MrNuke

I mean i get this line of thinking, but when one of the two alternatives is that a defense contractor keeps letting at home users (and developers targeting said users) use their product technically against their "personal consumer entertainment" ban on licensing, https://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/ That doesn't seem like a great alternative to me if we are worried about longevity...

Really. The teaser in the video was great, but the longer this goes on, the less confidence I have (see your post that got locked immediately the other day on their forums). No I have not met Andrew, but I know his great passion for the project and I have been a customer for years, as well as a participant with you on their Concorde-X forums. It has been paused before and it can be paused again. You nor I have on idea how far they are. To your last sentence, I agree full agree, but that isn't the issue at hand. The issue that is rapidly approaching the longer this draws out is do they spend time on finishing Concorde for P3D or devote their efforts to getting their A320 line in P3D. If you want to continue this discussion as we really are drifting away from the purpose of this thread, might I recommend continuing it in the un-pausing thread?

I understand that this may indeed be happening, but an economist would argue the time spent on developing that P3D product is a sunk cost and should be considered irrelevant to future plans. I totally get there are well reasoned arguments and cases to be made to ignore this i.e. a small developer needing cash flow to hold them over. With that being said though, any developmental time on P3D is a potentially wasted opportunity cost for time spent on developing for MSFS; and whatever projected sales the developers had for P3D projects when creating them are likely out the window. I'm thinking of a certain Concorde/A320 series developer that could be in this situation right now.

No it was made on March 31st...

I wouldn't necessarily be getting my hopes up. It seems like it could go either way at this point.

What requires assistance on a 737, 777, etc?

This is a good workaround, but Asobo should've should still push out an update to the testing branch to get them back on the main branch.

The Missouri River at KOMA has been finally fixed. Terrain spikes just North of the airport are still present from the last update though.

Thanks for doing this. I'll give it a try tonight.

Same here obviously. And I'm particularly disappointed as an alpha tester when everything was fine in one build and not subsequently.

As an alpha tester, I cannot believe the Missouri River around KOMA still isn't fixed.

P3D it is...

We need to separate Concorde and most other planes for a moment that I'll circle back to. I think it is a little ironic that the argument is P3D is an IFR simulator and MSFS isn't, because of a 3rd party add-on for weather in P3D. I just pulled up Heathrow in Active Sky and recorded upper level winds and temperatures at 24,000, 30,000, and 45,000 feet (IFR altitudes). Keep in mind that both Active Sky and Meteoblue are essentially modeling weather. MSFS' winds were within +/- 3 degrees and +/- 2 knots at all 3 altitudes. The temperatures were within 1 degree of each other at all three altitudes. Obviously there is a pretty big bug limiting where weather is currently being injected to, but I'm confident it will be fixed as MB's website has wind data for places it currently isn't being injected into in the sim. Circling back, if we want to get Concorde specific there is 1 major weather problem in MSFS. Weather data appears to stop at 150 mb which is just under 45,000 feet. For 99% of the civilian planes that have ever flown that isn't a problem as nearly every single plane is going to have a service ceiling at or under 45,000 feet. For Concorde it obviously is an issue. Again though if the solution to IFR flying weather wise is in P3D is Active Sky it only seems fair to wait and see what they come up with for MSFS. The game has only been out less than two weeks with an incomplete SDK, a solution will be found.

As a Concorde enthusiast on the other side of the pond, who never made the jump to P3D I'd tend to agree. I still have FSX installed just for Concorde X at this point, but I'd have a hard time justifying $199 for another potentially dying simulator and another ~100 for a single aircraft for said simulator. I doubt that is the case as their Boeing competitor seems to have reached the exact opposite conclusion. If you asked me which would sell more a study level A320 in MSFS or a new Concorde in P3D I think the answer is fairly obvious. I think the more likely scenario in play here is that FSL has likely reached a point where they are waiting for the SDK to be finalized before they can do any more work in MSFS. We will see, but I doubt this. As was discussed on one of the threads on their forums when they announced the postponement @trumpetfrazz1 noted had a 32 to 64 bit port been easy it would've been done. And without knowing how much time they've spent on it so far since "un-pausing," had they been that close to a beta before pausing... it also seems like it wouldn't have been paused. What exactly constitutes an IFR simulator? Putting the appropriate gauges or systems on the plane to fly IFR can be done in any simulator. And quite frankly assuming a given simulator allows flying up to 60,000 feet, things aren't going to look all that different out the window over the Atlantic Ocean in Concorde.

It is a mesh issue as it isn't really present on bing maps itself and it is also present in offline mode with bing disabled. The same thing is present further upstream on the Missouri River at Omaha (KOMA and Sioux City (KSUX). I'm equally as frustrated as KOMA is my home airport. There are tickets in for all 3 spots.

Which really doesn't matter. One party has agreed to a NDA not to disclose anything. The other party can choose to disclose whatever they want, and they still want control over that process.

You may want to delete this post.

You are mistaken to trust a wikipedia entry as gospel. The platform is still being actively developed and their blog (which the wikipedia article sourced for their "updates" section) can be found here.https://blogs.bing.com/maps We can have a discussion about how up to date Bing is or isn't versus Google or other platforms (it will vary from place to place), a discussion that I believe has already been had here several times; but no the last update to their data didn't take place in 2010.

Because the deal was that you only had to sign up once and if you didn't make it you'd automatically be considered for future alphas or betas. The site is suddenly acting like that may not be the case without any notice. The way the site is behaving is as if they no longer have a dxdiag on file and the application that you'd assume is complete isn't actually completed.

Is it wrong though?

For another $20 as an existing customer I would've expected a working VNAV.

There shouldn't be anything to check or a need to change anything on the legs page at all. The legs page looks fine in your initial post. Have you flown the tutorial flight? The Cathay flights are doing it at 13,800 feet so your 14,000 is fine. You are carrying a ton of extra fuel though for a short flight. SG

Yeah I botched that part. I was thrown off by the high fuel and low cruise. Thanks. SG

Regarding your question though that 215 knots on the climb page on the ground is more of a placeholder than anything especially if all of the performance information hasn't been entered. Run your takeoff numbers, fill in the V-speed information. That 215 will change to V2+15. As soon as you are flying and a clean configuration it will revert to 250 below 10,000 feet and the FMC will meet your altitude restriction. Seth Goodwin

After some more testing, KB4038788 in September caused FS-Lab's Concorde-X to CTD for me. That update also caused more widespread issues for many P3Dv3 users based on the LM fourm. It would appear that Tuesday's update fixed the KB4038788 as Concorde-X is working as well as the PMDG airplanes on my system. Now we just obviously need 1 more update to fix what was broken with the creators update. -Seth Goodwin