bendead

Well, a potential buyer asked something similar on the FSL forum but since he is not a customer yet, no access to MSFS section, he won't get a reply. that's so messed up...

Not a review but a first look / impressions. The UI, is the first thing you see when you are opening the sim and I don't know about you, but personally I like to spend the first 30min or so looking at every menus, new functions and aircrafts before starting a flight. If you go on a tinder date, the girl welcome you with a burp on purpose, even if the rest of the evening is going well, you will heavily remember that.

1. It's lagging, like nothing is running offline, feels like a stylish website 2. Horizontal scrolling. For 4 years we used Vertical, why change? 3.Aircraft selection tiles, top half a picture, bottom half, nothing, nearly everything in a single line that's too big to fit the tile, why not using it for the stats, or fit more plane, so no need to scroll for 40sec. 4. Select an aircraft, press configure, then save and back, you won't see your aircraft anymore, you will need to scroll back to it. 5. In the configure menu, you have the aircraft rendered in 3d, but it's static, why no hangar type of view, where you can move the plane around, missed opportunity here and no more hangar. 6. Sometime small plane are tiny in 3D and similar size one is too big to fit the screen I am giving only a few exemple here, it's fancy, but makes no sense to me. I am also happy to learn that the recommended landing surface for the ATR72-600F is water... Like before release, nobody from the QA spent 15min, going over each plane.

It's not so bad. Today I did a flight in a hot air balloon. At 1000ft, the basket propelled itself over the balloon and even with the burner still throwing flames upward, I was able to reach 5000ft/min. Before that it was only 3-4000ft/min. A least it made me feel better than the UI

You are quite optimistic, from the stream the dev said after the airbus line, so it could well be after an A330. For Concorde lover, that sucks

I agree, looking at the screenshots it's not the best looking cockpit. Let's hope the MSFS version will be the same quality as the A300B4 from Justflight

Interesting, why that?

Concorde after the Airbus line... what a bummer...

What a bad decision...

Is it official? If real that makes the career mode quite useless for me...

I am really interested about the career mode, just hope that 3RD parties dev will make their aircrafts compatible with it. It could also be a new market, dev specialized in making courses and flight tests, for addon planes. Imagine AOA, angle of attack interactive training, for the A320, B737, etc..., that would be quite awesome, and a great way to learn a new aircraft A bit like Boris for the sound.

Good news. I don't see myself spending another 77$ for a variant of a plane, the new 777, I already own I will wait for the MD-11 reviews first

Cool, but still nothing about the A300B4

Weirdly, that sounds like a step up from the default MSFS ATC

What would be the best GTN750 to use with this plane, TDS or PMS50?

Microsoft owns 49% of Open AI, they will definitely ingrate GPT-4o to Copilot soon. Makes me wonder what they will do with this tech for MSFS 2024

That's fine, I will soon update to a 7900X3D and 4090, so it will run a bit faster and I will activate all that again. But kudos to Asobo, on the V1 of MSFS, I would get around 5-10 fps with my settings and current configuration as opposed to 40-42 now

9900K laptop with MXM 2080, 1.78x DL with most of the applicable tweak, the image is just exceptional, a lot sharper than before, really easy to read screens even far away. But My FPS is going from 41 to 12 on the Fenix, guess it's just too much for my system

Is it only available through Orbx?

Game changing addon at a fair price, that's awesome

LOL, that's a good one But you might get a blue screen due to too much "overspeed" voice message.

Or maybe not Mach 24 at 40,000 feet...

No, always use your dipstick, before takeoff and on any airport you do a full stop, checking oil at the same time is not luxury. The log can be so accurate or un-accurate, that you don't want to use them, you don't want to hear about other people opinions, you want facts not feelings Only on 172 R or S equipped with G1000.

The fuel is the thing i check in fourth, after office logs, time before next maintenance and Aircraft paperworks "WB, radio certificate, manual, ect...". Then I use an archaic but really useful dip-stick that will show me the usable fuel level because its calibrated to the 172R tank : And I finish by checking the seal on my fuel cap and close them tightly. I don't really think that fuel gauges are essentials "well, they are mandatory as per NZ law" for a handling flight since they are 10% accurate if, you have full tanks "they might show you empty", climbing, descending or in a steep/max rate turn and 70% accurate the rest of the time. So let's be clear, they are rubbish, but for a cross country, they saved my life. On a 100%, touch and go, 300nm cross country, I noticed that my right tank was still showing full while my left tank was at 21 gallons, normally there is always a delay, because the left one get drain first but it was too much. My first reaction was to land on the first airfield and check the level. The right tank was full even with the selector on both. So after a quick refuel. I did a test 3000' AGL to check and found out that on any position, the fuel selector only picked the left tank. I feel really bad for the instructor since he was the PIC, he was responsible for the fuel. In my flight school, if I run dry "by my mistakes" on a solo as a student, even if I can land the plane, my school will still kick-me off and I will deserve it.

Well following all the procedures would not have change much of the result. Focusing on flying the plane instead of handling coms and keeping the engine alive might have