Benjamin J

I'm curious. I used to have the iFly way back when when they were one of the last to still actively developed for FS2004, and I really liked their 737 for that platform. I then didn't really pay much attention to them as PMDG was always the top. However, I've heard a fair bit about iFly's 737 MAX and I'd be interested in giving it a go. How does it compare, of course aside from being MAX rather than the NG? As for the Fenix, it has become my favorite aircraft in the sim, to be honest. I do think it's a much smoother plane in every sense of the word: how it flies, how it handles, system simulation, but also in terms of the 'gimmicks', with a tablet that I think is much better than PMDG's, some sort of cabin crew simulation and integrated GSX. Overall it just provides a much more seamless experience. And combined with all of WinWing's hardware, it's a true pleasure to fly (of course, I'm not pilot, so take my word with a grain of salt).

Just noticed yesterday that Traffic was released for all! I’d been waiting for that before buying BATC but finally bit the bullet now. Just had a lovely flight from Athens to Corfu. BATC really brings my flying to a whole new level!! Very happy with it so far. A really seamless experience and I don’t need to setup it do anything… connects to simbrief and the sim just like that and is ready to go. That’s how these sorts of addons should be, in my opinion!

I agree I was hoping ACO would be a little better than it ended up being. Still leagues ahead of DoubleT which is almost entirely inaccurate. No other RCTP that I’m aware of.

I compared the data in Little NavMap with the data in the Navigraph Charts app and didn't see any discrepancies, so went into MSFS and actually I do have all procedures listed... You sure you don't have any duplicate sceneries that are messing things up for you?

Exactly what @Fiorentoni said. The problem is usually that the runway designators of the scenery don’t match what’s in the approach procedures. Usually it means a scenery update is necessary if they are old, or there may be a mistake that needs to be fixed. I have the scenery in question but haven’t looked into it… I can look later today.

Since we are talking about what FB scenery will next be scooped, it’s KMSP. BMWorld/Amsim just posted a preview on Facebook that I’m pretty sure is KMSP https://www.facebook.com/100066830710698/posts/pfbid031U63MF9A2CkoudHvn5XDNTAkMGRg1Fs5DbErzKfF2jAFAPi2WPr4ELTViybmWtZAl/

Hey all, So, my situation is that I'm on a laptop. Overall it runs FSX pretty nicely out of the box, though it struggles with denser scenery etc etc, basically the usual complaints. Now with P3Dv3 being out, I'd like to finally take the plunge and go for it. My problem is that I don't have much disk space and P3D being the huge program it is, I can't feasibly have P3D and all the add ons on my internal SSD. So, I want to get an external drive for my add ons, such as AI traffic and scenery. With P3D requiring programs to be installed outside the main sim folder, this is the perfect opportunity to make this kind of structuring change. My question is, however, what I should get, and how it will impact my experience: SSD or HDD? And what type connection should I get? Will USB 3.0 be good enough, or should I go with Thunderbolt (though I'm not even sure this is really supported in Windows...)? Any pointers would be very helpful... Best, Benjamin

Fantastic-looking plane as always. Ah, the fond memories I have of the 'old' 747-400X... Looking forward to this one!

Hm, interesting. The LDS767 has always been one of the best performing tubeliners for me. I know about the sliders not always working. I have found that certain sliders do nothing for performance on my setup, and some clearly do. The thing about setting sliders at minimal worsening performance is something I have seldom seen, though. As always, performance and how to setup FSX is highly variable across computers.

Erm... are you implying that a computer can only actually handle the 777 when scenery is on max? Because by that logic, I'm pretty sure your computer can't handle the 777 too. Or do you have all your settings maxed out without seeing a slideshow? It's strange. I always thought it was the most normal thing in the world that you decrease scenery complexity ("dumb down") in order to get a better experience flying complex aircraft. The 777 runs better for you than the LDS767? I find that hard to be believe, honestly. Do you have some figures to go with that statement?

Indeed. My computer can handle the T7, I'm sure of that, but it would require dumbing down the scenery so much that I won't recognize where at all I would be flying. Contrary to the belief of some, I do want eye candy. So there. LDS767 it is.

I don't do politics - it was a genuine question. I didn't expect the answer to be any different, but the thing is, my computer really can't handle those big messy aircraft very well. So there's another reason for me to stick with what I've already got, at least until I get a better computer... Thanks for the answer!

Out of curisiosity, how is the performance of the T7 compared to the LDS767?

So I was reading up over at simFlight Russia, and found this link in a post: http://forum.simrussia.com/index.php?/topic/134-сценарий-Домодедово-uudd-скоро/ It seems like we have a beautiful Domodedovo coming our way! Sadly, you need to have an account to actually see the pictures. I did make an account especially for it, and found it quite worthwhile. The pics look great!

It is my call indeed: Pay $50 for a plane that many have already said is stunning and, knowing A2A is sure to be fixed in due course, or pay $40 extra on a plane I'll fly twice in the period of 3 months. Hm, difficult. I think I know what I'm going to buy... Nope, not going to "waste" those $40. Instead, I'll buy food from that. That said, I won't buy the A2A C172 for another few weeks. Let's see what the situation of that plane is, then and there.