lzamm

First off, "packages" in MSFS may refer to either the official content or the "community" add-ons. During the installation you get the choice both of where to put the app itself and, a bit later, where to put the packages. Using separate drives should not slow down the simulator (it may even speed it up slightly if the program needs to access both at the same time). However, the packages form the bulk of the simulator both in terms of gigabytes and in terms of the need to access them. Thus putting the packages on an HDD will definitely slow down the loading process at least. I don't know if it affects the in-game speed as I use an SSD. A half-way house, if you have enough space on your C drive, would be to install both the simulator and the packages there - during installation this means just the official content - and then put your addons somewhere else and use the MSFS Addons Linker to link them to the simulator. The addons then won't use up space on your C drive, but the speed will still suffer if they're on HDD. Another option the Linker gives you is to put all your add-ons in their own folder in your C-drive for now and then move them to your HDD (or a new SSD) when your C-drive fills up. You can even have multiple folders for the addons (including on different drives) but that may be excessively complicated. Either way, the Addons Linker is the best way to manage your add-ons and definitely a must-use. As a guide, my MSFS install, including all the latest updates, consists of 8GB in the apps folder and 156GB in the official packages folder so you're looking at 164GB for the base install if you put it all on one drive. This is likely to increase as Asobo release more official content (such as the GOTY edition and future World Updates).

Gluten is what makes bread bread. While you're merrily adding even more of it to your recipes, spare a thought for us celiacs who have to do without 😊

I don't think that's likely. The charges are hiding information from the FAA, not producing a dangerous aircraft. The elephant in the room is that the FAA itself seriously dropped the ball on this one through its lack of oversight (much as it did with the 787) and having the excuse of being deliberately misinformed is a useful piece of bureaucratic a$$-covering.

Not saying that at all. But he's the only one taking the rap. Not just unfair and unjust. It also removes any incentive to change things at Boeing, which would be an admission of guilt (remember how long it took them to fix the PTU's on the 737?).

No way. Boeing settled with the DoJ for 2.5 billion (meaningless, Boeing will just add a few dollars to the price of every plane they sell the USAF) to end a criminal investigation into the department's actions. The little guy, who doubtless followed his boss's orders and then was dumb enough to crow about it, doesn't get that option. Hung out to dry is correct.

Good one, reminds me of an airshow I visited several years ago - in the 80's probably. A Fiesler Storch (WW2 German observation aircraft), possibly a replica, landed across the width of the runway. Then proceeded to take off in what was left. Now that's STOL!

If all you want is real-time weather based on METAR's (no new textures or effects), try out P3DWX - it's free!

Not that the VC10 ever had a Garmin 😀. IIRC they started off with a doppler fit (like the early 707's) and had the C-IVA INS fitted later.

The word "torque" is used (or misused) to describe a number of effects related to rotary motion, however if I understand the video correctly the guy's referring to the gyroscopic effect of the rotating parts of the engine, rather than any airflow or aerodynamic effects. In most cases - with some notable exceptions such as the rotary engines in WWI fighters such as the Sopwith Camel - these effects are small compared to the mass (or I should say moment of inertia) of the aircraft. On the other hand the PT-6 gets fitted to some small airplanes, too. Many many years ago I visited the Rolls Royce plant at Filton where they built the Pegasus engines for the Harrier. The engineer giving us the tour went into some detail into the efforts made to cancel out the angular momentum of the two shafts, as the gyroscopic effects can apparently make manoeuvring in the hover quite interesting. He gave me the impression that it wasn't something that jet engine makers usually worried about.

Yet another live weather injector is FSXWX, which is free but may be a bit complicated to install as it does not have an installer but must be installed manually.

A few more numbers here. The guy certainly thinks big. The numbers in the article seem to more or less match those in the paper cited above, which assumes a 70GW laser array. For comparison the power of the Space Shuttle's engines and SRB's at liftoff is 12GW. This focussed into a beam that's only 900m across at the edge of the solar system. To avoid atmospheric losses, DESTAR 4 is on an orbital platform. Besides interstellar propulsion, it can be used to vaporize incoming meteorites as part of a space defence system. I suppose care has to be taken not to point that beam anywhere near the Earth - though there will be those who will find this capability useful. As described, the system is strictly one-way. For return trips, according to the paper, "In cases of short distance travel, such as a manned mission to Mars for instance, two DE-STAR systems are employed, one orbiting the Earth and one stationed at the destination. "

Or a bit closer to home, the Gimli Glider.

On a unix system it would be easy - a simple shell script using sed. Never tried it on Windows to be frank, but apparently with PowerShell you can do something similar: get-content somefile.txt | %{$_ -replace "expression","replace"} Source: windows - Is there any sed like utility for cmd.exe? - Stack Overflow

Nah. That's more of an engineering tool than a game 😉

That is the case with light aircraft, but in most airliners the trim moves the horizontal stabiliser not the elevator, and can certainly lead to reduced or insufficient authority if badly out of trim.

I don't think we'll see many crossovers from Xplane to MSFS. Have any been announced to date?

One-track minds 🙂 What strikes me about starship is how much more like the sci-fi rockets I read about when I was young it is. Buck Rogers, Dan Dare and even Fireball XL5 come to mind. Particularly with pictures such as this:

The module itself won't help you if it isn't referenced in the panel.cfg (which it isn't). There's some good stuff on flying propliners at Propliner Tutorial (calclassic.com) Nothing specific to the Howard, but plenty on the DC-6 and Connie. (Actually the whole site is worth a look, it has some great planes, including the Constellation I mentioned above) .

In any case FSX/P3d does not correctly model superchargers (if at all). Doug Dawson made a module which gives this functionality, and it is used to good effect in Manfred Jahn's Constellation and presumably in other propliner models. I downloaded the Howard file and there is no sign of the module in the panel.cfg. There's also a picture in the panel documentation that says "supercharger levers - inop for now" so I guess it hasn't been implemented. Certainly the lack of superchargers will affect the model if you try and fly by the numbers.

Having worked in a competitive technological environment and been on the receiving end countless times, I'd be very surprised if Mr. Randazzo hasn't lit a rocket under his co-workers' collective a$$e$ following the release of the CRJ and it enthusiastic (with some exceptions) reception. The clink of Aerosoft's cash registers can probably be heard across the ocean. No problem with that, if anything it's all to the good.

Unreal Weather - Live METAR Support for Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020: Unreal Weather - Live METAR 1.7 Released!

Seriously thinking of getting one of these. However I don't have a 10850 or a 3090. How would a 9070/2080 combo cut it?

No need to press LOC on a normal ILS approach. From the FCTM: When cleared for the ILS, the APPR pb should be pressed. This arms the approach mode and LOC and GS are displayed in blue on the FMA. At this stage the second AP, if available, should be selected. If the ATC clears for a LOC capture only, the crew will press LOC p/b on the FCU. If the ATC clears for approach at a significant distance, e.g. 30 nm, the crew should be aware that the G/S may be perturbed and CAT 1 will be displayed on FMA till a valid Radio Altimeter signal is received.

Useful rule of thumb for a 3 degree descent is 5x groundspeed. Thus 200kt groundspeed requires 1000fpm. BTW you don't have to depend on LNM to get the TOD 🙂 Another useful rule of thumb is 3x altitude (10000 ft requires 30 nautical miles), but then you have to factor in any significant head/tailwinds yourself.

Purely out of curiosity, does anyone know what causes the checkerboard pattern? A corrupted texture, missing texture, or what?