Jump to content

FlyBoyMike

Members
  • Content Count

    345
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 Neutral

About FlyBoyMike

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Brisbane, Australia

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

About Me

  • About Me
    Like all types of flying but I LOVE my heavies!
  1. Thanks for that. I've downloaded the files and copied them to my EZCA2 folder and will give it a try. Do I still need to keep the 'turbulence effect scale' setting in AS2016 as 35?
  2. So managed to work out that it was actually the Ezdok 2.0 profile causing this problem as the effects processor settings send additional turbulence data to AS2016. Turning these down seems to have fixed the problem. Does anyone who uses Ezdock 2.0 have these settings turned on at all when using AS?
  3. Hi, I just recently purchased AS2016 and installed it in P3D 3.4.22.19868 running on Windows 10 64-bit and have performed a few test flights in the NGX. I'm experiencing quite negative affects of turbulence on the aircraft once airborne causing it to bank left and right wildly during climb, this gets progressively worse near cruise and almost impossible to maintain straight and level flight. I'm not sure if it's AS2016 causing this or something else such as FSUIPC but I have just updated FSUIPC4 to 4.97 (P3D 3.4) to try and fix it without any success. So far I've tried the following. Turn down turbulence scale, wind turbulence effects, and wake turbulence in AS2016 Update FSUIPC Confirmed turbulence and thermal effects are disabled in P3D Confirmed wind smoothing is disabled in FSUIPC So far this is the only aircraft I've tested with AS2016 and it's been a while since I've flown it but I don't remember these effects being so bad with ASN. I've also just updated to the latest version of the NGX (1.20.8413) via Operations Center.
  4. I managed to pick up their 777 base pack the other day as I want to occasionally fly the -200ER type with three engine variants that's been missing from the rest of my fleet (I already own the PMDG 777 types). Have to say I've enjoyed it so far after a couple of short flights. Not as detailed and in-depth as the PMDG but definitely flyable with no major issues so far. $10 USD well spent.
  5. The winds aloft generally seem OK however they seem fairly inaccurate when flying over oceans. I did a flight from NZAA to RKSI the other day crossing the Pacific and had a tailwind almost the whole way when there should have been headwinds, this greatly affected fuel burn and I ended up a bit heavy on arrival. Midway through the flight I would disable xEnviro and turn on default XP 10 weather, then compared the winds with the ones reported on SkyVector for those altitudes and they were the same. Both sources use NOAA so would expect them to be accurate. I then turned xEnviro back on and got the tailwinds once again. Everything else about xEnviro so far is excellent and it produces some stunning visuals and effects however I do hope the devs put a bit more focus on areas such as wind data.
  6. Awesome shots! Yes the weather depiction off coasts is great however I was referring to flying over open ocean. I noticed on several occasions that no weather was being depicted, but I may be wrong as I'm currently flying just north of the Solomon Islands in the Pacific enroute to RKSI and the cloud coverage looks really good right now. I'm still a bit concerned about winds aloft over oceans as I should have a light headwind when I currently have a tailwind instead.
  7. Has anyone noticed that when flying oceanic routes xEnviro no longer depicts correct winds aloft and cloud coverage? I've done a couple of flights over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans recently and noticed the sky is always clear and winds are not reported correctly. Other than that absolutely been loving this product so far. It would be a shame if oceanic weather is not covered as it would limit my flying to only over the continents.
  8. I haven't yet had a chance to download and try out the update so hopefully will get some time this weekend. So far I've been very impressed with this aircraft and has become one of my favourites in X-Plane. I actually quite like the updated the cockpit textures that came with the previous update. Love those screenshots! Are you using any additional scenery for Sydney area? I notice a nicely detailed city centre in the background of one of them.
  9. Well depends on how you look at it. If you've never used one before then yes, it would be more challenging. If you simply program an FMC and push autopilot right after take-off then probably not so challenging. It's challenging flying IFR using radio nav aids like in the FJSim 727 and 737 but you'd normally use an FMC if simulating airliner ops in a modern jet.
  10. I think if you're simulating an airliner to maximum detail then the FMS is extremely important as this is the 'bread and butter' of flying these types of aircraft. I think it's just as important as engines, flight model, hydraulics etc and should not be overlooked. Sure you can opt to have a simpler model with a more 'basic' or no FMC, but you're just not going to learn as much IMO. If like me you master flying the model on a basic level then you'll just end up 'thirsting' for something more challenging and more complex that operates EXACTLY like it does in real life. GA planes and older generation jets don't have an FMS but they're a different kettle of fish entirely. I think FF did a much better job overall on their 757.
  11. True. As an example I find that when I compare the Flight Factor 777 FMS to the one in the PMDG 777 there's some really significant differences in capabilities. Some people might not notice them but little things such as not being able to do RVSM step climbs, lateral offsets, enter manual step climbs on legs page etc. Makes it difficult if you're trying to work with flight plans using PFPX. Also I think the de-rated TO and assumed temp thrust calculations are still way off on the FF 777, makes it impossible to use programs such as TOPCAT with it. From what I've seen so far of the IXEG 737 and the attention to detail I think they've got this area well covered.
  12. Tried that one. Seemed OK except whenever weather updates happen it causes major wind shifts that tend to displace the aircraft a lot. When using EFASS UltraWX the transitions seem to be a lot smoother.
  13. Not sure about Opus as I've never used it but I do have ASN and FSGRW for FSX and like them both. I think the FSGRW devs once mentioned a while ago that they plan on releasing a version for X-Plane at some point but no idea how far along that is. I've used EFASS UltraWX in X-Plane as well and it seems nice enough but don't think it's accurate at times.
  14. Right now as of this update it IS my one and only preferred heavy jet in XP I'm hesitant to even go back to FSX now and try the latest PMDG update or the 300ER because of all the great aircraft and updates that we've had in XP recently.
  15. Hi Jcomm, if you get the opportunity I highly recommend the FF 757. As much as I like their 777 especially now at 1.6.1 the 757 is a much more polished product. There's just something about the 747 though. I think it's great to finally have a well modelled one in X-Plane.
×
×
  • Create New...