Johnny767

We gladly accept opinions but not from mentally incapacitated individuals. Seek a psychiatrist :Cuppa:

And another reply from the same MaF that no one asked for his kk opinion. :Cuppa:

Well, well, well...Like some of you, I'm here wondering when will this be released and when will that be released. :p0307: Do you guys think PMDG has a nice surprise for us and release the "big dude" this Columbus day? Sorry, I meant this Memorial Day? Maybe not... As far as I know, I believe memorial day is a day to remember (not celebrate), those who died at war, isn't it? In-any-case, looking forward to at least some good discounts over this weekend, should we not have any good product released. Cheers

However, I wonder how close are we for the Tipple Seven to be released... months, 1 year, or 2 years? Who knows. Same with FSL, it could very well be a loooong time before release.

Nice set-up you got there. Well, at one point of our lives many of us wanted to be a pilot in real life, of course. A few manage to achieve their dream; others did not. And, I want to imagine that 85-90% of those of us today who fly the virtual skies are non -real pilots. However, we find a high level of gratification flying on our computer... Yes. it is so much fun! I believe at this point most of us have invested a large amount of money, learning, tweaking, and researching in this hobby; thus we should enjoy ourselves to the max. Happy flying

:t0152: Behave, Now. Behave ! :LMAO:

Hi Tom, no I am not. Is it much better that FSX? Does it uses all CPU cores? Or, would one not see much difference?

Enthusiast and Developers: Is it really that difficult to develop a new flight simulator? With so many bright developers out there I wonder why no one (or a team of several developers), come together and develop a new FS? Instead, they keep feeding an old, and broken flight simulator. Can you imagine the amount of money the new developer would make? I once read Aerosoft was going to develop a new simulator- not sure what happened.

Yes there is a large amount of products being developed for FSX. Why? Well, becuase that's all we have left. We could go with FS9 but that would be downgrading in quality. So, we;re stuck with FSX. However, if someone would create a much better FLight Simulation product than FSX, I am thinking most of us would run there too, especially for the need to take advantage of all cores within the CPU.

:t4011:

I wish we had the quality of FlyTampa globally; but, it would perhaps be impossible. I've been to FTX site to check the screen-shots of their "global" project, but honestly did not impress me a bit. In way, I'm looking forward to to PMDG 777-300, 747 V.2, Aerosoft A-330 and A-340 , and BBS- A-330 and A-340...And of course FSL Airbus versions.

Wow, this a/c looks really, really good. I just need it to fun fly around mountains and lakes; so I'm not really concern about the speed that much. In fact, I make those power-speed corrections myself on the a/c cfg I chose. But, it really looks nice. I will be getting this a/c. The first GA I will purchase in my sim life. I hope it goes well.

Yes I agree. It is important to fly with realism. That's why I fly A-320, A-330, and 767, MD-11, and so on. Oh My Gut! I didn't realize I mentioned your name in my post! Oh My Gut ! When I mentioned 'we' I was referring to my Anaconda and myself, not you! So, please learn to read and then come back, ok deer? Thank you, deer! :lol:

Correctable :smile:

Well, I can understand PMDG on this. It makes sense for them not to provide a release date on these products. These are high fidelity simulations and having a few people working on it (and very likely part time), is no easy task. Unlike Aerosoft, who has an entire simulation company that is perhaps bigger, PMDG has is more into "more in-dept systems" as well, and will take some good amount of time to complete. I believe that given the above reasons, the only time PMDG would be able to realistically give a date or a "closer date" is when it's almost complete.

Why do you need a smaller version when you can do (or get the bibber version). We want a large a/c (heavy) not a small one.

:lol:

Very well, thank you!

Generally speaking, the more detail the more workload, and will hit fps, isn't it? I wish entire FSX was at Fly Tampa's detail and very little fps hit. But, then that would be unimaginable task to accomplish.

I'm not trying to be funny or anything in between. I'm just trying to understand if that's what you want. (Currently you cannot see ice forming on the wings of the A-320, but you would like {or wished), that Aerosoft had simulated that).

Hey no worries; I found my answer. You want to be able to see ice on the wings from your cockpit (so I wasn't too off when I was joking). You are serious...wanna see ice on the wings so you can turn on anti-ice. :LMAO: Wow, that is expensive. But, I believe they have opened a can or worms. Next someone is going to be asking for Airbus Tyres (or tires). :lol:

I know- you're being funny, as well. But, let me get back on topic, seriously. What exactly is the discontent with the VC and the wings? If we are on VC, are we supposed (or would like) to pan to the left, and be able to see the wing, or the wing tip? I have probably missed the entire discussion but now I'm wondering what the VC and wing view issue all about.

Andre, so if I understand correctly the higher the number on: "Texture_bandwidth_multiplier=80 to 40", the more the GPU will take the load?

Ahhh, ok, the Q-400 comes with ice and the AXE is hot cause it does not have ice. Hummm, maybe Airbus should consider having a warning system on the display that will alert the pilot that there is ice on the wings. Daarn Airbus, their a/c are not advanced as I thought. Now, all pilots need to constantly be watching through the window to see if there's ice on the tyres (sorry, wings)

Ahhh, ok...Sorry I have an over-reactor mind and couldn't figure it out. :Devil: