• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

93 Good

About serviceceiling

  • Rank
  • Birthday 04/20/1995

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. Indeed, been there, done that. Just brush up on the SOP's, flows, the starndard visual pattern and the landing thechnique in the FCOM and you should get a "wow" from the instructor. ;) But to be honest, the Level-D sim handles a bit differently, it's much smoother and actually way easier to land than a desktop sim, with a very limited range of motion and sight picture. What I really like about the 777 is the TAC, which helps quite a lot after a post V1 engine cut... :D And the ECL + EICAS of course - almost no system knowledge required. (EICAS driven aircraft principle). Oh and the B77W actually starts rolling on idle power even at MTOW!
  2. Not everyone has an overclocked high-end CPU and a high-end GPU. And like I said, 4k screens in order to be able to use MSAA aren't an option for everyone. And to be honest, why should I significantly downgrade my visuals when I can have all my sliders right and get 30+ fps during daystime, just to have some fancy lighting at night? A lot of people seem to have problems with dynamic lighting on their systems.
  3. But it IS already there. Why should we, the customers, know or have any idea how it all works in the code and from a developers standpoint? This very topic is a clear indicative that there is quite a large outcry for a better solution regarding lighting. Even at airports that are "supposedly" v4 native I get horrible performance when I turn on the lights (even the cockpit flood lights). This really kills the immersion and is a clear step back when it comes to aircraft development. Why create a new bottleneck for everyone when there is no need? You simply lose customers that way my friend...
  4. The only thing that is "technically impractical" is having 5FPS due to fancy lighting in 2017. P3D v4.1 is such a beautiful sim that performs so well on modern systems but it clearly has its problems in the light rendering department.
  5. Since this very isue has been bothering me after I finally switched to v4.1, here are my two cents on this topic: Not everyone is able to afford a 4k monitor in order to be able to use MSAA an get a halfway decent visual picture and sharp displays. I have been using flightsim on a laptop since day 1 and have upgraded to a state of the art gaming one at the beginning of the year, which runs P3D v4.1 like butter...except when I turn on dynamic lighting. It really boggles my mind how a developer can force such a fps-demanding and currently pretty broken feature on everyone and ruin most people's experience, while at the same time bragging how well optimised their latest aircraft are in various other aspects when it comes to fps. Fact is, that I don't fly PMDG aircraft at night anymore because there's point to land or taxi without any landing lights. Downgrading my graphics to MSAA isn't an option either, since that would make my screens jagged and the overall appearance of the sim far worse. How hard can it be to include the same legacy lighting system that worked so beautifully in FSX/P3Dv3.4 as an option for those who don't feel like halfing their FPS just to have some more fancy lighting? This really seems counterintuitive to me...
  6. Nope. I had addon aircraft set as default for ages. From the A2A Cessna, to the PMDG 777, Aerosoft Airbus or the Majestic Q400 now. Never had any problems.
  7. I never loaded a default plane before loading any addon aircraft in FSX/P3D and have been absolutely fine for all these years on various diferent systems. Don't know why people run into said problem.
  8. Great news! Let's hope it's the moving map on the ND - would be pretty amazing if you guys pulled that off! Hope we'll see some new screenshots of the new bird rather sooner than later.
  9. There's an MD-11 coming to Xplane 11 from Rotatesim. So anyone who really wants to fly a new MD-11 has the option to do so in X-Plane. A much better platform when it comes to flight dynamics.
  10. Marketing level - Randazzo
  11. Awesome! Can't wait to tame this beast.
  12. That seems to be his secret trick.
  13. From a simmers standpoint. Yes. But realistically speaking there is not much sense in spending so much money, time and effort on the development of a dying species that is the MD-11. While it sure is a tremendous and iconic aircraft, it's very outdated and unefficient in this day and age. From a business standpoint it would be a much wiser choice to develop something that has a future, like the 737MAX or the 787 and maybe even the 777-9/8 since the system infrastructures are very similar. Rotatesim are working on a MD-11 for X-plane so anyone who really wants to fly one has the opton to do this in X-plane.
  14. Agreed. Flying an airliner on your own is highly unrealitic and infact illegal IRL. And while you can perfectly fly highly automated airplanes like the 777 on your own, even with online ATC, try doing the same in the 737 or 747 and you'll quickly find yourself "behind" tha airplane and heads down in the FMS or adjusting the airplane's configuration when you should actually be looking outside, flying, navigating or taxiing. I think I am repeating myself at this point but I do think that at the current time the Majestic Q400 is the holy grail of shared cockpit flying. It's a very accurate full system simulation with excellent flight dynamics and performance. And you really need two people who know what they are doing to fly that thing properly. Another option out there is of course FS2Crew but I find using it is rather odd, as you're just following a script and feel like you're talking to Siri, who doesn't always pick up what you've just said. One solution I found to work rather nice is the scripted FO in the AS busses, since you don't really need to do or press anything for him/her to go through the flows and checklists during the various phases of flight. Especally aircraft configuraton changes after takeoff, on approach or when vacating/entering a runway work pretty well and you can focus on flying the thing as a PF. So yeah, maybe the best solution for PMDG would be do develop some sort of AI copilot that does all the normal flows and reads the checklists. I mean, there already is an AI flight engineer in the DC-6. Just needs some more advanced code and algorithms to adapt to an always changing and dynamic environment.