nuNce

11 minutes ago, scianoir said:

The Orbx range is excellent but another very good (and somewhat less expensive) option is the Flight1 UTX/GEX series. A third alternative to would be photo real scenery such as the MegaSceneryEarth series which would excellent for VFR navigation because of its accuracy but may have VAS related issues in FSX particularly if you have a lot of it installed.

That also brings up another subject i forgot to mention. There are two schools of thought for this matter which are vector based sceneries (ie. ORBX Vector, GEX, OpenVFR Terrain) and photorealistic sceneries (ie. MegaSceneryEarth). Vector based sceneries draw the environment using textures, objects and landclasses which are present in FSX and which can be upgraded by other tools to give them a fresh look (ORBX and Global UTX which replace the textures). The advantage by using them is a more contiguous feel to the scenery between various zones, autogen (which is usually not present in photo scenery) and disk usage which is far smaller.

If you want absolute fidelity you can get photoscenery which is basically satellite imagery of the area, but normally comes with minimal or no autogen (buildings, trees) and has far bigger disk usage and download size.

It is a matter of personal preference, but if you plan flying low to the ground I would avoid photo scenery due to autogen absence.

You can find more informations here.

Well, flying VFR in default FSX would be quite hard without some addons. First things that come to mind are ORBX sceneries which improve the overall layout, but in particular Vector would give you actual roads, rivers and coastlines. It really depends where you want to fly. There are also country specific sceneries which might include landmarks which you would then use for VFR flights. Another great addon with country specific sceneries is OpenVFR which is based on OpenStreetMap data.

You also need to plan your route, you need to fly between places you can easily recognize in the simulator. When reaching a waypoint you then fly a specific bearing for a specific amount of time until you spot the next one. This might be a town, a bend in the river, a large intersection. Well known planners are VFRFlight and Plan-G.

This is to give you a really general idea, you can find many guides on how to fly VFR on the net.

I think you could go with far better settings than those you have posted, but I would add at least another 8GB to your PC if you can.

AS for the addongs I would definitely buy GSX (was on discount a few days ago, don't know if it is still on sale) and you will probabily need Steve's DX10 Fixer.

Have you thought about getting P3Dv4? Since you still have to buy those addons it would be the perfect moment to make the switch.

My bad! I went through the manual but skipped over some parts, thinking it worked just as the other FMCs I've been using.

I've made some more tests and I've discovered that, besides the fact that everywhere is stated that the ERJ doesn't have autothrottles, there is an AT function provided by Feelthere that can be activated with SHIFT+R. It even shows AT on the MFD. It was enabled by default in my case, pressing the combination was enough to disable it.

As for the other problem I still have no idea how to figure it out. But my only guess is that ERJ's don't have a real VNAV function, just FMC suggesting you which speeds\altitudes obtain at certain waypoints.

Hello,

I have two weird issues with my ERJ 145:

1. I cannot move my throttle when AP is engaged. I tried disabling the Disable Joystick Axes when AP is On option in the configurator, but without any luck. I use FSUIPC and disable the controllers in FSX, could there be an issue? All other birds, including the NGX work fine.
2. When climbing and cruising using the FLC mode, speeds set in the FMS are not achieved. But the weirdest thing is that they aren't even set correctly, I can see the blue speed bug always at a lower speed than required. Do you have any clue?

Thank you, I've tried searching but seems like I'm the only one with those issues.

Do you use FSUIPC? Maybe you have a mapped button which you are not aware of.

I will quote myself from the other thread

Quote

I had this happen when I set a default flight on FSX by mistake, which had the NGX as the default aircraft. You see only the HUD, the VC is not clickable and the 2d panels are messed up. Just keep the trike as default aircraft.

I had this happen when I set a default flight on FSX by mistake, which had the NGX as the default aircraft. You see only the HUD, the VC is not clickable and the 2d panels are messed up. Just keep the trike as default aircraft.

Hello,

lately I've been flying with a bigger involvement in the planning phase, especially in relation to winds during the cruise phase. Being aware of that I've started avoiding strong winds when obvious, but I still have some doubts in relation to choices regarding FL, step climbs and descent. I'd like to know your opinion on:

1. When is it worth it to delay climbs due to strong winds? Are 20kts less headwind worth flying 4-6k feet below optimal?
2. Once estabilished on cruise, is it worth trying to go to a lower FL to avoid unforcasted strong winds? How much headwind should you lose to make it up for say 2k ft of altitude lost?
3. In general, is there any rule of thumb to follow when faced with strong winds? How do you evaluate alternate routes and different FL?

I understand this can be a really complex discussion, and that flight planning is surely a big part of corporate investment, but I'd like to hear your opinions regarding my question.

Thank you.

One of the main mistakes I was doing was closing the throttle too late. As soon as you pass the threshold, just shut it closes, be ready to counter some movement (especially nose pitching due to loss of airspeed) and make a nice soft contact with the runway. As you are steadily on the ground pull the stick back, both to assure the tailwheel on the ground an to lock it in place and avoid any unwanted movement.

The sim is great. Still a Beta, so lots of things missing, but to me it is already enjoyable, and finally we can have a proper WWII airplane outside the boundaries of FSX. ED is showing support and listening to the community, so the future of this product is looking quite bright.

Also, there are small details I love, like birds flying over the runways. And those details are reported in the tour guide, at each stage's description.

I did the first leg of the tour, and the scenery is really amazing! :)

Album link

Looks great, just what I was looking for!

Nice, let's see how it goes! :D

Hey there!

As suggested I will post my video here. It's a preflight to cruise with the NGX and FS2Crew from EPKK to LIRF.

I made an FSX movie, that also contains quite some FS2Crew usage. Hope you enjoy! :)

[media=]

I had my first glider flight Saturday, so I can now give an impression. It was awesome!

A bit weird and new for the first two minutes, but as soon as I got used to the continuous moving around of the thing, it turned quickly into the best experience of my life! Can't wait for my lessons to begin. :)

Sharing with you. Details in the youtube page description. Enjoy! :)

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8ZHiZNv3lyk[/media]

More importantly, what relevance does this have to my FSX performance?

Nothing, but it would save you money (both when you buy, and when you pay your energy bill).

What relevance does this have to power draw from the wall while on idle?

As you get lower on power draw the efficiency drops. Getting low with a 550W means you have to get under 100W of power consumpion (roghly 20% of nominal power) to start losing efficiency, which is unlikely even on idle. Getting low with a 1000W means getting under 200W, which may well happen on the other hand. This means that on idle, with a PSU that is too big for your system, you will have a bigger power draw. Just like piston engines have a efficiency range, in a very similar way PSUs have their best spot in terms of power output/power consumption.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3

When you have a larger PSU, it does NOT mean that you will draw more power from the wall. The components inside the box are what determine the power draw from the wall.

Efficiency will drop under certain load factors and above some others. You need a well proportioned PSU to get the 80% efficiency.

http://superuser.com/questions/320451/why-after-installing-a-80-plus-bronze-psu-my-power-consumption-is-now-higher

Too much power?!?! I'm a member of the Tim the Toolman Taylor school of computing, there's no such thing as too much power It leaves room for possible upgrades in the future.

There is, cause it will eat up more power at idle. Also it will cost way more.

I heard the 670 is much better value since it's barely slower and £100 cheaper? :Thinking:

Get the Asus GTX670 DirectCU II, with stock overclocking.That thing costs less and goes just like the 680.

Way too powerful PSU. I'd say 650W is sufficient.