djnattyd

That's a shame because the detail on it is amazing

That panel is simply outstanding. Is it a self made one or the original? (Also which 743 is this?)

You could always mess around with the belly scrape contact points and position the where the retracted wheels would be. I did something similar when I moved the scrape points of the 738 from the belly to the bottom of the nacelle housing.

Those of you wondering about photoscenery compatibility, if you dig through your autogen folder you can find the lights in there. You will have to manually place them using the annotator so it does take a bit of time. I managed to get it working on some custom PS I made with SBuilderX

...how much "ProFlightSimulator" looks like FSX? This>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZZVxz2w9ZQ is one of their Youtube videos featuring a CRJ700 that bears an uncanny (identical) resemblance to the CRJ700 in FSX. Their advert/app on the Chrome webstore is even better, especially when it links to their webpage and you see actual in-game shots. The sad/worrying thing is, people have been duped into paying for Flightgear by footage from FSX. How MS hasn't slapped a lawsuit across their faces I will never know...

Having just re-read my OP I have a feeling I might have come across as a little sensationalist, but i'm far from that. To be honest it's more a matter of being perplexed as to why there are so many (seemingly interchangeable) rules and regulations tossed at those of us that sit on the outside of the flightdeck in regards to what electrical items we can and can't use while at the same time those very same items are permitted in the cockpit, in close proximity to the very instruments they're supposed to affect. It wasn't so long ago that the aviation sites were in uproar about a Northwest plane that overshot it's landing because the pilots were on their laptops. Now we have iPads certified as EFBs and yet laptops/phones/handheld gaming devices STILL have to be turn off on T/O & landing.As I said, I'm not an expert/pilot & I'm not pretending to be one (save for virtually) but with videos like that one (which, strangely linked from an unrelated topic) it's hard to see the "YOU'RE CAUSING A RISK TO ALL THE LIVES ON BOARD!" reasoning that so often appears when topics such as in-flight WiFi pop up, and it's easy to see why the general public disregard said rules.Quick example of the "don't care" attitude of an increasing number of people; I flew to EGNX-LEMH not too long ago and there were at least 3 people texting as we were lining up, the guy I was sat next to didn't put his phone away once except when he saw an F/A approaching.

Would the airline request that he uses his mobile? I can tell you from personal experience that the quality of that specific model of handset isn't good enough to produce a Facebook profile picture, let alone training images. Also, why would this kind of action be OK for someone sat up front, but we as pax are told we have to "turn off ALL electronic devices"?

Don't get me wrong, I get that those kind of situations exist. I remember an old BBC series presented by Jeremy Clarkson that had him sat in the jumpseat of a VS 744 on finals at Heathrow and the PIC was sat picking at the stitching of his seat while the plane autolanded. But surely flying a visual approach should have a lot more attention focused on the task at hand? To me this is akin to having a driving lesson, on a motorway in rush hour traffic, and having your instructor talk on his mobile. Just because he's looking out of the window doesn't mean he's necessarily "in the loop"

Been an age since I last posted on here...Just came across this>> http://youtu.be/M3mZu8bqAHw during one of my random Youtube trawls. Now, I'm not going to pretend to be an expert in flying, but I have spent enough time reading sites such as Airliners.net and flying this same approach in FSX (I also possess decent common sense) to know that what the PNF is doing (38secs in) is, to put it bluntly, stupid. Surely flying an approach (ANY approach), especially one as challenging as LOWI requires ALL attention to be focused on the job at hand?Seriously, I'm not a stick-in-the-mud and I appreciate that photos from the flight deck are taken from a unique perspective BUT... how can the PNF blatantly disregard the rules like this? More to the point, how is the PIC not screaming his head off at him?

I know Microsoft & Google aren't the best of friends but, would it be too much to ask that they set up a MSFlight Youtube channel? Either that or develop a Silverlight plug-in for Android? Really don't want to head downstairs at 4:50am (GMT) :(Edit: I'll let you know my thoughts after some well needed kip. (not that there's much point, nearly daytime here in Blighty)

For me Flight has to get rid of the crazy wind shifts that occur with real world weather. (as in so crazy it turned my C172 upside-down 100ft from touchdown!) That and the issue of AI traffic driving through the UI aircraft. Nothing worse than having just greased a 6hr flight only to have a baggage truck decide that it finds your #2 engine particularly interesting and goes in for a closer look... (Especially when you're running FSPassengers, cost me an arm and a leg for that A333). Grrrrr! Oh yeah, and better ATC would be nice. No more "Speedbird one-eight cleared to land, caution the piper on the runway" when i'm 1 mile from the runway and the piper is on backtrack for takeoff... STUPID!!

I have the same set-up with the only exception being that I went the way of ATI rather than Nvidia due to my rig coming with an ATI card as standard (You'd be surprised how easily a warranty can be voided! Damn you Comet!!) Done a couple of tweaks (Thanks Bojote!) and I'm running REX, ASE, some of the Blueskyscenery photoscenery as well as some self-made photoscenery. FSX runs pretty well with the sliders maxed IF i'm in a quiet area such as the middle of Utah or Scotland, whereas places like NY/LA/London tend to kill the FPS dead so I understand why you don't max it out yourself. In fact, if I'm going to journey to any of those places, I'll knock it all down and lose the AI, Autogen and some airport buildings. No biggie for me if it means I can touchdown without a CTD or a slideshow happening. As you said in a later post, I'll upgrade/replace when my PC refuses to boot. :) Mate, why the hostility? You do know that not everybody uses FSX for the looks? Some people (myself included) use it to do something that they'll never get the chance to do in real life, i.e Fly an aircraft! If I feel the desire to look at some hyper-realistic trees well... I'll look out my window frankly. Sure the visuals can enhance the experience, but is having 50% AI instead of 100% really taking away anything? Let's not forget that unless you have a full-motion simulator in your front room, even with everything maxed, FSX is still lacking the feeling that real pilots get.What you have to remember is; as cheap as hardware has become, some people have families to support and simply cannot afford to go out and spend a couple hundred £s/$s/whatever of a brand new CPU/GPU. Others simply don't feel any need to as FSX is fine for them and so instead they sacrifice some eye-candy for playability. I know that I would rather have FSX set to the lowest settings than be torn a new one from the other half for spending £900 on a new graphics card just so LAX looks "nice" and has traffic.The thing that Flight needs is adaptability. It NEEDS to be able to run not just on todays tech but on yesterdays, definitely NOT only on tomorrows'. What M'soft need to consider is, not only are users of FSX going to be buying Flight but also users of FS9, some of which won't have the same level of hardware as the FSX users, mainly because they didn't need it. To limit Flight to just a handful of people would simply put, be suicidal. Especially if they're wanting Flight to appeal to people other than aviation enthusiasts.This is an era of simplicity where the console is King and no casual gamer, enthusiast or not, is going to want to spend more time editing files than flying/gaming.

Thanks, i thought i'd started seeing things :( As for the crash detection, i normally fly with it off as well, but FSPassengers turns it back on as default and i guess i just forgot. I guess so, i've just done the return leg and saw nothing. Admittedly it was daytime, but i've never seen them before, even on a long haul across the Atlantic. As for the northen lights, still waiting to view those :(

Hey, been a while since i last posted here, but i figured that this was the best place to pose two questions.So... Question number 1) Does FSX have meteorites simulated? I was in-flight over Denmark and happened to see two white "somethings" flash by the cockpit, this happened so quick that i wasn't able to hit the "print screen" button before they'd vanished. At first i thought it may have been an AI aircraft and i simply wasn't paying proper attention (combination of random TV program and a conversation) but ATC never warned me and a quick external check revealed nothing.And on two question 2)How big is the collision detection box around fuel pumps? Touched down in Skvasta, it was a sloppy landing but i've just started using the Xbox pad and haven't got used to the sensitivity yet after flying with the keyboard and mouse for over a year, but anyway... Pulled off the active, ATC gave me directions to a gate to the left of the pump, at least a full gate away. Pulled in nice and slow and then "BOOM", the dreaded reset... As you can imagine, i was rather miffed. Moreso when i read the FSPX report that i'd collided with an object at a speed of 2kts and killed 7 people, injured 11 others and written off my brand new A321 (strangely, the flight crew miraculously escaped unharmed :( ). So, do i have a odd error somewhere, or is this just an example of FSX randomness similar to having a fuel truck/baggage cart drive headlong into an engine?

I might be wong here but, does nHancer only work with Nvidia cards? If so, what would you suggest for an ATI user like myself?

Sorry everyone if i'm necroing this thread but 360 games aren't required to run without any kind of storage medium. Final Fantasy Online requires the owner to have a HDD on their Xbox as the game installs to the hard drive, Cryptics' Champions Online will also have this requirement.

Looked around and didn't find an answer to this so...I was on a flight from Jamaica to KMIA in the default 744, AP was set at ALT-FL260, HDG was locked to the GPS and SPD was set at 280KIAS.I recieved a call from Miami telling me to decend to 12'000 which i programmed into the AP, at which point the plane went crazy!The nose suddenly went vertical and stalled me and i've no idea why. This is the second time this has happened (first time on a flight from EGLL to KJFK) but it only seems to happen in the 744.Does anyone know why or have a solution to it?

Hey Bob, i had a look for an AI plane and the only one i could find was the ARNZ AI concorde but when i try to install it i get a "unable to open sytem regestry" error.Do you know of any others? I'm running FSX by the way

Hi all, i've created a couple of FPs' for a Concorde that i've made AI capable but when it comes into land the nose is still in cruise position and it's landing is too shallow (no trademark concorde nose high approach). How would i go about making it come in at a higher AOA and with a dropped nose? The flaps buttons controls the nose when i make it player flyable but according to the .air, there are no flaps. Would i have to edit the CFG or the .AIR... Or both?

Thanks a lot mate, i'm going to put a big sign on my screen... "BACK UP EVERYTHING!!!"

Hey guys, i'm new here... Couple of questions1) Could anyone post the .cfg file for the default 737 as i've managed to overwrite mine with an AI plane by accident?2) Is there anywhere i could get the exit codes for the World of AI plnes so that they use the jetways and baggage carts?I'd be very heppy if anyone could help me with these questions, especially the config file.CheersP.S. I forgot to say i'm running FSX Deluxe