Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Neutral

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

1,581 profile views
  1. Great to see REX is coming out with a season-related product; competition is always good for the customer 🙂 I got Bijan's seasons pack but to be honest, stopped using it. I mean the idea of changing colours depending on the seasons is great, however all this effort in the final is put down by two major drawback of the sim: The types of trees (broadleaf / coniferous) is very wrong at least in Europe in places that I know. The broadleaved types prevail in the sim, while IRL there are large areas of coniferous forests. Perhaps Asobo takes data from openstreetmaps but this source is very uncomplete (again, at least for Europe). There are other publicly available sources with much more precise data about the type of forests (both in polygon as well as raster formats). Why Asobo is not using them is a mystery for me. Applying autumn colours to all-broadleaved forests in the mountains may look nice but is weird at best. Winter is just not believable: roads are under a snow-cover (as well as runways, usually) and lakes are frozen (which they may get frozen usually only under quite specific conditions). So why to use a winter-themed colours / models if the winter as such is actually pretty badly depicted by the sim? I believe that MSFS will improve in the aspects cited above. Then, to have such an addon like Bijan's or REX's will be a great addition to our desktop flying 👍 However until that time I see little sense in applying an advanced tech to something with broken fundamentals.
  2. Can anyone comment how bad / visible the terrain morphing is when flying over the mountains? Thanks
  3. Google maps look better in pleces but definitely on a large scale they've got issues (e.g. inconsistency in colour balance - a show stopper actually). If MSFS decided to stream Bing maps in higher detail down to zoom level 18 / 19 (now limited to 16 while the mod streams zoom level 20 when flying low), it would be a different story. I see what that would mean on bandwith requirements but if they offered hi res Bing tiles as a payware extension (even as a subscription) , I would grab it in a split second. We are discussing here relation Google = better because the mod provides hi res tiles for Google. Bing has them often too. Only these hi res Bing tiles are not streamed to MSFS (again: the Bing tiles are limited to zoom level 16 even though in many places zoom level 19 is available).
  4. Just a remark about the quality difference between the default sim and Google maps provided by this mod: Keep in mind that the mod downloads Google map tiles down to zoom level 20. The default sim Bing tiles are limited to zoom level 16. So even though Bing has (in places) ortho coverage of similar quality as Google maps, the default sim will show the Bing tiles only at zoom level 16. Now, if the mod was able to stream Bing maps without the zoom level limitation... (or use some other mapping services for that matter...)
  5. Just a word of caution: The first two sites from the list are actually scam. Their business model is to rip content from flightsim.to (at least, not sure about other sites), re-uploading to their sites without a consent of the authors of the packages and removing copyright text and watermarks from the screens. I suppose they get some income from the adds in the process. (I had to take some measures in order to have my content originally published on flightsim.to removed from these two sites) If you can, please do not support them.
  6. Anyone got the ADF to work? While it works fine on the mini-glass cockpit, the round gauge does not work for me. Thanks!
  7. Looks nice... though I'd rather see the long-ago-announced DC-3 being released first.
  8. After having bought JustSims ELLX and having seen how lousy ground texturing work they did and never replied to my support request... yes you get it by now: no more purchases with them.
  9. Any idea in what time frame these missing MFD pages (nearest and waypoints at least) might get implemented? Impressive work, btw 👍
  10. OK, then we need to live with that. Maybe in the future the SDK allows such modifications too. Thanks for the feedback @mrueedi
  11. Just an update: It seems that even though the base sim contains the navaid in question labelled as CH VORDME on 112.30 MHz, it actually acts as a DME. While the avionics can show a distance to the station, it is not able to track a radial to/from. Pitty. Nevertheless, the STAR can be flown via a default CC NDB on 360 kHz. Interesting thing to note is that the MI Kai Tak scenery actually adds another CH navaid which on the MSFS map shows up as DME only however there is no frequency assigned to it and it also adds another CC NDB in slightly different location with the same frequency as the default one. Any comment on it would be appreciated, @mrueedi. Thanks!
  12. Hi all, I got recently this scenery and am pleasantly surprised 👍 I set up an early morning approach to R13 with low clouds, was marvelling about the scenery... and about the time I was capturing GS the sim CTDed 🙃 (most likely down to the knew G1000 nxi combined with the default D42). I got a question to you all: Did you manage to tune in and track the CH VOR 112.30 MHz which is a part of the STAR for R13? I am not sure whether the VOR is included in the scenery. LittleNavMap does not show it up (only CH DEM) so I suppose it is not in the base sim. Strangely enough, the D42 was able to identify it when tuned in manually but the G1000 received no signal from it (so not able to track a radial). I asked the developer by an e-mail but so far received no answer (it is holiday season, so I understand...). Thanks!
  • Create New...