tttocs

Interesting. No, I've not tried it as I don't do the MSFS betas but it would be a welcome fix to look forward to for 7.2 release. It is better in '24 than it was in '20, but still... Scott

Using SI with PSXT is all well and good, but the traffic you'll see will not be controlled by SI. That's an absolute show-stopper for me as I value having the traffic I see under the same ATC control as I am far more than having it adhere to any particular schedule but knowing nothing about either the controller's or my existence. Keep in mind that AI traffic in SI is still in beta and a work in progress. They note this quite transparently on their site so I don't see that saying their traffic is built from real-world schedules as being in any way misleading. Among other things, traffic levels are variable and can be changed by the user. Plus, that traffic has to be sequenced with you having been injected into the equation. This is precisely why they base their starting point on schedules rather than live RW data. Given these factors, there obviously can't be a complete 1:1 correspondence between real world and in-sim traffic. Give it time and I'm sure it'll get better. Seeing what they've done with ATC even over the last few months has been nothing short of amazing, so I expect traffic will continue to improve as well. Scott

Yes, you'll have turbulence but setting it to "realistic" makes MSFS' ground handling in crosswinds issues even more unrealistic. I use medium for GA as a compromise. It's way too tame in flight, but less ridiculous in its ground handling in winds. As with so many things, it becomes a case of "what bugs you the least". YMMV and all that. As above - it's a matter of what bugs you least. AS in active mode may look better, but its quirks are not insubstantial. In addition to the transition issues you've also got the lack of approaching fronts and so on. And the transitions have nothing to do with "streaming updates", it's inherent in the design which basically uses presets to reflect the wx where you currently are. When weather changes, the presets have to change and so you get these unrealistic transitions. So, for example, if flying towards a front, you don't see the approaching system. When you fly into the cloudy area, the presets are changed, again based on where you currently are and clouds suddenly build in. Not HiFi's fault, as it's the only way they could implement active given that MS don't open up their wx engine to developers, but realistic in its transitions - it is not. That's why they offer passive mode. So yeah - go with what works for you. Scott

2.3 GB non-silent update here (does that make it a "noisy" update? 😁). Store version. No noticeable change between this and the original SU7 release that I can see, at least flying the TBM 850. Must be time to pull the Phenom back out of the hangar! Scott

And the number of times I've had to "wait in line" is exactly... zero. It's not like this happens a lot. I'll gladly trade the (very!) occasional network /server glitch for the (very large) number of times I'd CTD in P3D. Or the long load times, the lousy scenery, the middling performance, the dead flat runways, the wx that didn't reach the horizon, the limited areas I flew because I couldn't upgrade scenery everywhere... In short - I do NOT MISS P3D. AT ALL! No, MSFS isn't perfect and there are certainly issues I'd love to see resolved. But for me, it is BY FAR the best, most trouble free sim I've ever used. I'm seeing some pretty strong reactions here, considering the number of times we've been locked out of this thing. Perspective. Scott

Well, I'd not go so far as to say it quite so definitively, but for a host of reasons I've always felt potential server load/bandwidth issues to be a far more likely culprit than the villain of some many Avsim denizens' - the dreaded console. I certainly can't quantify or prove it, but among other things I've noted my worst perceived scenery quality issues all seem to come on weekends when loads are most likely the highest. (And a special shout out to the first person who jumps in with "but I've got 1.21 gigablobs of superfiber bandwidth, that can't be it!".) 😆 Another telling sign - since I'm retired, my biggest block of free time is nominally in the afternoons so that's when I usually sim. And I just don't typically see many of the issues reported here so often. My mornings and evenings are my busiest times so I don't typically sim in the evening when loads are much higher. Scott

Excellent! Many thanks! Scott

Understood, but that's what was being referenced in regards to reductions and MS bandwidth. Scott

Coupla things here. First of all, the LOD decrease at altitude issue has nothing to do with streaming vs downloading. We ALL stream the base scenery - so bandwidth (Microsoft's, not yours) could well be the ruling issue. And second of all, despite what you may do, as we all get pushed more and more to the MP, more and more streaming will occur for most users. So again - bandwidth at MS's end. Scott

Be careful here. Those "Darn Consoles" are pretty much why we have this sim. Scott

Following the magenta line is really as much a "using the autopilot" thing as it is a purely navigational thing. You can always choose to hand fly, whether VORs or GPS waypoints are used. You just miss the joy of having to tune frequencies and manage which VOR or NDB you're tracking and the additional joy of accounting for signal degradation, scalloping, station passage and all that fun stuff. Despite the many decommissioned ground navaids, you can still usually piece together a reasonable VOR to VOR flight plan with a bit of work - at least in the US. It's something I do fairly regularly just for grins. One other thing to consider about GPS however that's very much an advantage to GA IFR flying. Back when I started RW flying, smaller GA fields were often limited to maybe a non-precision VOR or NDB approach or no IAPs at all. These days with GPS, more and more small purely GA fields feature multiple instrument approaches, often including precision LPV approaches. In many ways, it makes GA instrument flying far more versatile than in the "good ol' days". And yes, in some ways even more fun. And again, it doesn't HAVE to be about the magenta line as you can still "fly the needles" yourself. I love hand flying instrument approaches, whether they're traditional ground-based or RNAV (GPS). Just some additional thoughts... Scott

There is a decommissioned mod on flightsim.to, but I believe it only works in 2020. https://flightsim.to/addon/72415/worldwide-update-decommissioned-navigation-aids Would love such a thing as well, as I too still enjoy the occasional old school navigation. Scott

Yes, I'm aware he's still around and active, though I don't know anything about FFX 😉. Just wanted to make sure the OP knew that the video gave excellent - but at least partly out of date - information. Scott

I don't have the Honda Jet so I can't comment specifically, and there are things in this video that are probably gonna be helpful, but a warning. Many of the Les O'Reilly videos on SPAD, while very good, are also very old, and SPAD.neXt has changed a lot over that time frame. The video was done on what was then a beta of 0.9.12.47. The current release is 0.9.24.26. FYI. Scott

By contrast, Say Intentions supports GA very well, both VFR - including flight following - and IFR, and includes GA traffic flying RW traffic patterns at smaller airports. That said, I agree with what Craig has said here. Without a background in navigation and proper IFR and VFR procedures I think both programs will simply frustrate you. They're not really good for initial learning, though they can be valuable to hone what you have already learned. There is a lot of information and many tutorials out there which you may want to check out first. Then when familiar, you'll have a better framework to consider what you might like for ATC. I did a quick look on Google for "tutorials for aviation navigation and atc" and came up with a fair number of good resources. Perhaps others might have more specific suggestions. Scott

After I lost all my controls in 2020 and prior to moving to 2024, I moved everything to SPAD.neXt. This both guarantees I won't have the issue again regardless of sim used, and allowed me to bypass the somewhat clunky 2024 control setup. And yes, those SPAD.neXt profiles are backed up. Prior to this, I already used SPAD.neXT for all of my switch and radio panels, but did rudder, yoke and throttle axes in MSFS. The only reason I posted was to let the person who thought 2020 meant he was safe from the problem know that it can happen in 2020 as well. Scott

The only time I've ever had this happen was in 2020. Scott

It's not a premium voice pack, such as you get with BATC. It adds the option of a different AI which they say can be a bit faster to respond and a bit better at voice recognition. It also allows you to amp the traffic levels "beyond 11". If you subscribe, you can get a one week trial of the optional AI. I did that and it didn't seem much difference in the AI's capabilities for my use. I forgot to try enabling the extra traffic levels so I can't comment on that. It also enables persistent memory for your flight crew which I don't use. For the time being, I decided not to keep it after my trial ended. YMMV. If paying monthly it's an additional $5.95, or an additional $59.95 for one year. Scott

Absolutely. SI's ATIS is often highly entertaining with various bits and pieces flagged as out of service, runways/taxiways temporarily closes for maintenance and so on. Definitely keeps you on your toes. Can't recall offhand where I was, but I had to takeoff with a significant crosswind a few days back as the favored runway was closed for maintenance. Scott

Fair enough - I'll take you at your word then. No worries. Nor do I. That was never my point - though personally I do choose to hangar one plane for the time being. Scott

We'll have to agree to disagree here. It is ABSOLUTELY whataboutism. The very definition! Not trying to excuse anybody for anything in the past, or give someone a "pass", for past transgressions. This isn't about Raul (again, see above - I'm not a member of his fan club), much as you seem to want to make it so. Correct or not, your argument is irrelevant to this issue. Just pointing out that the bug breaks something real, it affects a plane I own and fly in a very negative way and it's not some reddit panic. That's it. Nothing more. You seem to want to make this into some grand retribution for past sins. Cheez Whiz. Now you've gone from whataboutism to some serious axe grinding. Scott

Not claiming it's a "disaster". Just refuting the claim that its a nothing burger from some random redditors. That said, do you fly the Phenom? It's already a slippery airplane and I know I wouldn't even try to descend this given these numbers. It's a severe negative impact on the flight model of this plane, and yes - I do believe it basically renders it unflyable. Whataboutism much? I'm not Raul's biggest fan, but I do like the Phenom, and the issue is real. This (above) is irrelevant to that issue. Again, not trying to blow this up into something it isn't. But the issue is significant for some planes, and it is real and not just some artificial reddit crisis. Scott

There's a bit more it than that. Pls see the original report from Raul - FSReborn. Hardly some random redditor. He rates the bug severity as a Blocker - effectively messing up the flight model in all of his planes. Please read the whole thing yourself. As I noted earlier, the Phenom can be slippery enough descending. This takes it to a new level, essentially rendering it un-flyable for now. MSFS DevSupportSU7 Engine performance or drag is wrong!Version: 1.9.16 Frequency: Consistently Severity: Blocker Marketplace package name: FSR300E and my entire fleet Context: In flight? Bug description: All my products speed performance is trowed o Scott

Understood. No worries, Ron. I do use SI and indeed have no problems in that regard, but I don't currently use BATC, so would have loved to have seen the difference in voice recognition in a recent video such as this. Both products change so fast that it's difficult to keep track of where each of them are any more. And to my point about descents and vectoring on approach and wanting to see a larger variety, I did a flight today from KBFI (Boeing Field, Seattle) to KMYL (McCall, Idaho) and was assigned the RNAV Ry 34 approach into KMYL. McCall is a mountain airport in a fairly narrow valley at 5,000' with high terrain on three sides. Handling descending and vectoring here is a real challenge. Would have loved to have seen this kind of approach in a comparison as well. And FYI, SI with its recent updates, did an incredible job of descending and vectoring me appropriately to the final approach course. Scott

New normal for some, perhaps. As noted earlier, I got an update notification on the launch screen followed by an obvious download and application. Also running the store version. Don't know why the difference. Scott