WarpSpider74

Dave, great post. You and I seem to think alike in terms of settings and use of Gamebooster, CCleaner, Defraggler etc. I run the same .cfg settings, minus the affinitymask as I find it does nothing on my system in FSX or P3D. I use RadeonPro for all the driver settings and fo its included frame limiter. I've been getting fantastic performance even with my older 2GB 6970 (but then again, I've had great performance in P3D since v1.0...) Going to upgrade to a R9 soon and am eagerly awaiting more P3Dv2 ready addons! Cheers, Derek

Those dark patches are indeed the cloud shadows. If you look carefully you can also see them on land at the bottom towards the right. And like I said, they're far from complete or ready for use... but there nevertheless. Gives one hope that we'll see them properly implemented come v2.1 B)

Correct. They're incomplete and don't work properly, but they're definitely in there. I was just demonstrating that it can be done, not that it should...

Nope, it's cloud shadows. They can be enabled in the .cfg file.

Oh, you mean these cloud shadows? They're in there now. They're crap, and need a lot of work, but definitely there...

LOL!! Good stuff Fr. Bill :lol: Sounds like it'd go great side-by-side with my idea for an upgrade to PMDG's 737NGX which I call Button Simulator 2012, in which you spend a massive amount on artificial hardware buttons to press, to simulate pressing buttons in the software, in turn simulating pressing buttons in a real 737NG. There is no actual flight involved, just the pressing of buttons. Just like a real 737!

Pretty sure they've done away with the DX9 rendering pipeline completely. Backwards compatibility with old aircraft formats can't be maintained forever...

Yep, see here for the skinny on it... http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/68089-orbx-products-and-p3d-20-compatibility/

That kind of situation leads to this kind of occurence... http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/67139-so-stupid-it-is-frightening/

Alan mate, that is hands down the best P3D post I've seen anywhere to date. To quote the great HJS, "It's funny because it's true..." Best laugh I've had all weekend. Cheers, Derek

Unless you're privy to the terms of ORBX + Sim720's contracts, which you're not, how can you comment on what ORBX paid for the agreed regions? Also, I'm pretty certain that the Sim720 guys would be more than a little insulted by your comparison.

Yes he did. His dependent variable was groundspeed, his independent variables were indicated airspeed and altitude... Matt is still correct is his statement that 330kt at 40,000' is a higher groundspeed than 330kt at 25,000'.

Eh? Methinks you misunderstood Matt's comment, he was comparing airspeeds not groundspeeds. 330kt IAS at 40,000' is about 595kt TAS whereas 330kt IAS at 25,000' is about 495kt TAS, and for your other example 330kt IAS at 1' is 330kt TAS. With no defined wind component, Speed over Ground equals TAS, so there's a 100kt difference between 25,000' and 40,000', and a 265kt difference between 1' and 40,000'.

I don't know how I only just discovered this now, but thanks Dave!!! Cheers, Derek

I've never seen a pair of Polaroid's that WEREN'T polarised... but my personal preference is for Mako polarised glasses, with glass laminate lenses. They block some of the blue light coming in and the polarisation cuts down on the glare, great for bright sunny days on the water or in the air here in Australia. For my purposes (gliding) a good pair of polarised glasses are essential, as they help you pick out some haze domes on top of thermals in non-cumulus producing conditions. Thanks mate! Was a pretty normal landing... they look pretty steep if you're used to a nice stabilised approach in a powered aircraft. They have to be steep, normally made with half spoilers deployed, as you can't let an undershoot situation develop - no engine to perform a go-around :wink: Also, the damn things just want to stay airborne, so flare is typically only a couple of feet off the deck. Cheers, Derek