Kronzky

The OP may have been joking, but I'm sure he (and many other simmers) was considering ways of making his flights more "consequential" beneath the joking. After all, why worry about getting lost, running out of fuel, or doing a crash landing, if you can just redo it right away, without any penalties? I once worked on a military simulator -JCOVE Lite- that actually uninstalled itself if you killed one of your own guys! That may have been taking things a bit too far though — especially since nobody expected it. But for FS, my way of making my actions matter more is by recording my flights on FS Duenna. It logs your route, and anything else you do on a flight. The thing that makes it unique is that you can't hide your mistakes. Once you screw up, it's out there in your record, for everybody to see... You cannot delete your logs, and even if you abort a flight (in order to bail out of an unrecoverable situation), it will still show up in your record. With this permanent log in your mind everything you do in that plane all of a sudden DOES have consequences, and you start taking things a lot more seriously. It really puts a whole new dimension of realism in therer that I never felt when I just flew "hidden away" on my desktop...

I don't have GEX, but I have some comparisons on my site between default, FTX-Global, UTX, Prepar3d and the appropriate view in Google Earth: * Default vs. FTX Global vs. Prepar3D vs. Google Earth * Default vs. UTX vs. FTX Global + UTX vs. Prepar3D vs. Google Earth Here's one (typical) example for the city of Chihuahua, Mexico: FSX Default: FTX-Global: P3D: Google Earth:

Your best bet is probably to record the landing with something like FSRecorder, and then import and analyze the data in a spreadsheet.

The August race is now open! It's taking place in the backwoods of Vancouver, BC (so if you have Orbx's Pacific Northwest region this is an opportunity to put it to good use). The track leads through some steep and scenic valleys, and has a few challenges thrown in for good measure. There are two off-airport landings, a "how low can you go" leg, and a STOL landing (both optional, and can improve your race times). The route is set up to allow the use of sea-planes, and is about 150nm long (split into 5 segments). https://sites.google.com/site/fsebprl/august-2013-race

There's some "complicated math" happening for the scoring, in order to level the playing field a bit. :wink: It's not perfect, but it does move the different aircraft a bit closer together. Basically, we determine how long it should take you theoretically, in your particular plane, to finish each leg. Then we compare that ideal time with what you actually achieved when flying it, and the difference is your "race time". So — the closer you get to the theoretical limit, the better your score will be. As far as the An-2 is concerned, I guess if we go "by the book" it wouldn't qualify, as it's a radial engine. But you should come over to our forum, and we'll have a look. It's a unique plane, and definitely used in bush-flying, so we'll see if we can squeeze it in!

Yes, it's basically a time trial. You have one month to complete the five legs, and you can do it whenever you feel like it. The results are validated via FS-Duenna (so you have to be online when flying), and in the end the one with the fastest time (adjusted for the aircraft handicaps) will win. Which particular model are you planning to use? The rules for allowed aircraft are "Single engine fixed-wing aircraft with piston-driven, naturally aspirated engines. No turbochargers.". So, if your model matches that, you (or we, if it's a free model) do a test flight to determine the actual top speed (for the handicap system), and then you're ready to go.

The Bush Pilot's Racing League (BPRL) has just started its fourth race of the season, so if you like your flying "low and fast", and away from airports, you should check it out. This month's race leaves Kodiak island (where the last race happened), and continues on at the souther tip of Alaska. It consists of five legs, and the overall length is about 225nm. Four of the five stops are off-airport, so you have to be creative (and careful) when picking a landing spot. There are also altitude limitations in place, so finding a way through a mountain range can be a bit of a challenge. But even if you're just looking for a nice scenic ride in gorgeous environments (instead of bare-knuckle racing), feel free to join. The race got some unique routes and challenges, that should appeal to all kinds of bushpilots! Here are some of the spots that you'll have to land at: Further details about the race, and the signup forms are here: https://sites.google.com/site/fsebprl/jimmy-memorial-run

Try <Ctrl>Q and <Ctrl><Shift>Q. Keep them down for a while, as it takes a bit before things start to move.

Looks like the forum software somehow swallowed up the Google Map links to some of the segments, so here they are all in plaintext once more: http://maps.google.com/?q=http://www.kronzky.info/fs/DC3_WorldTour1.kml http://maps.google.com/?q=http://www.kronzky.info/fs/DC3_WorldTour2.kml http://maps.google.com/?q=http://www.kronzky.info/fs/DC3_WorldTour3.kml

I know you mentioned using your QW Avro plane, but if you have a soft spot for DC-3s (and who hasn't!?) I would suggest joining Buffalo Airways, and participating in their DC-3 World Tour. The legs are about 300-600nm each, can be done via traditional navigation (if you're so inclined), go to some really unique airports, and thei're definitely taking the "scenic route" (as opposed to the shortest possible way, like most RTW tours do). It's a massive project, with over 100 hops, and will take nearly a year to complete. But, since you're not flying by yourself (you can do the legs offline or online with others), at least you got some company to share your experiences with. It is split into three parts, and here are some GM overlays for the routes (click on the title for the description, or the images for the detailed maps): Segment One Segment Two Segment Three

If you do fly a lot in these areas, and you don't mind putting some work in, to make the airports usable, then I would suggest to rather go the manual route, instead of using the generic flattening meshes, as with those a lot of the airports will lose their "character". You may also want to look into the free meshes by Taburet (e.g. here). I tried them as well, and they looked just as good as the commercial ones from FS Global, but, unfortunately, also had the same issues. I guess everybody will be using the same base public-domain data for meshes anyway (after all, nobody's gonna send up their own satellite to take "exclusive" elevation pictures), so unless some commercial outfit can offer good fixes for the airports, I don't really see the point in paying for meshes that have to be fixed anyway.

Yeah, if it were so easy to fix airports, to align with updated meshes, then I'm sure somebody would've come up with an automated way already, and fixed all the ones that don't align anymore. But the fact that even PILOT'S (the FS Global creators) were only able to come up with some very generic solution (that I find rather unsatisfying) let me to believe fixing airports is not an easy or straightforward procedure. (And definitely not something you want to do if you're only visiting some far-off airport once in a while.)

Unless you're willing to spend a lot of time fixing airports that will become unusable due to the new mesh, I wouldn't recommend FS Global, or any other mesh. I've recently tried it in South America, and the results were pretty disappointing. Yes, the terrain looks more realistic, but at some point you gotta land, and when half the airports are screwed up, due to the discrepancy in data from FSX and the new mesh, then all you're left with is pretty, but unusable scenery. Sure, if you're flying in areas that are already covered fairly exact by FSX then you probably will have fewer of these problems, but in that case there's really no need for a third-party mesh in the first place. Only for areas that were a bit "neglegted" by FSX would you need a new mesh, and then you end up with these endless issues. Here's an example for a typical "obscure" airport in South America (SPPY - Chachapoyas), which lies on a ragged plateau. This is how it looks in Google Earth: The default scenery in FSX looks pretty flat and bland, but at least the airport is usable: Once you apply the FSGlobal mesh, you end up with an airport a mile deep in the ground, and rivers that flow alongside the edges of mountains: If you then apply their flattening mesh, the airport is usable again, but you lose the ruggedness of the terrain: Their flattening meshes are advertised as the fix for all these problems, but first of all, you will have to apply them yourself to the airports that are broken (so no flying into "new" airports — you will always have to check first whether they need fixing), and secondly, since they were created via a generic algorithm which flattens a circular area around the airport, you just end up with another fake terrain — one that doesn't have much more resemblence to the real thing than the original FSX one does. Here, for example, is the terrain view of another flattened airport in South America (SPLN). As you can see, the meshes created a perfect circle around the airport, and I wouldn't really call that an improvement:

If you're looking for challenges, and enjoy bush flying, you might want to look into the Bush Pilots Racing League. It's got some pretty challenging courses (with altitude limitations, off-airport landings, and mountain-hugging paths to follow). Plus, of course, you have to do it all as fast as possible, and with online tracking, so there are no second chances! The league just started, and is still a bit of work-in-progress, but if it's challenges in the bush you're looking for, you should check them out!

And, if you like to fly DC-3s, then DC-3 Airways is, of course, an excellent place to look: http://www.dc3airways.com/

You can either You can either download them directly from the DC3 Airways site (which is the authors' main "hangout"): http://www.dc3airway...oads/gauges.htm Most FS repositories will have them as well, (e.g. Simviation has a nice page for it). As far as installation — it's the same as any addon gauge, and the gauges do come with instructions. The sextant itself also comes with very detailed usage instructions, but some people find them a bit overwhelming, so I set up a little tutorial page on my site, with some "bare bones recipes": http://kronzky.info/...xtant/tutorial/

When I tried these gauges recently the drift meter worked just fine right "out of the box", but the sextant would never return a distance until I modified it a bit. (PM me if you need the modified version.)

I have both ON, and apart from the occasional rogue airport have no problems with it. The only thing I changed in the aircrafts I usually use was the max speed, so that the plane doesn't "explode" if I go 10kts over the limit (max_indicated_speed in aircraft.cfg). Once that is set to something reasonable the stress detection works just fine, e.g. affecting flaps or gears if used at inappropriate speeds. I find the loss in reality from being allowed to bounce off the ground at any speed (if I turned crashes off) higher than running into an airport obstacle once in a while. And allowing crashes gives you the chance to actually have successful wheels-up landings (otherwise you just do endless belly-flops)..

I did send emails to [email protected] twice: one on Jan 7th, and one on the 10th. Never got any replies. Then I sent another one to [email protected], on Feb 2nd, and got the same (non)-response. Then I called — once on Feb.11th, and once on Feb 14th, and was told that the issue would be forwarded to the webmaster (which, I assume, is you). Nothing ever came out of that, either. At the day of the order it looks like my email wasn't working, so that's probably why I didn't receive the automated confirmation. But that issue was fixed within days, and I also gave you other email addresses that would definitely have worked. But I never received anything. And yes, I constantly checked my spam box, so I think I did my part in this deal...

Is the MAAM online store still being attended? Has anybody ordered from there recently? Or is it just a shell? (Even though, no matter which time you visit the store it claims there are like a dozen other visitors online right now. But somehow I doubt that...) Nearly a month ago I placed an order online for a plane download, and while my credit card was charged, until now I still haven't received anything. I sent them three emails, I even called them twice, but I have not received a single email response, and while the last person I talked to (Lee) promised to look into it, nothing has happened whatsoever (this was two weeks ago). I understand their software is "donation-ware", but I *would* prefer to get something in return for my "donation"... Am I the only one with this kind of experience, or have others successfully purchased stuff from them recently?

It is still happening? I uploaded a new version after the first report by Danny, and downloaded and extracted it successfully on two different PCs without problem. If you still have issues with it, please PM me.

Also, keep in mind that different people have different definitions of "realistic". For some, it means everything in FSX has to look as close as possible to the real thing (requiring high-res terrain packages and virtual cockpits), for others the realism priority is more on the functionality (i.e. use of navigation aids, aircraft systems operations, etc.), and they couldn't care less about what the aircraft looks like from the outside, or if the trees are pretty... Trying to achieve "perfect" realism on both fronts will be either impossible, or severly limit your options (as far as usable terrains and aircrafts are concerned). So I'd suggest to figure out first what realism aspect is more important for you, and then follow Dan's advice, and get one addon at a time (it'll keep the learning curve and the frustrations down).

Glad you find it useful! As far as the terrain display is concerned — I could've probably made it more accurate, but then you'd be taking an FPS hit again, just like with the commercial solutions, and I definitely didn't want that. The main purpose of the terrain display is to give you a heads-up warning. If there's some red on there, look out the window, and make sure you're ok. The granularity is fairly rough, but it always errs on the safe side (i.e. you might see red when it's safe, but you'll never see green when there's danger). Once you develop a feel for the display you can use it for some pretty exact flying, though: I did several trips through the Rockies, way below the peaks, just using my GPS to find and follow suitable valleys; and it's quite a bit of fun navigating this way (like trying to find your way out of a maze). And for those who might pop into this thread, wondering what we're talking about — this is how the relative terrain display looks like:

I'm not familiar with the G1000, but I went through the same frustration with the 500W a while ago, and while the information is available internally, I couldn't find a way of displaying it. So I added an option to my "supercharged" 500W, to switch between the ETA for the next WP and the destination. If you want to stick with the G1000 though (and nobody can find a way to extract that data from there), you'd have to install a separate gauge for that. Even though I can display the destination ETA in my modified 500W, when I really want to arrive right on the minute, I normally sitll have a little extra gauge window open, to only display the currenttime and the ETA. It's as minimalistic as it gets, and you can download it from my site. This is how it looks:

My ATC window keeps messing itself up, no matter how often I fix it. This may have to do with me running FSX on two monitors, and often shuffling the windows around (as well as resizing them), so I'm out of hope that I can get a permanent fix for this. Are there any third party programs or utilities out there that use an alternative window (perhaps within their own application)? I'm aware that alternative ATC programs exist, but I'm afraid they'll use the same window as FSX, so that wouldn't help much. I wouldn't mind spending some money on a better ATC, but (even though I know it's not realistic) I would like to be able to read the messages (i.e. just voice communications is not enough).