Jimmy RFR

Members
  • Content count

    2,071
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jimmy RFR last won the day on February 1 2016

Jimmy RFR had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

379 Excellent

About Jimmy RFR

  • Rank
    Member - 2,000+

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    CEZ3
  • Interests
    Photography, programming, flight simulation, pc gaming.

Recent Profile Visitors

816 profile views
  1. Win 10 here as well. Zero issues. I did a lot of hand wringing at the time when deciding to upgrade to Win 10, but overall I'm quite glad I did. It's worth noting that now with P3Dv4 requiring new versions of nearly everything, I'm not so worried about trying to run old, possibly unsupported software.
  2. Actually, the area where I find myself missing stuff is not in the area of GA at all - I find there's nowhere's near the choice of military jets available in XP, certainly not quite at the same level as what's available in MSFS. I'd certainly love some of the MilViz jets (disclaimer: I've been a part of MV for a few years, so am slightly biased), or my beloved VRS Superbug, or the Aerosoft F-14, or any / all of Dino's creations to be available in XP.
  3. With the line-up they have, I would consider Carenado to be one of the 'big' players in X-Plane already, even if their offerings are primarily ports. I'm pretty sure that they've stated plans to update most of their existing XP fleet to XP11 eventually. Not sure how many other 'big guys' we're actually missing. It's more than likely that the absence of some of the established MSFS aircraft developers has given the existing XP developers more room to grow their skills, to the point where developers such as Aerobask, Dreamfoil, and vFlyteAir are producing aircraft that are every bit as good (or, in some aspects, better) than their counterparts in FSX/P3D.
  4. I'm curious if any of you with FlightSim Store issues (regarding new serial numbers for Carenado V4 compatible releases) have had them resolved. I own a few Carenado aircraft through them, one of which has been upgraded by FSS to the new V4 compatible installer and I'd really like to use: The 337H. I can download the new installer, but when I go to run it, it asks for a serial number, which of course the original never had. I submitted a ticket a week approximately a week ago, and haven't heard a word. I'm patient, but it'd be nice to get this over with.
  5. That is an awesome logo. I love it. I'd particularly love to reuse that "V.4 FTW" phrase elsewhere...
  6. I've found a few in the wrong spot, where they've interfered with the airport I was working on. However, reporting it as a bug, and giving in-depth info on where it should be, will result in LR fixing it.
  7. Oh I sure hope they do. One of my favorites.
  8. Well, I decided to try it out partly because it's 'new', and partly because I can use it for beta testing. However, I've been impressed to the point where I likely won't bother keeping 3.4 around. Since P3D wasn't my primary sim already, there's no point in having both copies - especially considering just how decent V4 seems to perform. Granted, I'm not going to tossing huge payware airports and PMDG aircraft at it anytime soon, as my flying habits tend to run much smaller, in much more out of the way places, but being able to run something like the RealAir Legacy in an FTX region with fairly thick autogen and cloud cover at 4xSSAA and still keep 60 fps... well.. 3.4 is toast for sure. Anyhoo... that doesn't really answer your question. So my thoughts: - Don't plan on using it unless you're willing to go simple (for awhile). There's not a ton of payware aircraft that are 100% functional. But since I tend to stick with one aircraft at a time, having an old favorite such as the Legacy is good enough for me. - If you have FTX scenery currently installed in 3.4, DON'T uninstall and delete. FTX Central is able to intelligently pull installed files from your 3.4 installation so that you don't have to download full regions. Saves time and bandwidth. FTX airports aren't yet available, only regions, Global, and landclass. - I have read that trying to install certain older aircraft in V4 can mess with them in 3.4. Not sure what the fixes are, I can't be bothered to find out - simply going to only use V4 for my P3D flying anyhow, so if it breaks in 3.4, I don't much care.
  9. The product page does not list compatibility, yet. Once all F-86 update emails have been sent out, then I'll also update the product page with the V4 compatibility stated. I was going to post about it on this thread once existing customers had been notified of the updates. There will be more to come in the days/weeks ahead.
  10. I've booted around for a bit in the included F-16 just for fun, and while it's not at the level of many of the exquisite payware releases of the last few years, I found it quite fun for a burn 'n go flight. I did question it's flight model a bit though... However, what DOES have me excited is that while burning around in the F-16, the autogen and sharp textures stretching out so far at high speed was quite wonderful. V4 is really a great performer for me so far.
  11. The PA31 XP11 version was just released, and the AC500S XP11 version was released mid May. Just FYI.
  12. I would completely be willing to give AF2 a chance, but for me it comes down to the available aircraft in the simulator. If it had even one or two more interesting things to fly, then it might be a different story. But as it stands right now, there's nothing compelling (for me) in the list of what's available. I get that they want to include a few popular aircraft that everyone is familiar with, but why not mix it up a bit more? Perhaps the performance and incoming FTX scenery will drive user adoption enough that some third party devs can come on board and round out the aircraft selection a bit, but that will need to happen first. Sadly, I'm not able to adopt the sim based on scenery & performance alone.
  13. The minute I saw that detail, you were the first person that came to mind!
  14. I did think that too at one time; but then I built about 40 gateway airports for my home province (Alberta) & another bunch for the neighboring ones (BC & Saskatchewan), so if I want to fly in my area of Canada, XP is automatically my choice simply due to the much better realistic airport availability. In regards to XP's default textures, I have absolutely no problem with most of BC, nor with huge swathes of Alberta or Saskatchewan. In fact, I far prefer XP when it comes to mountains & foothills; the ability to render sharp textures and mesh at far differences is definitely one of it's strengths.
  15. Lots of interesting reading in this thread; love the topic. There's plenty I would like to see in X-Plane, some of that is stuff I currently see in FSX/P3D. But the other way around applies too - there's plenty that I see in X-Plane that I would like to see in FSX/P3D. Neither sim is 100% perfect for me personally. Ideally, I would like to see a more 'alive' world in terms of airports & aircraft. If I think back on some of my most stand-out flight simulation experiences, one of the highlights was quite a few years ago in FS9: I was on a serious AI kick, having downloaded, tweaked and compiled hundreds of AI flight plans for tons of small Canadian carriers. But the icing on the cake was when I installed a really nice version of CFB Moose Jaw, and setup military AI to fly touch and goes in CT-155 Hawks, and then flew with them in the pattern, interacting with ATC and listening to the other aircraft doing the same. I spent a lot of hours doing just that - flying patterns and touch and goes at CFB Moose Jaw, all the while with a big silly grin on my face. The point I'm making is that you can have hyper realistic scenery, as well as a perfectly replicated aircraft, but it still can feel a bit empty without a living world to exist in. To make a bit more of a point form list however: - I'd like VFR capable ATC. - I'd like AI that can be setup to fly schedules, flight plans, touch and goes, patterns. - Better pilot tracking & activities, but without gamification. This is a tricky one, I think. I love the idea of the sim keeping track of your pilot activity, showing flight history, hours flown, various stats, etc. The problem is that it's far too tempting for developers to turn that into a 'game', as in, earn these XP points, don't get these penalties, etc. The same goes for stuff to do in the sim. I really enjoyed some of the ideas behind Flight's missions and aerocaches - giving me stuff to do in the sim is great - but I don't like when it's gamified too far. I think a random flight generator as a part of the sim could easily be within reach, and done in a way that could simply provide something interesting to do, without being part of a game. - More default resources. This means more AI aircraft paints & types to allow for a wider variety, maybe even regional specific. And more scenery objects! I'm a big believer in the Gateway airport project, having spent a lot of time contributing. However, I have quit for the time being. I'm simply getting too tired of trying to shoehorn in the same various buildings and objects, often things that aren't intended to be airport buildings, into creative arrangements to LOOK like airport buildings. LR has this extensive facade system in place, yet it remains underutilized. Three or four hangar facades that could work for small, individual aircraft hangars would absolutely revolutionize the Gateway airport scene. Indeed - I have the same issues in reverse! I do enough 'work' stuff in the FSX/P3D world that I turn to X-Plane for my actual fun.