Jump to content

Cristi_Neagu

Members
  • Content Count

    560
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About Cristi_Neagu

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 07/05/1988

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bucuresti, Romania

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes
  1. I wouldn't be so sure about that... The NGX is inherently compromised because it is developed for FSX, on a pure 32bit platform. It's not as easy as recompiling or even doing a few changes. My guess is that 60-80% of the code would need to be touched in one way or another. Sometimes it's easier to rebuild than to renovate.
  2. If my memory serves, yes. I don't think they ever gave the technical reason why, though.
  3. We're arguing semantics, but a flaw is defined as "a mark, blemish, or other imperfection which mars a substance or object". The cockpit geometry meets that definition. What you're describing is called a mistake. Anyways, it's irrelevant. I completely agree. If they are unable (or even unwilling) to fix the geometry, i'd still buy the NG3 (or whatever it ends up being called) on launch day.
  4. That's a bit unfair considering: 1. It's not like *all* 737NGs ever made had split scimitar winglets and PMDG chose to not model that feature, just like no 737NG ever made has that cockpit geometry 2. The winglet variants had different flight models to the non winglet ones, so split scimitar winglets would actually make a difference. In any case, this isn't about "The plane is unflyable with that geometry!" It's hard to notice, doesn't affect things much, and it's there for a good reason. What i'm trying to say is that it's a crying shame that the only model of a 737 (the most widely used jet airliner ever) made by PMDG (a company that prides itself with the quality and accuracy of its products) has such a flaw. The 737 has just as much of a prestigious status as the 747, if not more so. And we've had 3 versions of the 747 but only one 737. As good as that model still is, it would be a shame to draw a line and call it done. That's my opinion. In any case, the argument is irrelevant. PMDG are making a new version of the 737, and i'm really happy that they are. And even if they decided not to, i can complain about it all i want, it won't change things.
  5. A new release of the 737 absolutely has to happen for 3 reasons: 1. Only PMDG Boeing for short to medium haul 2. Only PMDG aircraft with a heads-up display 3. Only PMDG aircraft with a huge, glaring, issue that's right there in front of you every single second (you know what i'm talking about) I, for one, as much as i loved the look of the MD-11, would much prefer to see an update to the 737, even if it is just the NG or just the MAX.
  6. Hello, Yes, the issue was with a ChasePlane view. And i say "was" because the issue seems to have resolved itself. Maybe i messed around with some setting somewhere and everything needed a clean restart. Now everything is panning and zooming smoothly, both with ChasePlane cameras and default views. Thank you.
  7. Hello, I'm having the same issue with v0.4.222 Beta. Panning is smooth, but zoom is stuttery. Report sent via email.
  8. Didn't know about that... I'll give it a shot. Thanks!
  9. Thank you for the reply. I know there's a lot of other, more important, stuff on the radar right now, but if it's in the plans, that's great. Thank you.
  10. Thank you for the reply. The only issue i have with gimbal mode is that it uses the move axes. This is a bit inconvenient, as my joystick hat switch is tied to pan and tilt. To use gimbal mode would mean to tie up another hat switch to the move axes (i wasn't able to do that, for some reason; ChasePlane doesn't see any other hat), or use another controller (i have another controller, but since it causes some issues with some addons i'm using, i'd rather not keep it connected; also, to keep another controller connected for this is a bit overkill). The ideal solution would be to keep the move axes doing what they're currently doing, but have the pan and tilt axes orbit the camera around the plane. Right now the pan and tilt axes don't do anything in gimbal mode, so that's a bit of a waste.
  11. Hello, If i have the middle mouse button options enabled (like the pop up overlay) i cannot use my middle mouse button with the Flight1 GNS530 in fullscreen mode, and in windowed mode is very hit and miss (works about 20% of the time). If i turn off the middle mouse button options, it all works perfectly, even in fullscreen mode, without even restarting the sim. I'm using FSX:SE, and ChasePlane 0.2.36 Edit: I just read on the site that ChasePlane only supports FSX in windowed mode. Fair enough. But it doesn't work properly in windowed mode either. Can we get an option to select a different button than the middle mouse button? That would solve it, i think.
  12. Hello, I was wondering if an option can be added to the gimbal mode to have the tilt and pan axes rotate the camera around the plane, instead of actual tilt and pan, which does nothing in gimbal mode anyways. That would allow us to recreate the orbit camera that's standard in the sim. Thanks.
  13. I know this is like... over a year down the line, but i have the exact same issue. How do i reapply Europe? Or, if things have changed, what's the fix for this? Thanks.
  14. Hello, I know this post is over a month old now, but i had to reply. Just got burnt today with card fraud. Luckily, they didn't manage to get a single penny from my account. I just got back into flight sim after many, many years of inactivity, so i was doing some shopping, upgrading to newer software. I think the culprit was the UTX installer. All the other pages i've been to were marked as secure, but UTX was using a payment processor inside the installer. I knew it was a bad idea the moment i saw it, but i went through with it. Now i'm wiser, or so i'd like to think. Don't use your main card for internet payments. It's a very bad idea.
  15. I think it's safe to expect some updates to the FMC. I remember there were some functions not modeled. All in due time.
×
×
  • Create New...