tttocs

The piston model is, unfortunately, every bit as rough as the turbine one. In addition to the relationship between prop pitch and power not being right, mixture modeling is completely broken. With every plane you have to lean aggressively starting at far too low an altitude in order to maintain power and the relationship between leaning and fuel flow is wrong. The mixture issues become particularly problematic when it comes to turbo-charged aircraft which simply can't be flown in the sim as they would be in real life. Scott

It's been a bit, but as I recall it's pretty straightforward. Be sure you've used the Just Flight Model Switcher to select "F1 GNS Model". I use the 530, so the only line in panel.cfg I believe I've modified is as below: [Window09] Background_color=0,0,0 size_mm=950,687 ident=15531 visible=0 zorder=99 gauge00=rxpGNS2!GNS_530_1,0,0,950,687 window_pos= 0.660, 0.260 window_size= 0.340, 0.420 Remember that you have to go to the "Add-ons" menu in the sim after you've loaded your aircraft to actually select the 530. Also as Jay discovered above, before selecting the 530 be sure to turn on the default NAV1/COM1 radio or you won't get needle deflection. Once you've done that, go to the add-on menu and switch over to the 530. Scott

I hear ya Russ! :-) Places like Big Bear are definitely "GA" but still not small by any means. Wandering around your rendition, I'm amazed and enthralled at the detail and that's not even addressing the extensive surrounding areas. And places like KIDA and KGPI are really more "regional" in classification to my mind. In any case, I'm thrilled you guys are doing these, and doing them at the level you are! BTW, this plays into one of my pet peeves - referring to most GA planes as "little" or even "tiny". I suppose when your point of comparison is a flying megabus, but as I often pointed out to acquaintances, "if my plane is so 'tiny' why is it that the hangar that only holds my aircraft can fit 4 or 5 cars in it"? In any case, glad you guys are doing what you're doing. Keep it up! Scott

Sorry, but I have to push back on this one a bit. I fly GA in North America because I'm a licensed US pilot and that's what/where I flew (not currently active) IRL. From my perspective, prior to Orbx becoming a major developer, GA was almost completely ignored in terms of airports. I'm VERY pleased to see companies like Turbulent throwing their hats in the ring and adding to the list of folks doing quality regional and GA fields. There are plenty of devs out there doing Class B type airports. Don't begrudge us GA guys one or two quality developers who've decided to focus more on the smaller stuff. Scott

As others have noted - absolutely love your work and definitely looking to have a quality KGPI. I'm interested to see what things look like in a "P3D native" airport! Scott

There must be something wrong with us Jacek. I did the same thing with the same results. The only thing a forum search turned up for me was Shez saying he would NOT be doing KORD (along with a few other airports). Lots on the impending KDTW, but... Scott

There are options to install sets in ASCA as well because... I dunno, I guess some people like to work that way. But if you're using dynamic, you just choose that and ignore the sets. Looks to be a similar setup in SF3D. Scott

You shouldn't need anything extra to get RXP working. I've implemented it in the Turbo Arrow fairly easily. Basically you configure as though you were going to use the F1 unit and then use the RXP v2 tool to get the RXP version sub'ed in. The only gotcha that I ran into is that you have to turn on the underlying nav/com first and then switch over to the RXP unit via the in-sim add-on menu or the unit won't drive the CDI or autopilot. See this post for more details: Hope that helps, Scott

Indeed. I own the existing KLAS and yet I'm still looking forward to the upcoming new release with its much enhanced surrounding area and will be buying it. Looking at FlyTampa's website, it's pretty obvious that a lot of folks feel the same way. As for the whole "what to develop" thing, some of the criticism here seem to be based on personal desire rather than any real market viability. Devs aren't going to do airports they can't make money from, plain and simple. There are a lot of reasons they might feel they can't make money, including things like higher development costs, lack of good airport information and/or imagery or a simple case of the market being too small. In most cases it's going to be a combination of these things. If a given airport is really a slam dunk gold mine, somebody's going to eventually do it. If an airport has really been over done, developers are going to stop being successful with their new releases and will rethink their strategies. Scott

OK, I think I found his change. I'll give it a try. Scott

Hi Bill, Thanks for the response. However... I'm not finding the EGT fix from Bert that you mention. I see you referencing it in the thread you linked to, but nothing from Bert. I'm guessing that's in another thread so I'll do some additional snooping around. Scott

That was AWESOME! Scott

For all the talk of "3D" clouds, the thing that interests me most is their claims of greatly improved thunder storm depiction - something that no wx engine, including AS/ASCA which I otherwise love - gets right. As an example, last night I was flying the Turbine Duke from KSEZ to KDEN on a typical summer day (historical wx from last July) featuring warm temps and widely scattered "fair weather" cumulus over most of the route. Approaching Colorado's Front Range from the west I began to see a thickening of cumulus clouds in front of me. My biggest clue that these were actually significant buildups at that point? The lighting that started to appear underneath, as otherwise they simply didn't look very threatening. IRL, at the point I diverted, the threat would have been both obvious and ominous. If someone could somehow solve that problem and make such buildups look like the monsters they are, I'd be thrilled. Scott

I probably shouldn't have used the word "default" as that's a bit misleading. The buildings used aren't fsx/p3d default, but I believe are from their own Orbx Libs, just as many freeware packages depend on others' custom libraries. So they're not FSX/P3D default, but they're generally not fully custom buildings either. In some cases this works pretty well - for example, I've flown into KAPA in metro Denver many times and taxied up to the Jet Center for a $100 hamburger at Perfect Landing and darned if the Jet Center they've built doesn't represent that pretty well. In other cases where there's nothing in the library that matches it will be just OK. I think the freeware global airports and the modified fields in regions are a substantial upgrade over default and not to be dismissed. But they're still no substitute for a good payware field, and an airport like PANC deserves a 1st class treatment. Scott

RXP offers a very slick tool which helps with integration making it fall-off-a-log simple in most cases, and Ryan B. has put together a gauge which handles GTN button integration in the VC bezel. In short, most planes that offer F1 integration should work fine with the RXP equivalents. Don't have the PC12 so I can't speak to that directly, but I do have the RXP 750 integrated into the Turbine Duke for example. Everything works fine, including coupled LPV approaches. RXP will be releasing a G500/600 package soon as well. FYI, not affiliated in any way with RXP, just a satisfied customer. Scott

KTNP is a really nice, atmospheric airport. If you've ever been in the area you'll know what a great job the 29Palms guys did on it. As I've said elsewhere - wish these guys would do some other small airports in the SW US. Scott

They do, but you have to recognize the limits of those enhancements. While they generally try to correctly place structures, the structures used are standard library objects, not custom replicas as you get in a separate payware airport. And of course, any airport is a snapshot in time and may no longer be correct following mods. In short, Orbx enhanced airports in their regions are certainly better than default, but they're also nowhere near standalone payware quality. Scott

And every once in a while, the hype turns out to be true. Look at what ASN accomplished when it first released. It solved issues that had existed in EVERY wx engine to date (and yes, I've used pretty much all of 'em - wx is important to me). To my mind it actually DID end up being a gamechanger. I like to keep an open mind and wait and see what actually comes out before getting too carried away either pro or con. Scott

Which are you referring to? The RXP stuff was 40% off over Thanksgiving. Scott

I can't help you with KBZN, as I have that and the underlying Orbx region which it's designed to work with. As for KSEZ, I use it with MSE v2 Arizona photoscenery (no Global) without any obvious issues. As for LOD, I use 6.5 in P3Dv4 and that seems more than sufficient for my needs. Scott

Good call, Vic. Really scratched my head when I saw that, but good job rolling it back. Scott

I used that freeware version a while back as well (in fact, I think you're the one who put me on to it) - but it's really matched to photoscenery and would likely look pretty rough with SoCal. As Michael notes above, there's still hope for an Orbx release, so I think I'll forget about the Sim720 version for now. Still on the fence about McClellan, but at least I now know it's SoCal compatible. Scott

Excellent. Glad to hear they've added direct support, but a bit surprised it isn't mentioned on their web pages. Thanks for letting me know! Scott

Thanks to both of you for the comments. Yeah, I recall people weren't hugely complimentary about SBA. The problem is, it fills a nice hole in that part of CA. Back when I used Blue Sky photoscenery, I had a fairly nice freeware version designed to work with that photoscenery but I don't want to go that route anymore. Michael, I strongly agree that I'd rather wait for Orbx - it's just that it has been so long... Scott - yes I do have both Big Bear and Twentynine Palms and I completely agree. They're both absolutely top tier sceneries. I wish the 29Palms guys would do more US airports, and Turbulent have shot to the top of the pile in terms of developers who's work is almost an automatic buy for me. I've also been enjoying KIDA from them as well as 2O3. I don't have KMBS as that's simply not a part of the country I fly in. Scott

Can anyone comment on how well Sim720's Santa Barbara and McClellan airports work with Orbx SoCal? I know that Orbx had announced KSBA, but for now it seems to be a dead project. It would be nice to have a GA reliever airport in the San Diego area as well. With Sim720's Christmas sale these two together would be 25% off. They advertise compatibility with MSE and Orbx Global, but not the full-fat SoCal region. Orbx' compatibility forum references a patch for McClellan, but the link to it is dead. Any thoughts much appreciated, Scott