STK

The Cera team just responded on the official MSFS forums, stating that they are noting and acknowledging all of the issues posted there (and emailed privately) and will endeavor to provide multiple updates. They are also battling Asobo/MS heli flight model limitations, as twin engine helicopters don't truly exist in MSFS...they are really single engine behind the scenes. (Sounds like how things were in the FS2004 era). They also acknowledged a texture issue in the cockpit where a few critical textures were overly compressed. First update is coming soon, following by more in the coming weeks/months. They are taking a two week period to gather more user feedback and then working on problems. All in all they seem very responsive and are acting like they care about making a good product.

https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/ller-ilan-and-asaf-ramon-international-airport.457638/#post-920379 A much-needed high-quality rendition of Israel's second largest commercial airport - also the newest. Releasing very soon!

Very nice rendition of a smaller regional airport on the North Island of New Zealand, kind of in between Wellington (by Flightbeam) and Rotorua (included in NZ World Update), though much closer to Wellington. Fills a nice little gap for those flying Air New Zealand routes in-country. Real world destinations from here include Auckland (again, Flightbeam) and Christchurch (NZA Simulations) with Air New Zealand, as well as Nelson (NZA Simulations) and Hamilton (we need a high quality rendition here) on Originair (also need a nice Jetstream 31/32). https://store.inibuilds.com/collections/new-releases/products/xwind-palmerston-north-nzpm-msfs

I used to live close to this field and have flown out of it in real life privately as well as on airline flights, so I purchased it. Generally enjoyable and by far the best rendition we have, but I just emailed the dev with a few issues. 1. AI aircraft get stuck when departing runway 31. I'm not sure about runway 13 yet but I'm guessing it's likely. They are cleared to enter the runway environment, and then just sit there. Aircraft behind them also continue to enter the runway environment and they all sit in a line on the active until they disappear. 2. The C-130s are the wrong color. The sim depicts them as dark green, as if they were RAF types, whereas in real-life they are USAF grey. 3. I asked if an ability can be introduced to remove some or all static aircraft based on user preference. (Not a bug, but a preference). 4. Finally, purely out of curiosity, I asked if they considered doing an enhanced if not custom KCXY, which is right across the river. The airports are so close that there is a direct ATC line between them to deconflict arriving and departing traffic. I have had to alter my flight path (as well as hold on the ground) when operating out of both airports in real life due to traffic at the other airport. Will advise if the developer responds in the coming days with anything positive. #1 regarding the AI is the largest concern.

Will try this later tonight. Greatly appreciate the support throughout this thread.

That's odd as I just tested my GPS situation last night and get the simplified without the edit, but whatever works...as long as people are getting the GPS fidelity they expect. Thanks for that wonderful config edit to enable the GTN by default. I have the variables commented in or out depending on my mood, and it makes things so much easier (especially when trying to manage the pop-out manager with the 750 as well). Out of curiosity, do you have similar configs for other Carenado aircraft like the PC-12 or Cessna 337? I tried to use similar logic with those but wasn't getting results. Thanks again.

I actually use both. The 530 with some liveries, and the 750 with others (and associated hardware for both avionics that I have on my desk by FlightsimBuilder and RealSimGear respectively). There is/was a config on the 182RG release thread that enabled startup by default with the 750 which makes it a pleasure. I've used both systems in real life so I like to alternate between the two depending on what I feel like doing.

I was the poster on the official forums with the panel.cfg edit, as I experience the following otherwise: With the default panel config, and the WT version apparently installed in Content, the 182RG's GNS530 remains simplified. Among other identifying traits, the "AS" version does not do a startup RAIM check, has a different / simplified TCAS page, and lacks many features. I only get the fully featured WT version with the necessary panel edit from "AS" to "WT". For those claiming they don't need to make a panel edit, the quickest way to see if you have the more advanced GPS is if upon GPS startup it's doing a RAIM check at startup (there are plenty of images on the internet of what this looks like). If it's not doing it, then it's the simplified GPS. This applies to all Carenado aircraft so far. I have not experienced the white screen issue that the user above has, so unfortunately I cannot assist.

For the rotor heads and for those that can appreciate the latest and greatest in aircraft tech, it appears that HPG just announced development (and looking pretty far along) of the Airbus H160. Can definitely see the AS365 and EC155 origins. https://www.helisimmer.com/news/hype-performance-group-announce-h-160-msfs

I've asked some tough questions of CS on their forums both related to the B717 as well as their intended audience and team composition. Not expecting substantial answers except for maybe some statements on what's next for the B717, but it's apparent that the CS team has lost members over the years. Whether or not they will admit to this (if it even matters) is another thing. With all of this in mind, there is certainly room in the community for "ctrl-E" casual aircraft that look nice but aren't systems-focused. The crowd that is regularly engaged at Avsim or other FS communities likely isn't the target market. As someone with a steadily dwindling time to fly, and even less to try to learn a new complex aircraft and spend 30 mins before getting it off the ground, I think there is something to be said for those of us that enjoy jetliners that we can get up and go. I don't see CS misrepresenting what this aircraft is, so I'm not sure I'm seeing the scam (outside of those who feel like they are overcharging). For those that do anticipate using this aircraft, it sounds like we can expect Hawaiian, Midwest, TWA, and two more from the next livery pack.

The aircraft was made by inibuilds for MS/Asobo.

Haven't checked yet today but as of last night MS was still in active talks with Mitsubishi. It will be released - it's just getting the paperwork in order. The product will not be abandoned. Not sure if they will release when ready, or if they will cycle it to a scheduled date (at this point, November would be next as the October LL was announced).

Seems to be via Helisimmer and Google Drive, so there hasn't been much fanfare yet. Looks great though! https://www.helisimmer.com/news/jxt-released-freeware-bell-429-msfs

Carenado has stated an intent to bring their entire P3D/FSX library over to MSFS, of which a C207 is included. No idea as to the timeline of each addon.

I'm assuming it was a last minute unforeseen delay with the aircraft, as I don't think its contracted development is related to SU13. I'd rather have them take a week instead of releasing something incomplete just to meet a date. I don't recall the roadmap containing completely inaccurate prior to this occurrence, but interested in seeing documented cases. I do think at this point they need to do a projection at least through December, but if they miss a date again then more people will cry about it. Stuff happens.