buzznaut

Thanks much for the suggestions.

What are folks using for flying around this area with GA aircraft under VFR ? Looking to expand my flight area from the PNW given the poor weather during the winter there (and the fact that I like using real weather).

In no specific order ORBX NoCA A2A C172 Aerosoft PC6 Porter 4x However there are still so many add ins from the last few years I still want badly. Only wish the wallet was a little fatter.

Thanks much for the replies so far. My ideal is having the unit incorporated into the VC panel AND coupled to the aircraft autopilot. The short list of aircraft I am interested in having this work in in addition to the RealAir Legacy are (all FSX): 1) Carenado C337 2) Default C172 (with RealAir FS9 upgrade) 3) Aerosoft Katana 4x 4) Aerosoft Beaver X and Twin Otter X 5) RealAir Scout 6) Carenado F33 Bonanza or A36 Bonanza 7) A2A Civilian Mustang Experience with these specific addons? Any others that you've tried that work well?

I've been thinking of purchasing one of the RXP GPS units (cannot afford both nor the unlimited pack). The 530 unit appeals to me because of the display size. Seems it would be harder to fit into many FSX GA aircraft VC because of this. Is there a list of aircraft that are known to work with this particular unit? Couldn't find this on the Reality website, in the support forums or through a google search. Maybe others who use this unit could weigh in on those aircraft they've successfully incorporated this unit into both the VC as well as popup. Thanks much.

Interested in purchasing one and the two that are most interesting are the RealAir Lancair Legacy and the newly released Civ Mustang by A2A. Looking for opinions from folks who've flown both and or other suggestions. I don't have RXP gauges currently so incorporation is not a factor in my choice as of now. On that note could someone describe what main functionality is provided by RXP GPS that is not present in FSX default GPS gauges? Thanks much for any thoughts or opinions.

I use SimpleKey Pad on my iPad while flying in FSX. Lets me have easier access to keyboard based functions that I do not have mapped to my flight stick. Really awesome little app. Can quickly flip between that and SkyVector on a browser to look at sectionals.

Tried to PM the person who seems to have created this mod but he cannot accept PMs. Anyone know where I can get this fix?

Is this mod for the default GPS included in the package?

Thanks much for this. I just hooked up my new TrackIR and my pseudo full screen GMap and took a flight through the Clark Lake Pass into Port Alford. Totally changes the entire FLIGHT experience. Just terrific.

You are probably correct. However, there are many situations I encounter in FLIGHT where I think weather would preclude a small GA plane from operating safely in RL (I'm thinking of when I see condiitons where winds are >50kts). Maybe I'm wrong. Still think icing should be modeled.

I have been to Alaska and there is plenty of diversity to model--glaciers, cities, fjords, etc. Throw in the diverse weather conditions and there is plenty to see and different environments to experience it in. However, you dont need to create or simulate the entire ~600,000 sq km of landmass to experience it. My only point was that with the effort it presumably took to model the entire expanse of Alaksa (and all the associated airports) intact (when much of it is completely generic), I would have prefered if part of that effort went into providing more aspects of the game and simulation which I (and presumably other people, but perhaps not) enjoy. We'll see, perhaps thats what the MS FLIGHT team works on next. The challenges FLIGHT offers are terrific (like the ones you've outlined in your post) and I would argue its the best GA sim/game I have tried. That doesnt mean it couldn't be better.

To further qualify some of my critiques of the Alaska DLC on other threads but with more reference to this specific topic-- I doubt anyone would expect the vast expanses of Alaska to not be somewhat repetitive. What bothers me (and this is simply my opinion) is that I would have prefered a smaller, more concentrated area of Alaska (one with a lot of geographic and environmental diversity) modeled in a more detailed fashion with associated game play (bush flying missions, alaska-applicable jobs, etc) and associated deluxe aircraft. I think what we were provided with was well worth the $15 I spent, I just was expecting a lot more (and willing to pay more for it) and am just a little disappointed today. Maybe as I explore more of Alaska these initial impressions will change. I really enjoy FLIGHT. I want to see it succeed and that is why I am happy to support most of the content that speaks to me (scenery expansions, certain types of gameplay expansions, deluxe aircraft), however, I think and hope it becomes so much more than it is right now.

Totally agree with this sentiment. I was very excited for this DLC as I have been very impressed with what MS has been able to achieve with FLIGHT to date (in terms of fidelity and performance). My initial thoughts on the major shortcomings of this DLC are: - no new deluxe aircraft - qualitatively (based on limited use and posts on these forums) less "enhanced" scenery - No icing effects (I mean they point out in the adverts for the DLC how the major challenge of flying in Alaska is the weather and so how could you not include this??) - no map search function; still no correction for allowing to use map during jobs, missions (guess thats a gripe with the title upgrade not so much the DLC) - no new jobs, missions, aerocaches (for now) I would have gladly payed twice the price for half the area with the same fidelity, and playability/fun of the Hawaii pack. This is quite underwhelming and in my opinion a poor sign of what the future holds (given they've been working on this expansion since roll-out or before).

Maybe I was not zoomed in enough to see ILS approaches. No new missions or new kinds of jobs or new deluxe aircraft makes it a less than a clear winner in my book. But certainly the price is right for what you do get.