flight plan without entering everything manually in FMC. With 747 it is quite simple, just copy your compatible flight plan in to directory and call it in FMC with "Co Route". Any ideas Bora

maybe we should all have a wager. I don't think it will be ready today Bora

Can someone post some screen shots for the cockpits?

>I really don't get it. I really don't.>>The price is what it is... either you choose to purchase, or>you don't. The price is determined by many things, what does>the customer think is a 'fair' price isn't part of the>equation. It simply can't be.>>Developers aren't getting rich. Far from it.>>If you don't like the price of something, fine. I don't like>$4 for a gallon of gas. However, that doesn't really affect>the price. Nor does complaining about it.Well normally I would agree but these third party developers on these forums trying to create buzz about their product which is perfectly fine. I am sure they are taking into consideration the comments they see about their products. Negative, positive complains, price what ever it is. If they are not taking the comments into consideration then they won't be in business for a long. This is not any different then any other product. The price will be high initially to maximize the profit. Then will go down eventfully when more competition appears or not enough sales. Delicate balance.

>>@Alex, at max landing weight, landing distance is 3400ft so>>all 4500ft airfields are good. >>>>According to the Aircraft Operations Manual's Simplified>Critera for full flap landing:>>1) Anti-ice systems off.>2) Landing flaps full, approach flaps 15*>3) No tailwind.>4) No downhill runway gradient.>5) Dry runway.>6) Runway length - 4500 feet or longer.>7) Altitude 2000 feet or below.>8) 45* C or colder.>>At landing flaps 15*, maximum landing weight is 31,800lbs>which lists landing distance as 3470. That's at temperature>of 0* C. For every increase of temperature by 5* C, the>length increases by ~70ft.>>So... Cessna is most definitely recommending 4500ft or longer,>not shorter.I wonder if you use spoilers with extend full flaps during landing for short runways? I have flown with Cessna 172 a lot in real life obviously no spoilers there. In FSX it seems like it is hard to slow these planes down even with reverse and spoiler, I always have to apply breaks a lot.

>>Commercial developers have long held prices to the bone in>>order to accomodate low end users but the fact of the matter>>is that low end users do not make up the majority of flight>>sim enthusiast.>>>>If it were not for medium to high end users commercial>>developers would have to fold their tents. In essence the>>medium and high end users are carrying the dead weight of>>those who are too tight to pay a fair price for quality and>>complexity.>>>>Again, there is no healthy industry that relies on low end>>users only. As this cottage industry grows and becomes more>>healthy we expect to hear much less from those moaning about>>their personal finacial situations.>>>>An example: I started snow skiing and golfing on a "budget".>>As my skill level and enjoyment factor increased it was a>>natural transition to upgrade equipment and attend better>>resorts. After all it was my hobby:-)>>At no time did I ever expect to see the equipment>>manufactures/vendors or resort owners cut their prices to>suit>>my "budget">>>>The same is true when it comes to real world aviation.>Others>>here who own or rent real aircraft are taken aback at the>>"poor me" attitude displayed by many flight sim enthusiasts.>>I can say that my own path to the PPL and my monthly flying>>club membership/fuel costs have not been a picnic. >>At no time did I ever expect to see the flight club/line>guy,>>or CF1 cut their prices to suit my "budget":-)>> >>A list of all my low end addons as you have so eliquently put>it:>>Flight1 PC-12>Flight1 Cessna172>Flight1/coolsky Super 80>LDS 767>FSD Piper Saratoga>Wilco Citation X>Wilco A400M>A columbia 400 made by some company>Aussim Glassair III>GEX>ASX>FEX>UTX>Cloud9 US landclass>Scenery tech US landclass>FS genesis Mesh>Megascenery Hawaii>Megascenery SoCal>Megascenery Las Vegas>Saitek Yoke & Rudder Pedals>>>"Moaning about their personal financial situations">Again you insult me and my budget, and presume to know what my>budget is. The fact is you dont! You have quite the nack for>taking other peoples words and distorting them to suit your>needs. You also have a nack for spewing out alot over>cyberspace,and resorting to these elequent insults when one>doesnt agree with your views! (much practice I presume) The>truth is I could buy the PMDG747 anytime I want to or any>other addon in that price range. I just simply refuse to, and>to pay such a price for a single add-on is simply rediculous,>in my view, no matter what your budget!>>My copy of FSX: $50. I feel guilty, and would have gladly paid>more considering the price of some addons. Perhaps Microsoft>should start charging 3pd's for making addons for their>product? Then we will see who's moaning about their financial>situations!>>Chris>>I just fell the same way. Anything close to $50 is just ridicules

>People cry for more realism.> >It has gotten to a point now that they can have it, but it is>going to have to be paid for. I don't work for free, and most>anyone I know doesn't either. We don't have magic wands that>produce this stuff and if we are going to produce products>that do essentially the same as their counterparts and nobody>is willing to pay for it, we may as well be building real>units for a market that will.>>Like I said in the Mustang forum, if I marched in the local>Chrysler dealership and told them that I wanted a new car with>fine Corinthian leather seats (heated as well) a full blown>Bose sound system and all the options but only want to pay>base price... I can assure you they would show me the front>door to the building.>>You get what you pay for and in this case, you are going to>have too.>I guess you are expecting a discount form Flight1 with these comments. Good luck. The simulation might be complex, but they are not as complex as other games in the market that takes year of development and hundreds of resources. For single aircraft add on charging the same amount of money as the FSX itself it is just not fair pricing. It is just lack of competition. Then they cry about piracy. Well what do you expect? Of course then they say it is as expensive because they know it is going to be pirated sooner or later. So get as much as you can up front mentality.

Anyone knows how much is going to be? These add ons are great but they are a bit too expensive. :(

I don't like the long flights either. Especially I can not stand the ATC when it keeps giving the control back and forward in the same center. I am not sure if that is realistic at all. I did find a work around. Basically when you reach for crusing altitude, and the control center hand you over, just acknowlage but never call the next center. I just wait until 120-130 miles out final destination before I checkin. Again. ATC will just act like nothing happened and give you the decsent directions. Then you get aound 70 miles the ILS approach assignment. Also for those of you looking for more info about the airplanes just check out http://www.smartcockpit.com/ seem to be a good source

>The newer glass cockpit systems are really revolutionary, and>so far FSX has only exposed the tip of the iceberg on that>topic. The downside is that these new sophisticated>instruments tend to drag down frame rates. >>I'm with you, though, bigger is not always better when it>comes to commercial aviation simulation.>>Jeff Shyluk>Assistant Managing Editor>Senior Staff Reviewer>AVSIMYou take two aircraft with complex simulations I think Smaller Jets seems to have better Frame Rates. I am not sure if it is because of the size of the Cockpit being rendered is smaller or what. At least that how I always felt. They seem to run smoother. Also these new avionics is much cleaner and removes a lot clutter of the cockpit that should also help.

I personally enjoy the Bizjets versus big airliners. I am glad to see the news for the Cessna Mustang. We need more these types of aircraft with new generation avionics to be developed by the third party Vendors.

I am glad to see the new Biz Jets being developed by the third party vedors. Especially with these new generation cockpits.