Dutch727

Hi folks, The whole show is worth watching, but as there's interest in the SR-71 and that's my project, I'll let you in on the current status here. I'm not saying anything that's not covered in the video, but may be adding some additional color and details. An enormous amount of work has gone into the visual model interior and exterior. The amount of detail and realism is amazing! I say that not as one of the artists that did it but as the project manager and as an admirer of excellent work. I'd say it's 99% done now. A few details are yet to be completed (e.g. the pilots) and of course some corrections will have to be made during development and testing. If you want to have a look there's much coverage in the video. We're now hard at work on the systems and flight model. The flight model is external using Blackbird's ADV system and we'll be reproducing the unique characteristics of the way this incredible bird flies as well as is possible to do it. We aren't limited by what the sim can do. We will likely have a simplified option for those that just want to zoom around and have fun, but rest assured that by default it will be real, and it will be a challenge to handle. We'll have both a simplified and a realistic refueling procedure, among other things. Yes, we plan to have leaking fuel in the hanger pre-flight. We're aiming for 99% fidelity on the flight systems in the forward cockpit. I can't say 100% because that's never completely possible. 99% is a high goal! We aren't implementing the back seat electronic gear in this version in that you won't be able to sit back there and flip the switches. (You can look at it, it's all there visually.) Instead you'll have a "virtual RSO" that you'll communicate with as the pilot. The RSO will handle such things as the INS, navigation, and defensive measures like he would on a real flight. It was my privilege to spend almost a week with Major Shul and Colonel Watson in California. They made it so much fun for me. (I think about Brian often and miss him.) I learned so much about how the crew interacts in a real flight and recorded several versions of them talking back and forth as if flying in various normal and abnormal scenarios. We'll be using that knowledge and those recordings to bring you as much authenticity as we possibly can! When will in be in your hands? As soon as we can get it done, but this is a big project and it will take time. We expect to have it 100% ready in 2024 but that's not a promise, just a realistic goal. Happy flying, Dutch

Glad things are looking better. This is a hobby that requires some patience sometimes. I can't say how many times FSX itself has had me ready to toss my CPU out the window. Also a few add-ons, but with persistence, all usually comes right. Philosophically it's understandable. We're dealing wit ha complex software environment with thousands of options in the simulator itself, then add to that many add-ons, all trying to simulate a very complex thing: modern aviation. Sometimes I'm amazed it works as well as it does. One thing I do is try and keep changes to my own set-up minimal and make them one at a time. But even then...things fall over sometimes.

You are right in pointing that new releases with lots of features tend to stir up bugs, and this is especially true with a product that's been continually enhanced now for six years. Even though this last release, 1.7, went through more beta iterations that any previous release, with as many captains as we have flying the product with so many add-ons, and under so many different software environments, things pop up. Our strategy to deal with this is to stop adding new features after a major release until things settle and we identify and fix most of the bugs. We're looking at 1.7.2 beta now. One thing we need to be sure of is that the configuration files keep up with the new features. We hate it when people get frustrated, as they sometimes do. It's certainly not intentional, we are doing our best. Dutch

Just a heads up for any of you 727 fans out there. At long last, Captain Sim has updated and fixed their 727 Captain products, moving it from the flawed 2.4 up to 2.5 then quickly to 2.6. For current customers the update is free and downloadable from their website. I've installed the update and it makes a flawed product with potential into quite a good one with many longstanding bugs fixed and some new features like the V1 data card and built-in CIVA INS (ported over from the 1011 product.) This isn't to start another debate on CS, just to let any 727 fans know there's an update that greatly improves the CS 727. Which is now, to my knowledge, the best 727 simulation we have for FSX/P3D. If there's another out there I'd love to know about it. I am not affiliated with CS in any way, just a customer. Dutch

It certainly sounds like the entry to install FSCaptain.dll isn't being made in the dll.xml file for some reason. I see you've sent the files to us for evaluation and we should be able to get you going hopefully soon. Dutch

We'll be glad to do anything we can to help. Of course we want our product to work with all add-ons, and in almost every case we've been able to solve whatever is blocking success. Sometimes it takes longer than other times -- but we won't give up as long as you don't. Flight Sim is a complex and perplexing environment with many add-ons interfacing and interacting with each other. We have many cases of an add-on working perfectly for most users but others have issues with the very same add-on that are hard to understand or fix. At the moment I don't know of any popular add-on that we haven't seen work fine with FSCaptain in general. That's not to say any particular copy will, because there are so many variations and combinations of add-on products. We're never happy when someone is having problems, until we can solve them. Dutch

We're still working on this. There appears to be some kind of conflict, but we have other copies of the Aerosoft Airbus that seem to work fine with sound. The next version of FSCaptain has a new sound system that plays voices in a completely different way. We may soon send you an alpha copy to try. Dutch

This is one add-on that is really worth it, in my opinion. It will affect just about every airport in the world -- except any add-ons you may have. I have zero add-on airports and fly only to default or lightly modified default airports. (For performance reasons, mostly. The debates and angst over VAS are alien to me. I've never had that issue.) This makes everything so much better looking with not much real impact I can detect. This release fixes the one thing that bothered me the most: the shimmering taxi lines. Nice, free update. Good stuff. I recommend it. Dutch

I am up for trying PFE2000 again, depending on the answers to this checklist. If I'm considering a change I need to be sure I don't go backwards in a vital area. Must haves: * Authentic procedures and phraseology. * Support for all IFR procedures not just vectors to final. * Flight monitoring not allowing violations (altitude busts, off course) * Ability to request runways and flight levels. * Will at the very least keep AI out of the way on final. * A degree of unpredictability with multiple possibilities. * Ability to specify arrival gate. Want to haves: * Ground taxi control. * Ability to be placed in realistic holds. * Support for SID/STAR. * Support for VFR as well as IFR * Multi-leg flight capability. * A high degree of unpredictability. There might be more but these are the basics. I really wouldn't consider moving to anything that fails one of the must-have tests. Dutch

We're lucky to have so many choices, because no canned ATC program is ever going to be truly realistic. It's all a compromise. If you want maximum realism in terms of interaction with ATC you need to fly online. But online has major and well-known drawbacks too that make it unrealistic except in rather narrow circumstances. I haven't tried every option out there. I'll talk about the ones I have tried. First, the FSX default. This can be quite useable, depending on your requirements and expectations. It's not really appropriate or complete when it comes to big iron flying into big airports. (And that's exactly where online shines. See below.) But if you fly GA or to smaller and even medium airports it's useable. No, it doesn't support SIDs and STARs. But it's not too well known that you don't have to use their vectors to final if you don't want to be forced into that pattern. You can decline vectors and select one of the other procedures and fly that. That way you are in control and not flung out into the wilderness in your C150 as if you were flying an A330! Yes, it doesn't actually control much of anything and in heavy traffic situations it can be very frustrating to see constant go-arounds and the ultra-conservative approach to takeoffs where you or the airplanes in front of you wait for clearance seemingly anytime an approaching aircraft is within 10 miles of the runway! There are only 8 voices but they are good. But you really, really need to use EditVoicePack to speed them up! Oh, they are soooo slooowww inn sppeeaaakkkinng. About online. I am not an expert. I have tried it several times. As far as I know there are two main options - VATSIM or PilotEdge. PilotEdge is well spoken of but it only covers southern California as far as I know. I believe it requires a paid subscription. I have not done this. I've tried VATSIM on occasion and may do it again soon. But this is a matter of taste and your flying style in FS. If you fly big iron into big airports it's a viable and realistic option some of the time. VATSIM depends on volunteers and sometimes the airports are well staffed and sometimes not. My style is smaller and/or older aircraft in out-of-the-way places like Alaska or my home area of the mid-Atlantic states of the US. There are almost never any volunteer controllers where I want to fly. And the times I have used VATSIM the controllers have been nice to me but I get the impression that if you aren't flying big, fast jets you're not in the mainstream and tend to get ignored or forgotten about. I had a go at PFE and VoxATC. I never really understood PFE although it's well spoken of. I might try it again, but after some struggle to understand it, I put it aside. VoXATC has lots of potential - but voice recognition doesn't like my voice. I struggled for weeks with MCE, trying to use it. The constant "say again" and "let's start over" and "I didn't get that" made me want to throttle the FO (yes I did the training, twice and three times actually.) Same with VOX. The frustration level was just too great for me to enjoy it. Besides, speaking isn't a priority for me. I have no problem pressing number keys to respond to ATC. The one I stick with is RC4. It too has its drawbacks. The most annoying for me is the lack of ground operations. I would love for it to actually track me when I fly a SID or STAR. It allows me to do it, but as far as it's concerned it's just another set of waypoints, and it will inevitably hand me over to approach at 40 miles and vector me (unless I ask for another procedure.) I also wish it wasn't designed to do a single flight and shutdown. I often fly multi-leg and I have to restart the program between legs. But I'm used to that now. It's just an annoyance. And it's sad that development has ended. Another company would do well to try and match the feature set of this product and expand on it. That said, RC4 has many advantages that for me and my style make it the best solution I've tried. There are quite a few misconceptions out there about it. I'll try and address the most common of them. The voices are robotic. They might sound that way if you try and play them slowly. That increases the gap between words. You can adjust the speed and I put it at maximum. They sound pretty much like normal ATC to me then. And they sound like real people not voice actors. To me that's a plus. Not every ATC guy or gal in real life sounds like a DJ on an easy listening station. I have and you can greatly enhance the realism further by adding the "meatwater pack" that adds sound background static that makes the voices sound like a radio transmission. These voices aren't smooth like the MS ATC voices, but they sound real enough to me. It always does the same things. Anyone who says this hasn't made many flights. For a canned product, RC4 has quite a few variations. Far more than the default ATC, which always reacts in a predictably same way to every situation. That's my favorite feature of this product, actually, right up there with the authentic language and procedures. You can request any runway for takeoff or landing...but sometimes you'll be denied. You can request a level change in flight ... but you aren't guaranteed to get it. You can be placed in holding patterns. Just last night I was placed in a hold at 9,000 feet at a fix 40 miles south on KDCA due to traffic saturation. This is just as realistic, and just as annoying, as in real life. And you don't know what's going to happen. Often you are stepped down realistically. Last night I was released early. RC4 has other surprises. You really can't be sure. Sometimes the controllers are strict about speed on approach, sometimes not. It doesn't control the AI. It doesn't take control of all of it. But it most definitely intervenes to help get it out of your way, or try and prevent it from getting in your way. The most frustrating and unrealistic thing in the default ATC is they do nothing about multiple aircraft on final to the same runway! I have been on final in a DC-3 and had a 737 race right under me or over me! RC4 will not let that happen. Any AI aircraft on final to your runway when you are on final will be ushered out of the way. No AI aircraft will be allowed onto your runway when you are approaching it. And best of all: RC4 will get you outta there by clearing you for takeoff with tight (but realistic) margins concerning AI aircraft on final. No more waiting for 10 minutes while a slow little puddle jumper makes a 10-mile final when ATC could have gotten 3 or 4 jets out in the time, safely. (Of course this only applies if you are #1 for takeoff. It won't help when an AI airplane under MSATC control is setting there waiting, and waiting, and waiting. The controllers are nasty. Yes, they will reprimand you. This is in about three levels. Your first screwup they will be gentle and just remind you. The second (in the same flight) and they get a little firmer. Do it again and they will start asking if you "need special assistance" in an annoyed tone of voice. In my opinion, they should. This is realistic. There is lots of pressure to not screw up clearances in real flying. You could die and kill other people. Being able to sloppily bust altitudes and stumble all over the sky under ATC control during approach -- or anytime - is absolutely not realistic. I have not tried ProATC. My understanding is it got off to a shaky start but is improving and evolving. I may give it a whirl in the future. That's my perspective. None are perfect and never will be unless MS or LM or DTG hires a gigantic staff of human controllers to serve us worldwide. Yeah. Wait for that one. Dutch

I have gotten a couple of questions about installing the gauge in the "default 172". Apparently the README example gives numbers that are appropriate for the FS9 default 172, not the FSX one. I don't think I even had FSX installed when I uploaded that little gauge here! So if you want to see it on your FSX default 172 VC, the easiest thing to do is remove the N number plaque and put the ice gauge it its place. Here's the revised [VCockpit01] section of panel.cfg for the FSX default 172: Everything is unchanged from the out-of-the-box default except the last two lines, where I commented out the registration number plaque and put the ice gauge in the same place: [VCockpit01] size_mm=512,512 pixel_size=512,512 texture=$C172s_1 background_color=0,0,0 gauge00=Cessna!Nav_GPS_Annunciator, 69,457, 20, 19 gauge01=Cessna!VOR1, 259, 1,140,140 gauge02=Cessna!Nav GPS Switch, 45,456, 20, 21 gauge03=Cessna!ADF, 259,283,145,145 gauge04=Cessna172!EGT_Fuel_Flow, 400,109,107,107 gauge05=Cessna172!Fuel, 400, 1,107,107 gauge06=Cessna182s!Oil_Press_Temp, 405,325,107,107 gauge07=Cessna!OMI_Lights, 0,456, 44, 24 gauge08=Cessna!Vacuum_Ampermeter, 405,217,107,107 gauge09=Cessna!Annunciator, 0,481, 99, 25 gauge10=Cessna172!Whiskey_Compass, 100,456, 56, 39 gauge11=Cessna182s!VOR2, 259,142,140,140 gauge12=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio Audio, 0, 0, 258, 50 gauge13=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio Nav-Comm 1, 0, 51,258, 95 gauge14=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio Nav-Comm 2, 0,147,258, 95 gauge15=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio ADF, 0,243,258, 66 gauge16=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio DME, 0,310,258, 66 gauge17=Bendix_King_Radio!Bendix-King Radio Xpndr, 0,377,258, 78 //gauge18=n_number_plaque!n_number_plaque, 188,468,89,25 gauge18=ICE!IceWarning,188,468,89,25

It's January 2015 and I can't believe I am just finding this. A hearty Thank You - (would that be спасибо?) to the creators who put this out for the community and all those who helped (Bill, I think you were involved?). Anyway, I always had perverse love for the KLN90B. When Project Tupolev made the KLN90B FSX compatible I pulled it out and stuck it into a number of my airplanes. (Any airplane introduced after 1989 I consider too modern for my tastes. A retro GPS is the only way to go for a retro airplane - none of this modern colored moving map stuff!) But it has some frustrations and little problems. Not to mention no docs that I could find except the real KLN90B manual. No mention of how, for example, to turn the knobs (how long did it take to figure out that mouse wheel does the inner and right-click does the outer?). Now those problems can be fixed! And I intend to do it. Right now I'm deeply involved in the project to add contracts to FSCaptain, but when I get that done (or get tired of it and need a break) I'll mess with this. Basically in order of priority: 1. Move the text up so the last line doesn't get chopped off. 2. Get a clearer background image of the KLN90B. 3. Make a hidden click spot to load the FS flight plan to page zero and get rid of the add-on menu. 4. Use the NAV/GPS signal to decide whether to drive the AP heading from the KLN90B. 5. Add the ILS frequencies to the airport page 4 list. 6. Implement the ALT button. Anything else anyone interested would like to see? I'll publish it to AvSim with the improvements - just no promise on when, okay? Dutch

I am the creator of the gauge, many years ago. Much has happened since then, including FSCaptain which includes a vastly superior icing simulation. But the gauge in the forum is still useful, and free. I haven't tested it in any airplanes for a long time, and I'm not going to, but I can suggest that possibly the reason the gauge isn't appearing in some VCs is that the resolution of the VC is much higher that the default 172, which the example is from. You probably need to make the numbers bigger so that it's not so tiny you can't find it. Also, another problem is that the mapping of virtual cockpits can be complex. It can be hard to find a spot to put it. (I know nothing about the Duke itself as I don't own it.) Also be sure the 45 in 'gauge45' doesn't conflict with another gauge45 in the list. Change the 45 as appropriate to your panel section. That will cause a gauge to not appear. gauge45=ICE!IceWarning,250,20,40,20 The 250,20 determines the position and the 40,20 determines the size. The example is 40 pixels wide and 20 deep. That could be way too small to see on some modern high-res VCs. Try 100,50 and see if you see anything. I sometimes substitute another VC gauge out in place of this one, just to see it and know I have a location that's mapped to a visual spot. This is more of an art than a science, since we can't normally see how VC designers have mapped their cockpits. Dutch

Sure email them to me. And how would YOU like to be an FO? There's a voice chart and all it takes is a mike, recording software (default Sound Recorder will do) and you can make yourself immortal as an FSCaptain FO Dutch

The User Guide should be in a Documentation folder in the FSCaptain folder. We have several voice packs in the works. I like variety too.