RioPilot

I finally managed to map the controls, but every time I exit the aircraft my avatar either falls to the center of the earth or gradually floats higher. I'm unable to move or look around in either case.

Yep, if you select the profile and click the "Profile manager" button, you can Link the profile to the aircraft you have loaded up in the sim. If you do this for every aircraft, the profile will automatically change depending on the aircraft. All in all, I don't personally find Brunner too cumbersome to use. Aside from the initial setup, it's only a matter of opening up the CLS2Sim application and initiating the yoke. Then connecting to the sim once the sim is loaded. A minor inconvenience to be sure, but nothing compared to my Prepar3d days, when it felt like I had to load up countless applications just to get things going. Like ActiveSky, and other 3rd party applications,

I have the Brunner CLS-E NG. It's obviously pricey, but in my opinion it brings the closest feeling to an actual aircraft (at least judging from my experience flying small GA aircraft). I have 3 Brunner control profiles set up at the moment. One for light aircraft, another for heavier aircraft (like airliners and turboprops), and another specific to the Aerosoft CRJ. The profiles can be linked to each aircraft so that when you change aircraft, the Brunner profile automatically switches accordingly. I also use this in conjunction with SPAD for keymapping. Overall, it just provides an excellent feeling of the forces involved in flight. Not a perfect replication, to be fair, but definitely better than something like the Saitek Yoke, which I used previously. For example, when flying a 172, letting go of the yoke on the ground results in it dropping forward due to the weight of the elevator. Then, when throttling up for takeoff, the controls stiffen as you feel the airflow go over the control surfaces. During stalls, you feel the mushiness of the controls. You'll also feel bumps in the air translate to slight movements in the yoke during flight (though honestly, I'm unsure if these are random impulses, or are actually a result of factors like wind/weather). When flying heavier aircraft with the other control profile, you'll get a heavier hydraulic control feeling. And all these profiles can also be customized and further fine-tuned to more closely match reality. You can also configure things like stall stick shakers, ground roll vibrations, and engine vibrations. I briefly looked at the Brunner Rudder pedals, as well as their control stick. I can't justify buying either. Just too much cost involved. I have and use the Warthog HOTAS for aircraft with control sticks, and currently use the Saitek rudder pedals. I'm pleased with both, and while I may get new rudder pedals one day, I'm not sure I see the worth in getting force feedback ones.

This add-on of mine has been out for a while, but I've restrained from advertising it extensively as I still had a number of things I wanted to do to improve it. For those who noticed the pyramids of Teotihuacan were missing, and would like them to be represented in this sim, this add-on may be for you! The latest version (1.2), now includes Levels of Detail, Google-derived satellite imagery, and other adjustments to the 3D photogrammetry models, night lighting, and the inclusion of a handcrafted museum. The updated version of this add-on is a bit more on the larger side, but users can choose to forgo the add-on folder which includes the updated Google satellite imagery. This can be downloaded at either one of the two links below: https://flightsim.to/file/731/city-of-teotihuacan https://www.nexusmods.com/microsoftflightsimulator/mods/156

Is it just me, or does the C172 feel a tad underpowered? When doing a normal, no flap takeoff, it feels like the aircraft struggles to maintain an airspeed above 60 knots. This is with the plane almost level to the horizon, near sea level, so lean mixture isn't really needed.

I'm trying to understand what exactly happened there. It's like he noticed he was going too far to the left, so overcompensated by hitting the right rudder pedal more forcefully than he should have? At which point he basically just panics and adds power.

I don't think I will, but thanks.

So... uh, not to get too political, but is there any way to toggle that aspect on and off? LOL

It was not a particularly enjoyable experience, but after much trial and error (and learning the basics of Blender in less than 24 hours), I've managed to create a Google photogrammetry model of a casino in Atlantic City, which properly displays in the sim. However, the texture and mesh resolution was not to my liking. When using RenderDoc to capture the 3D Google image, does anyone know how to get a good enough "scan" of the model to where the quality doesn't degrade too much?

While doing one of the Airbus landing challenges, the wheels caught the top of some houses and I heard a couple bangs before the crash screen appeared. It seems the gear is able to take some of the impact on objects, which is actually kind of neat in a way.

The Stonehenge addon works out quite nicely (and there seems to be a rather large storm passing through the area now too) https://ibb.co/Y0hh3QS

Yep, looks like quite a few people are working out different landmarks: https://www.reddit.com/r/MicrosoftFlightSim/comments/igcqoo/viennas_state_opera_first_attempt_using_google/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MicrosoftFlightSim/comments/ifuivi/i_added_the_amphitheatre_of_nîmes_into_flight/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MicrosoftFlightSim/comments/igb7wz/first_attempt_using_3d_models_from_google_maps/ There's also a stonehenge addon I will try: https://www.nexusmods.com/microsoftflightsimulator/mods/19

Has anyone tried the P3D planes in the new sim? There are quite a few of their default planes I wouldn't mind flying. The F16 in particular.

Would appreciate any help 🙂

I was doing a flight from Puerto Vallarta to Mexico City in the CJ4, and ran out of fuel shortly before setting up for the approach. Granted, I probably should've looked at the fuel load more closely, but it caught me by surprise.

How exactly does one go about changing the transponder code in the CJ4? And how do you get the autopilot to follow the flight plan laterally? Using backcourse?

Does anyone know how to find ILS frequencies and course headings whilst flying the A320?

Ah, well I'm guessing if I try to use the in-game control mapping for as many things as possible, and leave SPAD only for the switch panels, that may reduce stutters. I'll have to give it a try.

I want to start by saying that I'm very impressed with the new sim. It's only been out a couple days, and I'm convinced that despite any flaws, this is simply the future of civilian flight simulators. It runs quite smoothly on my computer, as it should, as I have a quite expensive and powerful PC. The only significant issue I'm running into right now is when I use SPAD, I get an increase in stutters, especially during critical phases like takeoff and landing. SPAD claims this is a known issue, and a fault with Microsoft regarding how the sim communicates with FSUIPC. I was wondering if there any information on any workarounds, or at least discussions between SPAD and Microsoft regarding how to get this remedied. I have different panels and controllers which I use for different aircraft, so the control mapping abilities provided by SPAD are simply indispensable. Thanks!

I'm getting an error at the moment, about lacking an executable. EDIT: A computer reset seemed to solve the issue. It's working now.

I think the decimal thing is largely a European thing. According to their phraseology, they'll say "decimal" when issuing a frequency, whereas in the US (and I assume in many other places), they'll say "point." As Asobo is a French company, it rather makes sense it was incorporated this way. But I also noticed they'll say "decimal" when issuing altimeter settings, which I'm not sure is even done in Europe. At least in the US, it should just be given as a string of four numbers without any mention of "point" or "decimal." It could use some tweaking though, I agree. I find rather doubtful, since they include the Pentagon, which of course was itself a target on 9/11. I think it just comes down to the imperfections of the Azure interpreting the satellite data, and the developers simply not having enough time to develop custom models for all these important landmarks (as we see with the lack of the London Eye, for instance). That said, I do think it's interesting how the AI managed to interpret the overall shape of the capitol, which was rather impressive. But it still really does need to be a custom model.

I'm quite impressed by what I'm seeing in all the FS2020 videos. Of course, there are limitations, like we see in the Niagra falls video and elsewhere. Still, generally speaking, what we are seeing is better than what is offered for default in essentially every other sim. In terms of my expectations, that's everything I'd hope for. However, there do seem to be some odd aspects to Washington DC in the beta build, as you can see around the 37 minute mark in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kavLImNPL_8 They represented the Pentagon and Lincoln Memorial with custom designed structures, yet the Washington Monument is represented by a generic building, as is the US Capitol Building. Gathering photogrammetry data for DC is understandably limited, as such photo aircraft are probably not going to be allowed to fly around the DC restricted airspace. However, the lack of custom structures for such major landmarks is puzzling, unless what we are seeing in the beta build is simply weeks or months behind what it already developed in the final build.

I was wondering the same things, and was actually going to make a post on this same topic. Google simply has way more photogrametry locations than Bing. I understand Microsoft wouldn't want Google data addons on their marketplace, but I see no reason why an independent 3rd party couldn't offer free addons elsewhere using Google data. Hopefully Bing will continue to get more photogrametry data though. Especially in countries other than the US.

I know at certain uncontrolled airports, the pilot can activate (or deactivate) the lights themselves by clicking the mic. Fairly certain that's not something which will be simulated though.

Surprisingly not the worst landing I've seen on these FS2020 Airbus videos...