Vim Fuego

Evening all, Firstly, just a word of thanks to both Ray and Ronzie for their continued support of this otherwise excellent product. I appreciate your efforts in what appears to be a reduced capacity as far as activation issues go, but...I am also (and have been for a while now) having a hell of a time activating RC4. I've followed Ray's advice in this and other threads and CC'd Doug Thomson in on my activation email and I have indeed received an email from Doug, but it appears to be an automated response instructing me to repeat the email sending procedure to 'receive an activation within 15 minutes', so no activation code unfortunately. However, I have sent that original email (thrice now, including the one I cc'd Doug in on since 28/11/17) to no avail. I can only conclude that RC4 is no longer officially supported, despite still being available to purchase. Had I recently bought the product I'd be considerably miffed, but as this about the third or fourth time I've had to go through this in the last couple of years, i'm left with more a sad sense of resignation. Which is a shame. It's still a great product, it's given me nearly 8 years of sterling ATC goodness and I shall miss it, but I think enough is enough. Thanks again to the two R's for all your help over the years. Over and out. Richard P.S.: I realise that all sounds a tad dramatic, but I'm at my wits end with this.

Yes, same problem. Exactly as you described.

Hi, OP, this is really down to your ASN turbulence settings I'd suggest. If you're using default, thats 70% on the Turbulence Effect Scale? Even in clear conditions i've had problems with that one. On a number of occasions I've had to take manual control in CAT III conditions due to the AT 'falling asleep' on approach and then rocketing up during wakeup mode, and thats with no wind, no apparent tubulence. Problem is I've no idea how realistic ASN is in it's modelling of turbulence. It's certainly superior to the native FSX but as I've only experienced real turbulence as a passenger i've no idea how turbulence affects the aircraft at the business end and how it affects (or doesn't) factors like airspeed. 50% turbulence effect scale in ASN is usually fine for me, but I usually fly manual throttle after disconnecting the AP anyway. After some experimentation a while ago I recall that with 20-25% TES in ASN the AT will maintain speed regardless of conditions. Obviously the wow factor of flying turbulent approaches is somewhat mitigated as a result, so 'realism' may suffer. Depressingly, the Aerosoft Airbus will hold speed even at 70% TES in absolutely filthy weather conditions, but I expect that may be due to a simpler modelling of AT than PMDG. Cheers

If you're running a 64-bit OS, here is the critical command: regsvr32 c:\windows\syswow64\msstdfmt.dll Cheers

Just taken her for a spin after reaching saturation point with the 777. Forgotten how much fun she is to fly, particularly on a short hop, EGSS-LFPG, a real life trip for FedEx MD-elevenses. Wow! What a climb. What a...well, it could go on all night. Delving deeper, looking at the LSAS and the RCWS and all that goodness, that makes it such a joy to fly, well ,I'd be amazed if PMDG didnt port it to P3D at some point, as a huge amount of clever coding clearly went into all that backoffice stuff. Richard

The real leap forward for me with PMDG was the MD-11. I still regard it as the benchmark sim. The 747 I couldnt run without tuning down just about everything but runways in FSX on my old Core Duo machine, but the MD-11 was ready to rock from the start. The MD-11 really opened my eyes to what FS, and a VC could do. All of a sudden I was no longer sat in my spare room, I was 36000ft above Europe...there goes Belgium, here comes Heathrow, lulled almost to sleep by the whirr of the air conditioning, now turn on the dome lights to read the instrument approach plates to Manchester. Great days. I should note, it all got better. I've now replaced the MD-11 with the younger, better looking and let's face it, better endowed 777.

Kyle, you know what i'm talking about re the licencing issue. People worrying their FSX Gold Edition will vaporise come the day that Microsoft fall out of the sky (I refer you to the post above mine). Never, basically. As for revenue stream via Steam, I doubt after the inital explosion there will be much there. But if as you say, it is simple enough, then fine. It doesn't seem to be so far though.

Exactly this. Why the fuss? And why are PMDG wasting time with duel installs? In fact why are they bothering at all? It's not 64-bit, so whats on offer? The rubbish about licencing i've read on here is just plain daft. Mystified.

Not possible with the blip trim Ryan. Big inputs are required to escape its pull, and then bang, you're over speeding and trimming up to compensate. Especially bad on approach and/or finals. If this is the final word I am in fear for the new 747. Are you planning to introduce a trim reference speed with that?? God help us.

If you chaps think it worthwhile to move things along I'll file a ticket as well. James Bennett best describes my situation. Despite the sterling efforts of Rob Robson and co (and thank you hugely for going to such lengths to try and figure this all out guys) the technicalities of all this are a bit beyond me I'm afraid. Suffice to say, I don't find this a particularly pleasant bird to hand fly, with or without the trim ref speed marker. I have no difficulties trimming by feel in the NGX etc etc. James, if you don't mind I'll file a ticket essentially paraphrasing what you've described here, if you have no objections? Cheers

An attractive idea, I find it alternately very to quite frustrating myself. However, so it seems do at least one of your fellow 777 pilots in the real world. I stumbled across this archived post from 2003 on pprune where a 777 pilot (no.2 post) lists his likes and dislikes of the then fairly new 777. Guess which feature he posted as no.1 on his list of dislikes?? http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-107512.html Seems as though PMDG may have got this undocumented feature exactly right after all!

Short test flight from EGLL to LFPG, and there is a clear difference. No need for the FBW trim ref speed nonsense. Intuitive, fluid, its all there. Well done guys, bloody well done. Its 1 in the morning GMT and I want to take her out for another spin. C*U in FSX...I am amazed.

Bingo. Its a hobby for most of us. We all have lives and commitments outside of burning 30 minutes or 13+ hrs on flight sim. No shame at all in jumping in at the (highly automated: easy) deep end.

I'd recommend the NGX base pack and go from there. Fly the tutorial, fully automated, autoland etc and build up from there to manual landings on ILS then go visual etc. I recall the buzz of just getting the 747 from A to B after hitting the CMD at 500ft all the way to autoland. I also recall actually having to take over the controls for the first time in the MD-11 due to wonky ATC instructions and being surprised how easy it was to land manually (see Kyle's comments re: small vs big aircraft). Caveat emptor: I'm the worst kind of virtual pilot i'm afraid as I never spent much time in the Cessna and usually go through the tutorial, rinse, repeat and if anything unexpected comes up then I hit the manuals or search the forums. I've gone from the 747, MD-11, NGX and now the 777 with that approach. I could have saved myself a bunch of time by simply RTFM, and would undoubtably be a better virtual pilot, but to be honest I've had a great time discovering the intricacies of these machines in my own distinctly haphazard way. I'm one of those "wonder of flight" types, I guess. No way I could ever raise my hand if an airline attendant asked in an emergency "Can anyone fly a 777?" You can however surprise yourself how 'expert' you become over time. I'm now flying RNAV approaches into some seriously scary airports with the NGX and having an absolute blast. Flight simming is what you make it, PMDG provide incredible tools for making the most of it whatever your approach. ****************** Richard A Wells

Bad taste? No I'll tell you what is in bad taste. A developer...no, a business resorting to emotional blackmail as an excuse to postpone its commitments. And let's be clear, BBS had no previous problems going off the radar for months on end with no updates whatsoever. There was really no need to embroil paying customers in personal tragedy. That was their choice. But here I think lies a big problem with the FS add-on market, and it's this: the erroneous idea that we're all chums. That it's a community of pals, we're all in it together somehow, that we must all support and encourage each other even after the money has changed hands. A notion that only lasts I might add until the product either succeeds or fails and if it's the latter then it's usually f*** off in no short order from our developer pals to the disappointed customers. This much I do know: BBS have my money and all I have is the same recycled PSS garbage they excreted onto the market in July 2012 with no real sign of progress since and there's not a chance in hell of a refund after. But that's just good business, right?