Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

351 Excellent

About mspencer

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It was a bit of an odd comment by Robert, so I think this possibly has some merit. I don’t think we’re getting a surprise Christmas release, but if the next release is a MAX it certainly wouldn’t be outlandish.
  2. Yeah it sounds like the piece I was missing. No unprotected DLLs to replace so was missing the tool to do it for me. I’m on a trip now but home tomorrow nights, will give it a spin.
  3. Addons have been using lookups to figure out transition altitude and level for a long time too (FSL I think??), HPa vs mmHg is a lot less complicated than that
  4. I used to see Simbrief totally disregard altitudes specified in the FAA DB, but that appears to have been fixed. I'd say I've never seen Simbrief seem to do this via altitude, but maybe it does. It does have the data - it's in most OFPs for the +1k/-1k spread for wind and ISA - it seems to populate the most frequent FlightAware route without considering time of day. On shorter sectors, I think it has an optimistic view of how high you can get. I've seen Simbrief give altitudes 5-10k higher than the LOA/FAA pref route altitude.
  5. PMDG called it a "tablet feature" but even that isn't entirely correct, when I first updated I spent a few minutes indignantly looking for it in the tablet only to find it was in the FMC's route loading menu as a new option.
  6. I read every single comment, nobody found it. Somebody said it's in AppData\Roaming, it isn't.
  7. So, long story short, been trying this out for a few days. I have my settings configured as per the Fenix KB article here:https://kb.fenixsim.com/honeycomb-bravo-setup Now, that works perfectly with the FBW and Fenix throttles, but with the PMDG B737, I can't get it to "hold reverse thrust" and allow me to use the throttle levers to control reverse thrust as per the setup. So far I've just tried the 737, all the mappings are the same and while it is a different set of handles, it still presses buttons 10/11 when I pull the reverser handles, but moving the throttles forward seems to take it back out of reverse and applies normal power. Any thoughts? I'm using a mix of MSFS settings and some things set in SPAD, in this case all the throttles/axes are mapped inside MSFS, not SPAD (including those buttons), I use SPAD for the autopilot panel and buttons. Also if someone has a verified set of SPAD commands that allows the gear lever to come back to off... that would be welcome too lol. We spent 45 minutes yesterday trying to get that programmed in as well haha
  8. Seemingly impossible if the sim exe is in Program Files\WindowsApps directory. It's a protected file for me, last time I tried to change this by reinstalling it did nothing but brick my sim for a week until I could sort it out.
  9. I was the other way around coming from the FSLabs. "Come on, why won't FINAL APP activate"
  10. As mentioned by someone who seems knowledgeable in GPL, the fact that the ini A320 is being released alongside MSFS using GPL code necessitates the entire program being open source under GPL, but I’m not sure how true that is. It would be a huge, huge issue that ini got MS into if it’s true.
  11. Was saying this in the initial thread when this was first released. They have no history or track record of delivering a complex airliner, and something with so much automation is an incredibly difficult thing to do right. The company that brought you the SeaRey with default avionics and a few subpar sceneries is not likely to be able to produce a complex airliner. As the E190 and E175 rank among my favorite airplanes, and I fly on the E175 almost weekly, I'm not really in the mood for "I told you so," I just wish another company would pick it up and do it justice some time down the line. I'm not really interested in Airbus LNAV/VNAV code jammed into an Embraer especially when that code is being written by Aerosoft with their history of "great" Airbus products. Ugh.
  12. Yeah this was from their Discord - they did not disclose the aircraft but shared a testing image where the flightplan was EGLL-VHHH, leading me to, completely unfoundedly, believe it may be the TFDi MD-11. No evidence at all for that though.
  13. They're not actually developing their own LNAV/VNAV, they shared some time ago on their Discord that it was being developed by "another developer for another airplane" that they didn't disclose, and that "theoretically" all of the logic had been programmed. I'm sorry, but I have no idea what that means. They basically said we've got it all written down and it might work, but also we have another dev from another company working on another project we're expecting to deliver this... I'm extremely, extremely skeptical about this.
  14. Based on their historic timelines, I don't think it's a stretch at all to expect this as early as this Friday. They really don't tease very much.
  • Create New...