• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

43 Neutral

About flyforever

  • Rank

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Contact Methods

  • AIM

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,622 profile views
  1. it was a quick hot fix. Don't know if it was considered a "real update".
  2. I had mentioned some months ago in some forum that FSW starts out with ORBX Global textures, better GA flight modeling, and True Sky, all for the low entry price of $25.00. And, according to DTG, they are not finished yet. I am highly confident that as soon as the SDK is out, planes -large and small--will come out of the shoot. The moving target syndrome is a terrible thing for many(younger) folks who have not lived through the long and slow history of flight simulation development.
  3. .....why would a seasoned flight simmer choose FSW over existing offerings if it does nothing to significantly differentiate itself much less advance the state of flight simulation? FSW may be the only "complete" and the lowest cost sim for first time buyers. P3D is great for experienced and deep pocketed simmers. So it leaves us with the old FSX-SE, xplane, and AF2.
  4. What people forget is that software is all about the future and not the past. To this end, most users will quickly forget about the past if a new piece of software is truly worth buying. For example, Just Flight had a reputation of putting out poor, unfinished products, just as some other TPDs( and we know who they are) do. It was not one day that someone didn't swear that they would stop buying anymore Just Flight products. Then one fine day, Just Flight introduced a new plane( the arrow) that is getting great reviews---unanimously. Guess what? People are buying their product, and forgetting all about its past "poor" reputation. That's the nature of software. If Just Flight continues in this new path, users will forget its past sins and buy again. Unlike an old simmer who has already invested in his or her sim thousands of dollars and starts getting picky on some small detail, a new simmer will look at the three or four sims currently on the market and decide which one to buy based on entry cost, ease of entry into the hobby and perceived present and future value. Moreover, he or she will look at available third party options and determine if they fulfill their fantasies, yes, fantasies. I never had any problem spending money if I thought that that expenditure would gratify my sim needs. I love classic airliners, and so I buy them all-- the good ones and the bad ones. And yes, many times I've gone against my inner rational self. Lastly, Stephen Hood has spoken about FSW breaking new ground, being truly disruptive. I am willing to wait until he either quits, gets fired, or truly succeeds in giving us a revolutionary product. He's not a stupid developer. He knows what's against him., but I like his approach. It's new and innovative. I am on his camp. My opinion is that in these times of immediate gratification and "internet" arrogance( people say whatever they feel like), putting out an "early access" is risky business. Putting out an early access flight sim is sheer madness. DTG may yet turn out to be the little engine that could. The story has yet to be fully written..... Let the races begin.....
  5. The first thing to do is to open the yoke and determine how the switch loosened up. If the switch still works, the fix might be an easy one. But only a visual inspection will determine the best solution. Opening the yoke is not difficult.
  6. "throttle dec" works great for each switch. Without a switch, you need to have lever position as idle before the mechanical stop of the lever, and then the movement past idle can be used to activate reverse throttle with fsuipc.
  7. Am I the only one who thinks that aircraft nose up reaction to lowering flaps is excessive? I know that one can change the numbers with plane maker, but, as someone who just getting the feel for xplane, I'd like to know if anyone has already made the changes so that I can simply edit the aircraft file. The md80 is the one that interests me. Thanks tony
  8. It's important to introduce variables to aviation. A good sim will have real weather, some probability of failure, a challenging environment, and a purpose. That purpose could be to fly from A to B efficiently, on time, and safely. Or delivering cargo to some exotic destination. Flying with live ATC is extraordinary and challenging. More importantly, aviation is about the dream of flying, so it's letting one's mind and fantasies take him or her into a world full of possibilities. For me simming is like reading a good book. Some pages are great, and some are good, but one must read all the pages in order to enjoy it.
  9. You didn't mention calibration in windows. That's the first step, always.
  10. If one thinks about it, it's best for DTG to concentrate on the best possible core while leaving all the other stuff to third party developers. In the long run, it guarantees more success and innovation. FSX is a good example of a sim that, despite its flaws, became an excellent sim thanks to third parties pushing the envelope. One example is the following: which gps do people prefer? The flight1 or the default one. The flight1 gps has made the gps functionality a pleasure. I am a bit annoyed at all the sling shot throwers out there.
  11. choosing the right pot resistance is a matter of "noise". Too high resistance( 100k)= high noise( spiky behavior in the sim) ; low resistance= low noise, high current draw. A good compromise is 10k.
  12. That chip is indeed a few dollars. But you need a pcb board, some electronics, and a magnet to build the complete assembly. The chip alone wont do it. They sell already made assemblies, I believe, for appx 10. One then needs to play with the magnet location and distance. It's still a diy and requires patience. If you're building your own quadrant, you can design the pots arrangement so that they are easy to replace when they fail. This, at least for now, keeps things simple and cheap.
  13. we agree to agree.
  14. Wd 40 and carbon don't do well. Electronic contact cleaner is the right chemical. The fact is that building a multilever quadrant that is functional is a bit more difficult than simply putting a few parts together. In theory, it can be done. In practice, after all the money and time has been spent, the Saitek looks like a bargain. As i said earlier, building one would be more a question of the fun and pleasure that one derives from building one according to his or her fantasies than the money saved. I am all for it, but not because one thinks money will be saved. When I built mine, I went through several prototypes before it felt and worked right.
  15. That's good to know.