beoxx

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    No
  1. beoxx

    Best simulator for Glider pilots?

    Never tried Condor so I can't compare. What I find impressing with Aerofly in comparison to FSX and X10 is that you really have the feeling that you fly through air. And wind...feels like, well, wind. You really have to fight against it sometimes. Also if you fly near or low over a mountain you can feel updrafts and downdrafts. Quite nice. Plus a stunning view out of the window. I didn't know about Condor, guess I will check that out, too.
  2. beoxx

    Best simulator for Glider pilots?

    Check out Aerofly FS. Decent fotorealistic graphics and the best flight dynamics I have ever seen in a simulation. The software is limited if you fly classic GA (not much system depth, no real navigation, very basic autopilot and planes don't use fuel and so on). But for gliding with a realistic feeling it is just awesome I think. There are already some gliders as standard planes but also some payware addons meanwhile.
  3. beoxx

    fseconomy users quick question

    Hi, don't worry the FSE flight planner has been there for years and there was never an incident. A few hundred guys are using it. I would also say this is a "must have" if you want to fly bigger planes efficiently and it is so much more comfortable. Once you have used it you don't want to miss it anymore.... Also, the software is free now. All you have to do is to join the flight group "FSE flight planner". This is also free with no strings attached. Cheers
  4. I think both are worth having but if I had to choose one I would keep the Kingair. The Kingair feels newer both with systems and overall (as an addon). But the J41 is still decent. Both planes have some buttons to push and system depth. The J41 is hard on the frames, the Kingair is a bit better here. It was a factor with my old oc'ed core2 duo but they both run well on an i5. FDE are good on both addons. Subjectively maybe even a bit better on the J41. For FSE: The J41 is the better cash maker of course but it is also more work to fill up all the seats (FSE Flight planner helps, but still...).The 200 is a nice plane to just do a quick relaxing 8 to 13 pax run back and forth without much searching for a good route. I had a J41 for a while in FSE but sold it. But this is a matter of personal preference of course. In my case, if I want money I fly a BAE146, Electra, CRJ, Embraer or something. But most of my FSE time I prefer flying something between a Cherokee and a Kingair. I must also say the F1 200 looks awesome imho But it is not an easy choice. From time to time I rent a J41 to fly it again and it is always fun for a while. I just couldn't do it without my Kingair for too long (which is already not a bad plane to haul in some cash).
  5. What I also found a bit disturbing: I have seen at least 2 posts on their facebook side from not so happy customers that where pointing out several bugs and it looks like they just got deleted... A video with engine sounds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXyaq8FzaOw I agree sounds are very..mediocre...imho.
  6. That's an option of course. I played around with this a bit. You get the report and see what has to be repaired or will have to be repaired soon. Once it is done you have to wait a long time to see the effect of the wear and tear again. Or you would have to use the used button every couple of flights but you would have a different plane every time and I would like to see how "my" plane holds up and reacts to my way of flying it. Also a wrong fuel consumption when using TC is a factor when you use Airhauler or fseconomy. It is my only complaint about an otherwise decent addon. I was hoping that this would work with TC one day but after reading some posts in the forum about it, I doubt it.
  7. That's what I also don't like aboubt the a2a 172 that the fuel burn and all the wear an tear counts in real time only. We have a decent plane with all those simulated stuff that can break or wear out and we won't see much of it as long as we fly her by the book. I would love to see some hours on the hobbs meter to see what happens without having to spend so much real life time for it. I fly in fseconomy and usually use some 4x to 16x in the middle of the flight. I made a tour around the world in a PC-12 (Flight1) and it took something like 120 flight hours and around 30 real life hours. I am not sure if I had as much fun if I really had to fly all of it in real time. But that is just me of course . I hope you have fun with your tour. It is much more challenging in a 172 to do this I guess. A PC-12 is a very comfortable plane to do this in comparison
  8. beoxx

    Real Air Duke v2.0 Released

    At first I was not even that overwhelmed by the upgrades...but that changed after the second look. I had only a few minutes time for the first flight and it felt pretty much like the old version (=enjoyable) with everything looking somehow a bit better. Then the evening came and I had time for a better look. Some of the new liveries suit the Duke very well and she appears more "up-to-date" with them. Lots of small details like the dirt on the carpets and the windows or the little scratches on the surfaces give her a way more used and realistic look. Also she finally got some worthy leather seats (the old ones looked liked they were stolen out of an 80's overland bus imho. :lol: ) A while ago because of similar better details the T-Duke almost killed the piston version for me when she came out. When I switched between the planes the piston suddenly looked way to clean, steril and liefeless in comparison. This time it looks like it might turn out to be the other way around for the same reasons. But the most important factor for me is that: I was descending into a small valley to make a landing on a little airfield. I was not in a good position yet and already very near to the runway. I was high and fast so I extended the gear to lose some extra speed. The plane started shaking and I could "hear" how the wind flow around the plane changed. I extended the flaps and again I could "feel" and hear the results. I forced the plane into a steep turn and this time the whole fuselage screamed in protest. I made a hard landing, my head got heavily pushed up and down and the plane stopped at the end of the runway with squeaking brakes. You get feedback and this makes this plane feel very realistic and "alive". The RA Dukes have always been some of my most flown addons. Now the V 2.0 is even better and state of the art when it comes to optics and technique. Imho totally worth it.
  9. I just downloaded it from Carenado a few hours ago. > Carenado.com > my account > my products > 182 T at the right end behind you serial number "update" Note: There is only this one update left, SP1 and SP2 are no longer there.
  10. Quick test over ORBX PNW, some HD rex clouds, FPS unlimited, on a Haswell 4670k /GTX560ti, no oc: Before Patch: 46 FPS After Patch: 57 FPS Performance is now like the TBM 850.
  11. They should offer a stand alone version. If I want only a G1000 206 I have to pay $50 for a plane with not much system depth and a G1000 that is only slightly better than the default.....
  12. beoxx

    TBM 850 Review

    Ok I totally take that back. It is not specific for this plane. I just found the same thing on other planes. I really never noticed...after years of FSX..... :unsure: Lesson learned. I was just so focused on the FPS in the TBM and Fraps because I was trying to optimize it with turning of one PFD measuring different modes on the MFD and the impact on FPS and so on. And this is way harder to notice without Fraps running in the back I guess. Using the map still costs a lot of frames in this plane compared to other G1000 planes I have though.
  13. beoxx

    TBM 850 Review

    I just found out something strange. As soon as I use the mouse and the mouse pointer appears I get a huge FPS hit. When the pointer dissapears it takes a while and the FPS go up again. I used Fraps to confirm. I heard that the I-Fly 737 also had that problem at first. Can anybody confirm this or is it just me...?
  14. beoxx

    TBM 850 Review

    My little review: Long story short: It looks good, but performance after a second closer look and some testing with fraps is worse than their Malibu and also their 182T. Resolution of the MFD makes you think that you need glasses. As with their 182T I also get an extreme FPS hit with the TBM when using the map on the MFD. This is NOT the case with several other G1000 planes I have like the Flight1 Mustang, Feelthere Phenom 100, Quest Kodiak and more. There is only a small hit. Also for example with their Carenado Malibu with g500, 2 x gps, weather radar and all 5 displays including map activated or all except the pfd turned off the difference in fps is minimal. Now after I spend the money and see it for myself I must admit that I am somewaht shocked that they don't even got the speed right. I mean come on... the 850 is about SPEED and they don't even get this very obvious thing right? That plus all the little bugs and flaws with the G1000 and FDE. Eveything appears to be rushed. I wouldn't even expect a perfect G1000 for that price. But for sure I would expect a limited G1000 in an otherwise high quality product for that price... I already resisted some of their releases in the last year even though I was interested in having such a plane in my collection (both KingAirs for example). Now I wait and hope for the service packs...and not even to fix all the problems...only to make it at least a bit better...before they abandon the product....like always with Carenado I think this will finally be my last Carenado for a long time or until I hear that they changed their attitude towards quality.