F737MAX

Correct. And:

7 posts in less than 25 minutes defending the dev / using ad-hominem comments against people legitimately raising issues? Hmm... 🤔

Loved FS9. Such a stable flight sim platform in comparison to everything that has followed, for a lot less money and a lot more freeware. However, everything has its time. When I saw VDGS at airport sceneries, up-to-date AI airline timetables and liveries, updated airport layouts (including new terminals, runways and taxiways or just entirely new airports) and ever more detailed 'study level'/complex airliners, the urge to move on to P3Dv4 was too great. What a ride it was for me for those 14 years, though!

Already been done by this great add-on. https://flightsim.to/file/51413/gamod-offline-version ⬆️ All the non-airline traffic you could ever need!

Don't get me wrong, I can certainly find plenty of annoyances in MSFS in addition to UI and perma cumulus in live weather, e.g.: Ground handling like it's icy in the dry, sticky when it's wet. Nearly every graphics setting found in previous ESP sims is now tied to the TLOD slider. AI traffic having an outsized performance hit on everyone's hardware, etc... Us proper flight simmers™ (and I can be just as guilty) on here need to remember that MSFS isn't for irl flight training. The gliding experience is woefully wrong according to glider pilots, there's little to no peril in flying in marginal conditions, let alone storms, and ILS glideslopes and PAPI lights are often severely misaligned. Other flight training platforms exist to cater to hours-building, recurrent training or practising normal and/or emergency and abnormal procedures. However, I love that flight sim 'default' now includes Garmin equipment and recreation of other avionics previously only found in payware. I can come relatively close to the experience of flight (especially with certain add-ons) on an incredible platform that's technologically and visually light years ahead of others. One that receives very regular updates, where the devs try to incorporate the more technical aspects of flying, and most importantly, is a lot of fun! tl;dr Don't be guilty of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It's certainly not perfect and remember, MSFS2020 is an entertainment product first and foremost. Yet it has incorporated and continues to try to include the intricacies of flight. On home hardware. For just $60 – $120.

Making MSFS more 'Xbox-like' has given us the most realistic helicopters in the MS flight sim franchise to-date. It's also given us: the cheapest and most feature rich A320 the most realistic Garmin units for free the entire world in photoscenery rather than landclass textures multiple new payware developers pushing our expectations of paid products higher the most freeware content since the flight sim genre was in its previous heyday some 20-odd years ago. IMO, the benefits from making MSFS appeal to the Xbox crowd far outweigh the negatives.

Don't need intricate detail of the whole terminal interior, but I much prefer a modelled one to parallax effects when it is visible from the aircraft stands. Off the top of my head, EGLL T5, EICK, LEBL T1, EDDK T2, KDCA T2, VVNB T2, would all look terrible (IMO) if the respective devs had used parallax effects.

😆 Nah. There are major hubs in the USA by Flightbeam, FlyTampa, Drzewiecki and iniBuilds, all of whom are among the best/better scenery devs for MSFS. If you'd said "mediocre" about Africa, South America and parts of Asia, you'd have a much better argument.

Where are you overflying when the CPU is "killed" at cruise altitude? If it's over parts of Europe, it may be due to a bug. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/extreme-cpu-usage-performance-hit-during-cruise-30000ft-altitude-in-eu-region/635911

1. You're on the wrong forum! On here we love spending 45 mins to 1 hour doing pre-flight before every flight and having hundreds of knobs, buttons, dials and circuit breakers to play with first. 🤓 2. The negativity comes from the fact that it takes a freeware developer to mod the payware to make the payware acceptable. Not every aircraft needs to be "study level"/high fidelity, though I would want the model to have correct proportions, look good visually inside and out, and perform vaguely like the real aircraft does. If BlackBox, Carenado and freeware devs can manage it, so should LVFR.

The point is for you to be controlled by ATC without all the weirdness that default MSFS ATC gives you every time you fly with it now. Ultimately, yes, BeyondATC needs to control all the aircraft in the sky. I don't like 'early access' / beta / partially complete products, yet it would be hypocritical of those of us who accepted Fenix's CFM v1 A320 and a much later v2 Block 1 and Block 2 release schedule to criticise BeyondATC for doing something similar. Concerns over the devs having attention taken away from delivering AI traffic control in favour of an endless list of bug fixes, VFR control, scope creep are legitimate. Though, don't forget, AI traffic control is scope creep from the original premise of the program.

I don't believe that to be true either. There's been a noticeable shift in moderation tone since last Autumn/Fall. What was previously permitted and even commented upon by some mods has now changed, as if by edict...

With all the Community Managers and Moderators on the official MSFS forums now, I don't believe that to be the case.

Hope you are able to find one or two as I'm more than simply interested in a Hi-Fi solution to MSFS weather. Perhaps a 'lite' version of a weather product as a stopgap that can manage more than one layer of clouds or greater cloud variety and density than MSFS' own live weather can manage?

@Damian Clark Is there no way for Hi-Fi to 'hack' MSFS' METAR stations reporting to give more than just one global weather scenario at a time? Alternatively, is there a way to replace what MSFS imports from MeteoBlue to replicate entire weather systems using your own sourced data?

This topic every time someone brings it up...

From people stuck at home under lockdowns and on furloughs... Fenix, Pyreegue, FBW, WorkingTitle, FSLTL and PuffinFlight have all* been fantastic new entrants to the flight sim environment, pushing the boundaries of what makes an excellent product in a flight sim designed for the 2020s. A2A, JustFlight, AIG, iniBuilds (for their fast release cycles for very good, rather than excellent, quality products) and FSReborn are the only devs* with direct previous flight sim experience that have maintained or enhanced their reputations with their MSFS product collections. (*I may have missed a few developers from these lists). I'd argue there's more of that going on now. Whereas before it was a handful of devs like Taburet, Prealsoft and FSXcenery, we now also have 4Simmers, Dreamscenery, RKBridger, SoFly, South Oak Co, Spinoza... It's appears to be profitable to churn out lots of low effort products for MSFS.

Not an April fool. IIRC, it's to do with mamu82 perceiving an imbalance between charging Xbox users a fee for downloading his works off Marketplace as opposed to PC users getting them for free from FS.to Not going to pass comment on whether that's a genuine argument / fair / appropriate / understandable...

It's the DART people mover tracks cut into the hillside. https://youtu.be/VPhpmQ7NxMk?feature=shared&t=181 It's not necessarily quite as deep a cutting, but it appears to be an OK approximation.

Orbx is now a reseller/storefront much in the same way as Aerosoft, iniBuilds and JustFlight are. As such, Fly2High is a separate developer whose work is being sold through the Orbx store, though I wouldn't rate their stuff particularly highly. Like all stores, it's worth performing some research on the developer to see if they meet your quality standards. That said, Orbx's own product quality has been questionable for a while. I would only buy their add-ons where a lead developer is named in their product description e.g. Marcus Nyberg or Finn Hansen.

What's worse? Mis-selling an airport as being linked to a city that's hours away (Paris Vatry Chalons – LFOK) or one that's in a completely different country (Andorra–La Seu d'Urgell – LESU)? Back on topic. I'm looking forward to getting ini's Luton. The detail looks really nice as usual. As pax, the airport is horrible. But for flying it's great for the rapidly rising escarpment before the threshold of rwy 07 and for various low-cost airline ops.

It does not take 5-10 mins to set up the Fenix on a simple short or long final approach, more like 1½ to 2 mins, 3 at most. The longest it's ever taken is for a long star arrival into KLAX with a change of weather is 5 mins. That's because it's a 'complicated' arrival, lots of fixes, complicated scenery and it took a while for the Fenix to stabilise in different weather conditions from the start point after it was teleported to the KLAX approach. Get the Standard version and use the upgrade option to get the Advanced one if it meets your needs.

Watch the video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=McYhsOw21Zw If you just want simple approaches to repeat, FSiPanel standard is plenty. IIRC, the failure triggers in Advanced are more detailed than the ones available to use in the Fenix MCDU.

It's those devs using the 'many and often' business model. With their products appearing more often, it can appear as though 'early access' aircraft are the norm in MSFS. Thankfully, quality devs do exist and take a more measured approach.

JustFlight, Leonardo, A2A, FSReborn, FlightFX... and I'm sure there are a few others whose aircraft I'm unfamiliar. We've also no idea yet about BlueBird Sim (though updates appear promising). Both FSLabs (if they ever release) and iFly should also have fully functional products at release. Frustrating as it is, it's just the nature of flight sim on a new platform—it takes ages for the very best devs to create a 'feature complete' aircraft.