Jump to content

xplanery

Commercial Member
  • Content Count

    2,592
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

250 Excellent

About xplanery

  • Rank
    Member - 2,000+

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

3,273 profile views
  1. P3D is basically an improved and more stable version of FSX, so yes I would recommend it over FSX. X-Plane has also seen huge improvements over the years, but system wise I don't think you'll be able to find as good 737 as the PMDG is for it. Also one plus side is that most of FSX scenery works without issues on P3D V4, even if some developers like to charge extra for updating, but that can be avoided simply through using migration tool of some kind to use the original installer of the FSX version.
  2. Most people seem to be getting at least equally good performance with P3D V4 as their did with V3, thus I see no problem there, though of course soon after release there might be some bugs left. I don't mind some old gauges not working, I'll be mostly flying just a couple of payware tubeliners anyway and I can expect most of them to be updated sooner or later. Majestic Dash 8 & FSLabs A32x and Aerosoft A330 will give me enough fun until I reach retirement in 50 years or so, and all these companies have very fair pricing policies compared to some other major players out there. What really matters to me is that most of the scenery I've purchased over the years will work with P3D V4, I have no interest whatsoever in buying all that stuff again for X plane or whatever. Only thing I've ever needed for simming is more stable FSX with no OOM problems, and this is exactly it.
  3. Big thanks to everybody for suggestions! We've decided to make Albuquerque Sunport (KABQ) as our next project, however at later stage we'll definitely consider many of the other suggestions too. We would be very happy to receive images of terminal and other buildings in KABQ and other suggested airports. Often the hardest part of creating an airport is getting enough quality imagery for detailed modeling and texturing, so if any of you have the chance to take a lot of photographs of an airport you would want created, please PM me. :smile:
  4. I'm planning to start some new airport scenery projects with a friend, but I would prefer to create scenery for ones that haven't been previously created for FSX/P3D in decent quality (so mere AFCAD's and such don't count). So I thought I could ask here for some suggestions / ideas. Are there any airports you would really want to see with no existing quality addon-scenery for them? Willing to do ones located anywhere in the world, as long as there's sufficient image data available on the internet, or from you. Thanks in advance for any suggestions! :smile:
  5. Coolsky for 30 as it's much more detailed, if you want fly other models then also Sky Simulations.
  6. I once removed it and if I remember right the only application that got broken as a result was some useless default movie editor of Microsoft, otherwise everything worked well. I haven't deleted it from my current FSX setup though, simply placing uiautomationcore.dll into FSX directory seems to work in this case.
  7. IMO BBS isn't much better than Wilco, at least the last time I tried I found the flight dynamics somewhat worse than those of Wilco. The FBW feels clumsy compared to let's say Aerosoft A32x, the aircraft is very slow to turn even with maximum left/right input. Graphically BBS A330/A340 is of course better than Wilco...
  8. Very sad to hear this, rest in peace Tom. Without his important work FS community wouldn't be what it is now.
  9. Wilco, it has better manual flying handling for sure.
  10. It's probably okay until you hand fly it, it's not smooth or realistic at all.
  11. This is what I've encountered too. The last version flew like a rock, this one flies like an old rusty 747 that has some serious issues with its hydraulics. Compared to Aerosoft's Airbuses BBS A330/A340 are very unresponsive to control inputs, you can move stick full left / right and for a second or two there's no real effect whatsoever, there's a long delay and the response isn't smooth at all. Oh well, I guess I need to wait for Aerosoft A330, it's not like I had much hope in this project left anyway.
  12. Probably in 10 years I would assume. But first they'll release a PZL M-15 Belphegor equiped with full functional Soviet, mildly intoxicated pilot.
  13. I agree, it's a real shame. Perhaps the situation would be different if Level D openly admitted that the 757 project is dead, I think them claiming they are working on one probably kept some other developers from creating one, thankfully QW did it anyway with decent complexity.
  14. How exactly? The Chinese would have had absolutely no reason to mess around with a civilian 777 flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. This would also explain why none of the "big players" - regarding radar and satellite observation - came out with any helpful knowledge. If the Chinese had shot it down US government would have let the entire world to know that a long time ago already.
  15. I would recommend just switching to QW. As somebody who has flown on 757's many times QW really gives me a lot better sense of actually being there than the CS does... I guess it's a mixture of superior flight dynamics & sounds.
×
×
  • Create New...