enamel

I have never used an MS Flight Simulator. I win right?

It must have been her filming the monitor, since anyone else would have been dying laughing.

That's not the AVSIM way. We must work to overcome our enemies (those that have the gall to like a different game than me) with a torrential downpour of our tears. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth until we can convince yet another developer to give up on flightsims all together! Our cries will unite to drown out those who might speak positively of "the others"! We will never give up! There can only be one (or two because FS9 gets a pass)!

I ran a freeware SR-71 from JFK to LAX. FL850 @ mach 3.4, took about an hour, maybe less. Then I overstressed it with negative g on the decent, getting down from there may be harder than getting up there. I also went from SEA to SFO in a freeware A320. I don't really recall the parameters of that flight, I was mindlessly following ATC and plugging values into the AP.

I am using this freeware A320 when I feel like messing around with airliners: http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxac&DLID=169928

There is no difference in the sim between the Professional and Acedemic versions. And i believe the only addition to Professional Plus is weaponry. The watermark in the academic version can be seen in the upper right hand corner of this image. In full disclosure, it is more visible with the top menu visible, which is the default: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1npV6aFfCuQ/UgwnSSxXx3I/AAAAAAAAbxw/U2hQ8gvfpw8/s1600/Prepar3D+2013-08-14+17-32-06-02.bmp I have not had any issues with the FSX addons I have installed.

The price ranges from $9.95/mo for a dev subscription to $2300 for a Professional Plus license. You can find the prices here: http://www.prepar3d.com/prepar3d-store/ I imagine most of us here, being students of life, opted for the $59.95 Academic version.

You are missing the fact that P3D is an actively developed and supported product. That is the long and short of it, people are excited about a ray of hope for the future of flight simming. If you are happy with FSX, by all means stay with it and enjoy your flights.

100% P3D v2, That being said I do miss the job system from MS Flight. It is simple and adds a ton of replay value for me when I don't have any direction but want a "meaningful" flight. I may start playing around with the mission creation system to try to see if I can capture some of that.

Edit: Sorry, original post was uncalled for. MS Flight holds a special place in my heart that has yet to be replaced, and it pains me to come back here to see the same BS that drove me away.

Gotcha, I have never run FSX so all these comparisons are lost me. With all the doom and gloom I feel like an outlier having a well performing install with an older system. I do have ORBX PNW and a Ceranado C185 now, I get a pretty good fps hit in cities with the scenery. Nothing that would make me dig into a cfg file tho. I fly mainly bush, and get similar performance with the scenery. Just relaying my experience with P3D since that is where my interests lie.

I have not done a single "tweak" on my low end system. Installed, moved a couple sliders (literally 2) and have 35-55 fps. YMMV

Just for clarification, a EULA is a licensing agreement between you and the license holder. Breaking its terms is in no way breaking the law. The most likely outcome of the license holder finding and enforcing a EULA violation is a revocation of your license to use the software. Sent from my SGH-i917 using Tapatalk

When the items in the top list move into the bottom list: http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=4373

For this issue on aircraft, you can use 'L' to turn off then on the lights to fix it.

I have the C185 Bush working, but I installed it by tricking the installer into thinking it was being installed into FSX, then copying the files over to P3D.

I actually just went back and started a flight at KPAE and my issue was gone, textures were loaded fine. Perhaps it is the same type of intermittent issue as the trees? The only thing KPAE is missing now is the hundreds of 787s currently parked there waiting for delivery. It is less of an airport and more of a parking lot at the moment! I also went to KSEA and the taxiways are indeed missing. The lines are all there, but it is just all grass. Need to put tundra tires on the 737s I suppose. So bottom line, ORBX PNW is *mostly* working for me, but you have to approach it with a real early adopter attitude until it is officially supported.

I am missing ground textures at KPAE and I have the tree texture issue as well. I didn't run into any of this until reading this thread, so naturally I blame this thread, the OP and everyone who replied for breaking my install.

You can also drag and drop the plane icon on the map to set the coords.

With my GTX560Ti w/ 1Gb of VRAM I use exactly... Wait for it... 1Gb of VRAM (regardless of settings). :lol:

Interesting, because I use this one constantly. Perhaps one of the other "views" have focus? For example if I create a new top down view window, that small view has the focus and I can zoom in and out in it. I have to click the main window for it to gain the focus so I can then zoom in it.

Hold Space to put you into mouse look mode, so Space + mousewheel to zoom in and out.

The Project Airbus A320 really scratches my "heavy" itch at the best possible price - free. I have also played around with a 787 w/ 737 VC that is nice, not as complete as the A320. I don't fly either all that much, but I did not have any issues with either plane.

http://airdailyx.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-guide-for-installing-orbx-scenery.html The key is the symbolic link part (aka shortcut). Once you set up the registry and the symbolic link, reinstall ORBX and you will have tree textures. Note this is not supported until ORBX releases an official installer for P3D v2, but it works just fine for me!

VOR is one of those things that sound much more complicated in discussion than they are in actual use. Once you play around with them a bit, the discussions make much more sense. They can be very simple, but are hard to explain simply.