Stick

Mmm, I don't think we should all be so quick to jump on Rockcliffe ....... let me say, I LOVE FlyTampa St Maarten complete, and have flew many countless hours there, between TNCM and TFFJ and SABA .... I never get bored with these flights! But, part of my enjoyment is the fact that (i) I've been to St Maarten in real life (but not TFFJ or SABA), and (ii) I've seen all the TFFJ landing vids and the layout & dimensions of the FlyTampa TFFJ is just perfect...... .....but >> the enjoyment I get from it is from these above aspects more than texturing and object quality. Now I do think the actual TNCM airport is exquisite and as good as any FlyTampa release, but if you take off and take a good look around the island of St Maarten itself, there is some definite blurriness, and some of the texturing ain't up to the latest releases (especially Orbx etc). I put that mainly down to it being a far from 'current' addon; I think it was released in 2008, so we can't expect 2012 quality in every regard. But it's still my overall favourite ever scenery product for FSX ............ however if I was buying into it, today, and didn't have an emotional link to the area, I'm not sure I'd be so rose tinted to be honest.

My PMDG frame rate scale in FSX looks like this :- Higher Frame Rate Performance <--- MD-11 ---- JS41 ---- NGX---- 747X --------> Lower Frame Rate Performance but there's not much in it between the JS41 and the NGX for me. JS41 def a bit lighter though.

+1

The three forthcoming topics mentioned in the presentation were the 777, 747 2.0, and the DC-6, so I would not expect to see the Dash 8 for some time yet. I certainly don't personally expect to see it this year.

There is a CONFIG thing that you get with the Duke, that you need to launch (should be on your desktop after installation), where you can change it from brake steering, to nosewheel steering.

Yeah yeah! ... that's what I'm talking about B) ..... didn't know that was in development. Very nice! Stick with the high quality sounds you used in the 310R mind ya PS... I hereby pass copyright of the term 'GenViz' for you to use for this range :lol:

I get it sometimes, but not sure 100% on the cause. I used to get this really badly in the Flight 1 Pilatus PC-12. Try this; As you introduce fuel and the engine lights, hold down the F1 key (it's the default key for setting thrust to idle)... see if that stops you lunging forward!

For your given scenario above, I would set your HEADING to the same as the departure runway's ....... then take off, fly straight ahead, and engage the AP into HEADING mode (following the runway heading). You can then turn your Heading knob left to steer the aircraft towards the magenta GPS course. When you intercept that, you can engage NAV mode (coupled to GPS). All this assumes you're not using FSX ATC, as otherwise they will give you the headings to intercept your NAV course. The pink "Borders" in your 2nd screenshot above, are ATC regions. The dotted circle one related to an airport, and the larger lines relate to "Centre" ATC functions. ...broadly speaking.....

It doesn't have a prop/condition lever The SR22 uses a "combined power lever" that manages both manifold pressure and RPM, as a 'power' component. But I take your point that without documentation, as a newcomer to the type you maybe wouldn't know that. Aside, it's an excellent add-on, one of Eaglesoft's best. It is getting old now (released in 2007 I think) but I still fly it, as it has no real competition yet. (Carenado are releasing a SR22 soon).

I must admit I was initially unimpressed with the new layout ....... but after a few days. I've found it loads faster and is easier to navigate. So my initial pondering thumb, becomes an unambiguous; thumbs up!

Ah! Shame it's not a A300-600 but still nice that we are getting a FMC for the B4. B)

Exactly! ......... can't wait for the proper FMS-armed model. But this 'pimp' is working great in the meantime. Cool! .... A -600 will be nice, with newer Avionics to enjoy B) I'd be happy to, but I'm not sure what I'd share? - I just used FS Panel Studio to make all the changes. Took less than 5 mins. But I'll take a look at the ISG site whe I get a min, and happy to share the panel.cfg there, if that's how it's done. B)

I think you should change your name to GenViz ..... :lol: I, like a lot of simmers, have zero interest in military aviation, but I really enjoy and value your work and the quality of your products. I hope you will continue on the back of the 732 and KA 350i and create more general and commercial aviation add-ons. B)

Excellent point. I couldn't agree more! :lol:

Good. I welcome anything from Milviz; lovely attention to detail, especially as they're one of the minority of devs who realize how much audio matters in the quest for "in the cockpit" fidelity. B).

It does not operate like the real YD function (armed on ground). In this model, it uses the default YD logic and as such can only be active once in flight. Turning it on, on the ground compromises rudder authority in FSX.

Agreed, of course they're not. But not all are privileged to have flown a single nautical mile in real life. And the simulation of any aspect of aviation is subjective. Simulating a 'APU Master ON' procedure from a SOP manual, by reaching up into thin air, flicking an imaginary switch and calling "APU Master Switch ON" is a simulation if it serves to draw a parallel to the real activity. If the simulation of maintenance actions on a small GA aircraft provides people who have not the ability or desire to experience the real thing a semblance of (virtual) reality, then those maintenance aspects are relevant to a flight sim product. Now, simulating getting up at 03:30 to get to Heathrow to take on a red eye flight, that's something I don't wanna do! ..... but joking apart, some people get enjoyment from sitting in front of a long-hauler for 10+ hours. There are so many different interpretations of this fascinating hobby.

Many thanks for the help Tom; The 2nd drive is indeed purely for FSX use, to I will probably try your option 1 suggestion. Much appreciated.

With respective that link does not give any further detail on what your software does, it is just a translated French post that says the product is wonderul, excellent and better than WideView. It would be good to have a few words from you summarizing the real benefits of the program, especially the aspect that seems to interest most people: using networked PCs to provide additional FSX 'views'.

Well, it's a long title, but it's all in there! I have a second HD on my PC which is currently completely empty (it had a X-Plane 10 install on for a few hours yesterday but that didn't last, bah! meh!). Is there any way of 'moving' my existing FSX installation (which is in the Program Files (x86) folder of my regular main C:\ Hard Drive), from the C:\ drive to this new D:\ drive ? I gather it will be more complex than just doing a 'cut' and 'paste' from the C:\Program Files (x86)\Flight Simulator X folder to the new D:/ drive, as I guess the registry would need to know about the move? Any advice on whether this is possible would be really appreciated! If it's not possible, can anyone give a view, whether it is worth it (performance increase wise) investing the 12 hours in uninstalling my current FSX+addons install, to re-install everything onto the second HD? Thanks again.

Yes it's not a new capability but OPUS seem to be providing the most hassle-free way of achieving it. So Jerry, yes you could have your main FSX PC powering just the one monitor (thus boosting performance by around 50%), and then use 2 other PCs, with OPUS loaded (and they will both also require an installed copy of FSX too), to provide the other views. OPUS can be used for side views, independent to the main front view, so it's more versatile that just running a stretched front view, across 3 monitors.

It was completely the wrong decision to move that C90 topic out of the FSX Discussion forum and into the Carenado Support Forum yesterday; it was clearly a user-derived discussion about a new release; it was not a support matter. It would be useful for us all, (to ensure that topics stay on course), if the moderator who moved that topic out, could let us know the reason for doing so. I did send a PM to a Moderator yesterday, to request the 'move' be reviewed, but have not yet heard back. If all topics that refer to a product get moved from the FSX Discussion thread, this section will become a ghost town. I think you may be getting the 'Pitch' command of the (seperate) Flight Director system confused with the Autopilot servers. The Sperry AP on this 737-200 has no selectable pitch, via a control knob or dial; as said above, under AP control, the pitch of the aircraft must be set by the Pilot pushing or pulling the yoke, to set a given 'pitch rate'. The AP will then automatically trim the aircraft to maintain that pitch. The FD has a 'pitch' knob that is used purely to set a reference pitch, for the pilot to follow on the FD bars. This is generally only used on Take-off with this AP.

I totally agree Dave; I know of other people too who ran it fine on Win XP 32bit.... I think there was something amiss with my old system. I would say though that in general, the NGX will hugely benefit from the memory management improvements of a 64 bit system, particularly Win 7 64 bit.

@ Chock; I really think the 'maintenance' thing splits the community; however I'd argue (with no backing whatsoever!) that you're probably in the minority in terms of it being of little interest to you. Topping up my car's oil bores me too, but topping up oil and maintaining my own aircraft in the real world certainly would not bore me. I have an Aviation film (from Simmarket) of an Estonian flying club where they start the vid with the guy re-fuelling, checking oil, checking water in fuel etc, on his Piper PA28R-200 Arrow... and I certainly don't fast forward that part to get straight to the flying. In fact it's one of the most fascinating parts of the vid. We're all different and I'm guessing from your posts that flying fidelity is probably a lot more important to you; it is to me too and probably most, but do not dismiss the 'peripheral' aspects of flight simulation that many of us do enjoy. After all, it's all part and parcel of aviation. I also want to thank Rob Young for taking the time to give the background on the phenomenal advances that have been part of the RealAir releases for some years now. Talk about flying fidelity! .... nothing beats RealAir in this regard. B) I also agree with Rob on the outdated bureaucracy around aircraft certification et al. The "thems the rules" piece frustrates me because that attitude holds the world back and just serves to feed egos.... but that's probably for a philoshopy or psychology debate! ............. certainly it is mad to me that a 40 years old rusting spam can, can be IFR certified, whereas state of the art aircraft with better avionics just cannot achieve that. Mind you it can go in the non-certified aircraft's favour. Just look at all the low cost GA autopilot systems, like these :- http://proviationsho...param=cid%3D%26 that can only be fitted to 'experimental' non-certified aircraft, for example. I occasionally fly right seat in a Tecnam with an avionics stack that most C172s would die for ........... all VFR of course.

Nah - the devil flies X-Plane! :LMAO: