Jump to content

Pict

Members
  • Content Count

    128
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Neutral

About Pict

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 02/29/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    manitoba

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

About Me

  • About Me
    AOPA Member #06758619, FAA/ECCAA/TC PPL/CPL-ME/IR

Recent Profile Visitors

1,550 profile views
  1. Pict

    Close call?

    There are a few actually (example of one below).... All runways have glideslopes....just that most don't have glideslope guidance (e.g. ILS/MLS).
  2. Be reasonable - 24 Hours haven't even passed yet.....and it's a weekend. At least give a technician one to two business days to respond to a support request (and more time to investigate and come up with a solution). [Edit 201611051718] While you wait you can also search the forum for similar posts and read the stickied posts as well to see if they have anything relevant.
  3. Visit (and register at) their support forum for help: http://qwsim.flight1.net/forums/
  4. Sounds like your scenery.cfg (or terrain related files in the FSX directory) may have been corrupted at some point during the process. I only have the boxed version so not sure if the steam version changed it - but you can try checking your /ProgramData/Microsoft/FSX folder to see if any backups of your scenery.cfg were made by the Orbx installer. *X referring to the primary drive letter your resides in.
  5. Eaglesoft's SR22GTX Gen-5's a personal favourite for me - flies pretty much perfectly on the numbers from my experience, and not taxing on my system at all.
  6. Noticed the same thing as well - particularly the erratic FD commands - better than earlier versions so at least some fine-tuning took place. I'll withhold any judgement until the software is actually complete....as there can (and most likely will be) be major overhauls even at a "v0.85.x" - especially in the area of systems. Unfortunately many of you here (and elsewhere) seem to not understand what beta software actually is though ... VC is far from complete, systems are still being implemented, FBW still being tuned ... and by a two-three person team (how many of you complaining have any programming knowledge? Maybe you should offer your services to them and pitch in rather than poke fun at them constantly). The mere fact that they're taking on developing an Airbus FBW type (notorious for their difficulty in programming/coding for any accurate simulation) is a feat in its own right - and there *will* be major coding/visual/FDM overhauls for sure even before any RC's are released. FSLabs only covers the narrow-bodies for now - aside from Aerosoft's upcoming offering, this is pretty much the only other Airbus wide-body with any (planned) in-depth systems simulation - and the only recent one doing a mid/study level A340 (well there is the Wilco Editions....can't really say anything on it as I don't have a copy of it). [edited for grammar] -sorry for my marconic english
  7. When you (and others here who are constantly complaining) decided to buy what is *beta software* you should have known all that would be encompassing....meaning unfinished systems, bugs, incorrect performance parameters, handling issues, installation issues, texture issues, memory leaks, sound issues, etc etc. Nobody held a gun to your head(s) to buy it. They never once said it was a finished product when they began selling it - so not sure why persons here are acting as though they did. Moral of the story: if you want a finished (or as close to finished as you can possibly get) software - save your pennies and wait until the final release - don't buy beta versions and complain afterwards.
  8. All have some degree of licensing from the respective manufacturers - you can't be making money off their products (or any likeness thereof) without it.
  9. Basically anything from Rick Piper/ Fraser Mckay over at cbfsim.org (Fokker F27s/L-188/Viscount/Britannia/CL-44/Hs.748/Dove/Heron) Also Tom Gibson & Co's aircraft over at calclassic.com as well. In the Library you can find a nice Piaggio PD.808 (vintage military/business jet), and the author of the Simcheck a300 has an a300f4-200 (complete panel/DHL aircraft) there as well. --Xavier
  10. To date the best Aztecs are available for X-Plane 9/10 (fdm/systemswise/visual model-wise and external model). None have 2d cockpits though (I find x-plane's vc system easier to navigate at any rate)
  11. Unfortunately I had a staunch British instructor who insisted I refer to it as "Roof Panel" lol hence my habit lol....one wrong word and I got whacked on my head (like he referred to throttle detents/gates as "balks"). Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same designer at all...maybe he/she retired to Vero Beach after the war. There's a nice early aztec as well (straight tail-blunt nose-square bar yoke) over on either flightsim or simviation too (I forgot where I downloaded it first).
  12. There are a few freeware Aztecs for FS2004 (That can be ported over to FSX) that I currently know of (over at simviation). In the payware arena there are a couple for X-plane 9/10 that I can vouch for regarding accuracy of handling - not the best VC-wise (read: no 3D instruments and only a few knobs pop out - not a deal breaker for me though), but external model and FDM are spot on. @ttocs true..side by side the C310 looked like an Albatross while the Aztec looked like an overweight chicken...but I found the Aztec to feel more "solid" in handling somewhat - especially when flying in IMC down to minimums in turbulence...just the trim wheels was something I was never able to get over.....I mean on the ROOF?! Seriously Piper? the roof? I'd love to see one of the more prominent devs make an Aztec for FS2004 and/or X (I use both so it doesn't matter to me which one) - Just that my personal wish would be one with the regular air driven gauges - no garmin glass...maybe a simple kln90 gps at most..I feel that anything more will kill the spirit of it.
  13. The one I flew had a long sharper nose...but for sone odd reason Piper chose to mount the trim wheels on the roof/overhead panel (incredibly awkward!)....plus it had a REAL critical engine (ie all the utilities on the left engine only). She had charm though.
  14. For me it tends to happen if I either run fsx then switch to fs9, or if i haven't connected to the internet while running fs9 for a while. That's the pattern I'm observing. I'm (like Ian) thinking it's probably an addon that triggers it, or even fsx itself too (possible registry interference). It's more a nuiscance than anything else really, as after a couple tries it starts and runs with no problems. --Xavier
  15. I've had the same issue as well - fs9.exe showing 0% in task manager but rundll32 showing about 40% processor load - it rectifies after I kill both and try again. Sometimes it takes 2-3 tries on my system (I'm using Windows 7). -Xavier
×
×
  • Create New...