• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ericbgee

  • Rank
  • Birthday 07/09/1968

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Lubbock, TX USA
  • Interests
    flying... aviation... soaring... winging it... pilotage... dead reckoning... taking off... landing... taxiing... aircraft, the things they do and the people that do it to them

Recent Profile Visitors

250 profile views
  1. Hi, folks.... I've opened a ticket with Alabeo to let them know, but I thought I'd share here, too. I/We seem to have found a syntax error in the aircraft.cfg. which, unlikely as it may seem, was causing a certain addon scenery module to crash. But, after sifting through install and error logs we found this entry in the aircraft.cfg to be the cause: [Views] eyepoint = -0.7 -0.7, 1.9 There is a comma missing between the first two coordinates. After discovering and replacing the missing comma, the addon scenery module stopped crashing. I've been able to reproduce this event several times in confirming the cause of the crash. FWIW the addon in question is the SODE module used by iBlueYonder (Bill Womack), among others, in his newest sceneries. If you don't have the module or scenery installed, you've probably never had a problem... but you might want to go in and replace that comma, just in case.
  2. It seems to me that would be a topic for the ASN support forums... rather than a snarky response to a release notice. Countless others and I have updated with no problems. Also, just to save yourself any trouble from actively "ignoring" anything, why not just uncheck the extremely easy to find box in the Settings menu. It's marvelous software if you use it correctly.... try the manual.
  3. In Steve's DX10 Controller, on the "Legacy" button... uncheck "Legacy Aircraft Self Shadow" and "Legacy Aircraft Force Shadows". If you hover your mouse each of them it says NOT to leave checked. Don't ask me why, I don't know enough about it to answer... but this solved problems I was having with the same planes.
  4. I've always thought their website was more than a little bit confusing... but I like the product. The upgrade price that you are referring to is for upgrading from old OpusFSX software to OpusFSI. I just updated my existing FSI installation with no problems and no additional cost.
  5. I couldn't disagree with Carlos more. I run PMDG's NGX and 777 (among others) along with TrackIR, OpusFSI, Plan G, FSInn... with no problems... (except for the occasional OOM around high population density areas in the 777) There's no need for a supercomputer... although, it helps if you can afford one. I can't. i5 - 3470 @ 3.2GHz 12.0 GB GeForce 730
  6. I'll be honest... I love Orbx Global textures... and I'm sure that Vector is pretty accurate in other parts of the world... but in my neck of the woods, UTX is still the best option for making my FSX world resemble the real world as closely as possible. Vector does roads and shorelines... but doesn't show any of the schools, sports complexes, cemeteries, golf courses or other special features that UTX provides. I wouldn't enjoy flying in the US, outside of full Orbx regions, without both UTX and Global.
  7. Let me get this straight... you're here trashing 10+ year old, home-entertainment, flight simulator software because it's got some glitches such as oversized scenery and not-entirely-accurate flight physics? Welcome to 2004! We've missed you. We're so glad that we've finally got someone of your caliber to put us straight. You don't like confrontation? Then don't be so confrontational and stop whining about obsolete software...
  8. With all due respect, I wasn't referring to you, personally, at all.... simply that there is a very vocal segment of the flight sim community that is obsessed with details and authenticity to which I did not necessarily belong. Perhaps I could have worded it a little more PC, I will agree, though, that the original wording of the post and package are definitely misleading... and that, although the additional eye and ear candy are nicely done and appreciated, more credit should be given to Sr. Lucena...
  9. I had been toying with the idea of putting the FSND updated 737 VC into their MD83, just because I'm not a big fan of their MD83 VC... now I don't have to hassle with it. I think that doing so, then calling it a 717 is a bit of a stretch... but it works, and all of the extras you've added look and sound great in the video. Since I don't tend to be as anal as some others about details and authenticity, I'll definitely check it out and give it a go...
  10. Sorry, but I'd have to disagree with all of you. I purchased OpusFSX a few years ago, and have used it on every single flight since that time. It's my weather engine as well as my link to TrackIR. I feel like I've gotten my money's worth out of the program, while the developer has been working his/their butt(s) off to constantly improve the program and provide me with free updates and prompt, friendly customer service. And, guess what? It still works. Even after the release of OpusFSI... OMG! I'm still not out any money other than my original purchase. Now, the fine folks at Opus have released a new program... OpusFSI.... substantial revisions, new features, enhanced old features, new program... plus, they offer a pretty generous (and standard) 50% discount if I want to upgrade my software. REX did the same thing. Do I feel obligated to upgrade to OpusFSI immediately? Of course not. OpusFSX is still my tool of choice for doing what it does. Will I upgrade eventually, when my finances allow for it? Abso-freaking-lutely! Is Opus the only software development company that has ever done something like this? Of course not. Developers charge for upgrades all the time, if it's a mostly new product or a complete rebuild of an existing one. From the FSX world, I'll use the RealAir BE60 Duke V2 as a quick example. Nobody (well, nobody whose opinion I give a damn about) complained about paying for THIS upgrade? What's the difference? So you don't use OpusFSX to its full potential, or you were slow to jump on the bandwagon... whose fault is that? Not Opus's... I guess I feel the need to defend my favorite software just as vehemently as others promote theirs...
  11. I hate to be Capt. Obvious, here, but unplugging any controllers that you don't want a particular game to recognize should fix your problem. The problem does not lie with your rudder pedals. If there's no setting within the game to select/calibrate/etc. individual controllers then your best bet is to unplug whatever you're not using.
  12. I was recently having the same problem... it turns out, in my case, that the JS41 is much pickier than either the NGX or T7. I had set an add-on plane as my default flight. It is a relatively simple plane and I didn't think anything about it because both the NGX and T7 loaded perfectly. However, the JS41 just crashed FSX to the desktop every time I tried to load it. After switching the plane in my default flight back to the FSX Default C172, the JS41 loads right up without a hitch. It seems to be very sensitive to the changes in FSX that other aircraft make, and doesn't want to load properly unless it's got that blank slate...
  13. Why must everyone compare everything Carenado does to PMDG, A2A and RealAir? Some people prefer the hyper-realism/system depth/etc. that these companies offer in their products. Others just want a plane that is easy to fly and looks cool for awesome screenshots. Carenado is not a new company, by any stretch of the imagination. They don't need to "keep up with" anybody... they're doing pretty well on their own. Anyone who has been around flight sim for any length of time is quite aware of which of these types of product Carenado produces best. Why must we dig up that dead horse and whup it some more any time anyone mentions a Carenado product? It's not for you.... you want more... we get it... There are plenty others out there who disagree. Personally, I feel there's a place in my flight sim world for both the ultra-realistic and the casual eye-candy. Sometimes I'm just not in the mood for a preflight check and constant systems monitoring. I just want to fly and do some virtual sightseeing. Other times, I want the full Accu-sim experience. It just depend on my mood and available time.
  14. @Scott Yes, Captain Obvious... perhaps it has, although comprehensive searches on the major websites have turned up nothing. Perhaps someone (maybe even you) has gotten it off our site from the back end. Perhaps one of our members shared it. I'm not upset, but I had hoped that you might be able to tell me where you got it, so I that I can fix that problem... especially since your signature is pushing a totally different flying club, not ours. If you can't or won't help, that's your business... although it does negatively affect your credibility, IMO. EDIT: An apology is required from me. I just discovered that, in theory, nobody should be able to download our assets without being logged in as a member. However, our old download pages will appear in the results of a google search for a specific FSX paintjob... "Carenado C337 repaints" for example... and anyone can download. We obviously need to fix this and if I hadn't seen your screenshots, Scott, we might never have noticed this. I apologize for doubting your intentions. Nice screen shots! Enjoy! :Applause:
  15. Scott... yes I know. It's a repaint that I did for the Deer Valley Flying Club, and wasn't uploaded anywhere else but their website... so I was just curious.