JasonD210

May I ask what improvements have they made to it that makes it superior? Have you not had any compatibility issues?

That's how Flight looks now, and I agree, that's not much fun. But when its released it may well look different. You never know. For example, MS might drop the add-on / dlc restrictions that it is trying to impose on 3rd party developers. Also we don't know how flexible it is. It might be able to work very well with modules and other programmes similar to ASE, and that means custome built models are possible, like A2A's Accusim stuff or PMDG type quality. However, I share you're skepticism. It will be an interesting year in Flight Simulator Development, and by December I reckong we'll have a pretty good idea where things are going.

I'd need a Dart or Viscount manual to know, but I'm willing to bet that they are not simple pitch levers as shown in the Viscount, but more like in the Dash 7 ;-)

Thanks for that about the DME.I don't have the JF Viscount anymore (I returned it) but as I remember there were quite a few inaccuracies, such as interior at night looks like all the warning lights are on, and if I remember rightly there were modern radios on the roof? If so why not just add the DME anyway?I also remember that the engine start-up was not modelled well. The props just start spinning suddenly, like the captain sim Hercules series, and unlike aerosoft's "Otter" where some clever programming disguises the FSX limitation. I think my disappointment with this aircraft, and also the Comet, was that there was no custom programming under the hood. It's basic FSX functionality - but I got the impression from the description that there was more to than that. I am quite a demanding simulation enthusiast, so I'm sticking with A2A aircraft for older ones. The B-377 with Accusim is a really nicely modelled flight deck. I'd say it's about per cent functional, compared to the real one. May be I'm spoiled. And in the B-377 I navigate the old way, using dual ADFs ;-). They have a poor range so it's not quite enough, so some dead reckoning comes in there too, along with some with some star fixes using the add-on sextant gauge.I did some research on turbo-props of the era, and some engines were fitted with pitch control levers of sorts, such as the P&W PT-6A. I have a Flight Manual for a Dash 7, which I believe had a PT-6 variant. While there is no mention of any propellor pitch levers on the flight deck, levers that are discussed in various checklists are engine condition levers and power levers. The manual mentions the following settings for the engine condition levers : FUEL SHUT OFF; NORMAL FLOW; MAXIMUM RPM. For the Power levers: MAX REVERSE; DISC; FLIGHT IDLE; TAKE OFF.The last entry for the "After Take Off" checklist states that climb torque should be set, presumable with the power levers and charts. Condition levers were set in an earlier checklist to max RPM. Yet underneath the "After Take Off" is a note. It says: "When decreasing power, reduce engine torque before reducing propellor RPM". I guess that means that the power lever is doing torque, and then the condition lever is doing RPM? It seems that the power levers control both propellor pitch and fuel flow and hence power; but the condition lever is also able to control fuel flow.However, the Viscount had Rolls-Royce Dart engines I believe, and I have little information on those, though I suspect the engine controls will be similar to the Dash-7.Anyway, both the Viscount and the Comet by Just Flight are quite nice looking, and to be honest, for money, are ok.Anyway, the Viscount looks quite good, and so does the comet. I kept the Comet, but returned the Viscoutn due to my being so disappointed.Regards/Jason.

FSX is working now, and will be for a while. At the moment there is no reason to go over to Prepar3d. I believe the best strategy is to stick with FSX and keep an eye on the other sims, and see what happens. I don't think much will be happening withn the next year or two, so why not enjoy FSX while it lasts?It might be an idea to purchase X-plane, since it is relatively cheap and there are some nice add-ons for it now. You can have some real fun with the Aircraft maker too. It does no harm, and it make make it easier to make the move in the future, if it becomes necessary./Jason

I think that's a sensible approach. Stick with FSX and keep an eye on the other sims (including Flight and Prepar3D). I'd actually be tempted to purchase X-Plane 10 to keep a close eye on it and start to familiarise myself with it. There are some very nice add-ons for X-plane now, and many developers are showing an interest in developing content for it, such as PMDG.FSX graphcis were never exceptional and now they are starting to look dated. There will come a time when one of the other sims will be better, and people will start moving over to it. I think people are upset now because the future of their hobby is insecure.

Thought I'd share this. Probably most have seen it, and it is biased I guess, but generally I found it to be a good and comprehensive review:http://www.technologetic.com/2011/12/x-plane-10-review/The chapter on the sky is interesting. One of the bigger disappointments of Flight for me was the weather system.Notice also the part about ATC. I have read in X-plane forums that the ATC is very buggy. It seems that X-plane 10 is still in Beta....BUT, X-plane 10 has almost all the features now that one would expect of a good simulator. I think it has good potential.Also, take a look at post #176 in this thread:http://forum.avsim.net/topic/351464-avsim-exclusive-screenshots-for-x-plane10/page__st__150I've heard a lot of people moaning about frame rates, but if X-plane 9 is anything to go on, X-plane is going to be around for a few years and during that time frame rates will improve as more powerful computers come out and and as X-plane itself is tweaked and updated.I think X-plane 10 has a lot of potential, and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with it now that PMDG and other developers are turning towards it.

Mircosoft aren't stupid. Those who demand realism and realistic simulations and only want to use planesed design to the standard of PMDG 737NGX, and A2A Accusim, and ConcordeX, are a niche, a minority. The majority of the market belong to the instant gratitifcation type, who are happy with pretty liveries and lovely graphics.If you consider film and television, 90% of stuff produced is the same kind of crap. Low budget, quick to make rubbish such as reality shows and talk shows etc - very little quality. But quality does happen - we do get the occasional good film or TV series that was the result of someone's inspiration, rather than a popcorn market money spinner. But in and compuer games, it seems that even rarer these days that a good product is released. There's almost no interest by publishers in proper simulations, and it really annoys me that the most produced games are violence orientated.Although X-plane has its perculiarites and problems, at least it is produced by a man with a passion for what he does, and has a good user base of simulation enthusiasts.

Perhaps that's got something to do with the fact that they've removed a lot of stuff and given us a game instead of a simulator.

Are there ever any guarantees? MSFS was a consumer product and now that has moved in a direction we don't like.The only thing that would worry me with Prepar3d is the cost of future add-ons for it. For example, if an add-on developer makes something solely for Prepar3d, how can they market that? Will they be able to market it towards us, with pricing similar to FSX add-ons?It's all quite depressing, I must say. Perhaps it's time for me to start winding down this hobby.

Well said, although I'm not sure MS will be disappearing anytime too soon. It's a shame Bill Gates isn't around to make them produce a decent simulator!

Here is a quote from Prepar3D forum by L-M employee John Nichol, from the forum over at Prepar3d: "Prepar3D is a simulation framework, which means that it should be able to be used to develop any type of virtual interactive simulation environment, and used by anyone to train within that environment. Off-the-shelf of course, it is a system ready to go for training. Obviously it is best for flight training applications right now, but we will hope to see it being employed in other domains."Just Flight have already added their Comet to it, (which incidently was not very realistic). There didn't seem to be any problem with that. Both ORBX and REX also are also adapting their products for it. Again, quotes from Prepar3D: "Orbx does offer content for Prepar3D, and I believe they offer a free demo area as well. All purchasing and licensing of Orbx content would go through Orbx." - Bhiolis ( http://www.prepar3d....viewtopic&t=571) Again from John Nichol of Lockheed-Martin on the same website:"I can tell you that REX are working on a Prepar3D version of their excellent add-on! FSUIPC should work as Pete Dowson has built in support for P3D."

You can get Prepar3D for $9.95 per month if you get a developers license.We can all stick with FSX for another couple of years or so, especially if the DX10 features are utilised. But bear in mind that while FSX is standing still, Prepar3D is moving forward. There is already talk of version 1.2, which will feature DX11 rendering and more.At least we have both X-plane and Prepar3D as possible platforms in the future. In situations like these, I think only time will tell. I certainly shan't be getting Prepar3D whilever FSX is alive. What would tempt me to go over to Prepar3D is if developers started acknowledging it and providing versions of their software specifically for it, which is very easy to do at the moment./Jason

HiI have the old Aerosft Scandavian Airports 1 installed. These where originally done for FS2002 and 2004, I don't expect them to work well in FSX with regard to transparency and so on, but I am getting a big frame rate hit it when at ESMS that takes me down to 2 - 3 fps. Also, textures are missing off some objects. When I cycle the views (s) all sorts of strange things begin to happen. The tower view just shows me sea; and then spot views have planes up in the air or below the ground and so on.I tried turning down scenery display settings in FSX but they have little or no effect. There must be some other cause. I used these airports in FS2004 without any problem, and that was on a much older PC.My specs today are:Intel i7 2.8GHz8 GB RamnVidia GTX 460.With that hardware I should not be getting any problem with this airport.Can anyone suggest what might be the cause?

Has no-one mentioend the PMDG J41? Probably the best multi-engined turbo-prop there is...http://www.precision...uct/js4100.html I would also add this the Huges H1-B....

Who. apart from casual simmers, bother with default aircraft anyway?

I don't mind the visual models being weaker if the program logic was capable of accommodating PMDG 737 / A2A type of aircraft system modelling.There has been some promising attempts at advanced aircarft in Xplane - like this WIP for XPlane 9: The Xplane developers seem to take Flight Simulation seriously and are probably keen to win over FSX users. So let's hope X-plane 10 offers something competitive!The problem with the FSX/Prepar3D engine is that these systems are only 32-bit which means maximum of 4GB memory is supported, and they don't utilise multiple core processors, so when you take a heavy aircraft like the PMDG 737 near a heavy airport like one of Gary Summons Xtreme series and it becomes a slideshow.I think a lot will depend on what MS Flight turns out to be like - and we'll know about that pretty soon.

Hi, thanks! Yes, I checked that and everything is ok!

On the PMDG 737NGX, I am ready to taxi, but when I move the throttle levers forward, engine 1 is not spooling up. Also:Engine 1's idle only is 20.3 N1, while engine 2's idle is 22.6.Engine 1 oil temperatue is 9 deg, while engine 2 is 103 deg.Both the animated power levers are moving when I increase thrust, and engine 2 responds normally.There are no warnings or failures indicated.Any ideas?/jason

Great! Then what I'm seeing is normal then. Thanks!

HiI was using this aircraft for the second time and attempting a cold start.When I start the APU, the EGT rises to peak at about 7 then drops back to 4 and stays there. If I try to turn it off, it remains at 4. This doesn't seem correct.Does anyone have any comment about that?Also, what is the best way to cold start this aircraft? I just switched everyhting off then saved the panel state, and it's this that I'm loading now when I start it although the battery is always on for some reason.CheersJason

I think it is for some :)

Great news about the Tupolev Project being available for FSX that is. Me neither, but I'm afraid that's the way things are going. Steam has been around for a long time and is probably the best of it's kind. Microsoft's answer to Steam -- Games for Windows Live -- is nowhere near as good nor as user friendly and tends to be slow logging in. You don't even notice logging on to Steam. I've had Steam almost since it began and it's worked fine.I see you're in Bulgaria, by the way. I was in Sofia last March with work, I enjoyed the visit. I especially enjoyed Supertrans cabs after initially getting ripped off by one of those expensive cab companies at the airport. The Happy restaurant on Georgi S. Rakovski road was one of our favourite haunts - loved the sausages there, and the Kamenitza beer. The gave me a Kamenitza beer glass when we left. We also visited the Pri Yafata restaurant on the last evening and that was also very nice./Jason

Well that's great news!