AviatorMan

Thanks to you both. No I didn't have Bing and Photogrammetry data turned on. When I did turn it on, everything was as previously. And I must say I am very impressed that the photogrammetry data for this area North of Fort Worth, and the entire metropolitan area (including the historic Stock Yards just north of downtown Fort Worth) are so accurately represented. And whilst I am thankful that this area is included in the photo realistic data, Forth Worth is not the best known metropolitan area in Texas and the little town of Saginaw with its grain elevators is certainly a backwater place. And the scenery (flat prairie, urban sprawl and freeways) is not something to send a postcard home about.

Several months ago, when I first installed MSFS2020, I went to KFTW Meacham Field in Fort Worth, Texas and did some slow and low flying exploring the area. I don't know if the area was supposed to be photogrammetric or not but I flew some areas that I knew well (having grown up there). After take off from KFTW I headed north towards the suburb of Saginaw and saw one of the grain elevators in the town, and was delighted to see the elevator accurately represented, including the large sign on its side. Then I flew over the town to the west wondering if the High School I attended was there. Yes it was, including the circular main building which was unusual for its time. Other areas of the town also looked nearly as accurate as a photograph. It certainly looked photogrammetric to me. Yesterday I flew the same area and was shocked to see that the grain elevator wasn't there, the high school was there, but in general buildings. In place of the grain elevator there were generic industrial warehouse type buildings. My question is: has Microsoft/Asobo eliminated some of the original photogrammetric urban areas?

Thanks for the info concerning the difficulty for developers. A bit sad as MSFS2020 opens up so many places with realistic sceneries not available before, and it seems leaving behind the independent developers who want to contribute airports superior to default airports, except for runway terrain contour following. We are all missing out, including Microsoft and Asobo.

I have now uninstalled the addon EGSU and can confirm that the default airfield runway does in fact have a high point towards the eastern 1/3 of the runway. That being said, apart from the runway contouring the freeware addon version is a superb rendition of Duxford Airfield, whereas the default does not resemble it at all. So I will continue to use the excellent addon.

I have noticed that many (most?) MSFS2020 default airports have runways that follow real world terrain contours. I am wondering if developers have to do anything specific to ensure that their runways follow the terrain contours. I am wondering this because a few of the addon airports that I have installed seem to have perfectly flat runways, but do not remember what they were in the default airports. (I could of course uninstall them and check.) One airport I have flown in real life (EGSU) and am pretty sure that the runway had significant contours, but the addon does not seem to have this feature. I think that the runway terrain contouring is one of the really good features of MSFS2020 and would like to be able to know before I purchase that the feature has been retained.

I understand F1 and F2 are the keys for reverse thrust. What about reverse propeller braking, e.g., for the DC-6. Can someone help? Thanks

I was reluctant to use this site at first, but their EGSU Duxford Aerodrome got my attention. At first I was discouraged because I was having difficulty in understanding how to unzip the files and get them into the Community folder. Have finally figured that out. Have browsed their catalogue and saw not only that there are hundreds (thousands?) of sceneries and aircraft, with a very clever navigation technique, which includes graphic samples of the product. The lack of graphic sample views has been one of the limitations of sites like Avsim and Flightsim.com that have offered freeware as a sideline. (I think the value of these two sites is primarily their forums.) I have now downloaded EGKK Gatwick, EGKB Biggin Hill, Tours City (France) and La Rochelle City (France).They are all really good, and definitely worth a donation. I spent a couple of hours today browsing and have identified several more I intend to download soon.

Thanks for you informative comments. That sounds encouraging. I have owned several Milviz planes in FSX and in several versions of P3D: the C310R and Beech B55 were very good. One that I really enjoyed was the T-50 Bobcat. Lots of functionality, including the 1930's-4'0's era radio and navigation. I tried hard but never figured out how to make the radio work!

A suggestion to Aeroplane Heaven: I have just seen a video of your recently released Spitfire. It looks great and seems to have good system functionality and flying characteristics. However, the cockpit and instrument panel does not really move when the engine starts. Have you considered developing algorithms for cockpit and panel animations to simulate these vibrations. It's pretty important to immersion. And I notice that your announcements for your upcoming DC claims: "...In our simulation tribute, we have attempted to bring you something of the way it feels to fly one of these legends. A bone-shaking, rattling ride..." So how will you make us feel this? Indeed it will be hard to replicate this feeling in a PC desktop simulation, since you wont be able to shake our desk chairs in front of our computers. However, one thing that would really help to overcome these limitations is animation of the cockpit and panel vibrations. A recent freeware version of the DC3 in P3D did a good job of animating these vibrations. Good luck and I look forward to purchasing your upcoming version of this iconic aircraft.

Looks great, and seems to fly well. Lots of fine detail in the textures, and evidently a good level of system functionality. The only negative I noticed was that when the engine started the cockpit and instrument panel did not move. Or at least very little. With this huge piston engine and prop turning, in real life the cockpit instrument panel would not just sit there as if dead. For better immersion, it would be helpful if aircraft developers started developing techniques to animate these vibrations. Like A2A's Accusim perhaps?

Those who have installed this great airfield may be interested that Tom Cruise was flying there a couple of weeks ago: https://www.royston-crow.co.uk/things-to-do/tom-cruise-mission-impossible-flying-at-duxford-8392756

When I started this topic my goal simply was to point out that there is a fairly large difference between the progress made in the simulators, from FS9 through FSX and P3D and now MSFS, and the little progress made during that period by aircraft addons. Some of you have mentioned other good addons, e.g., Milviz C310 and B55 and RealAir's Duke B60. Yes I agree that these are all good. I have them all. But they came out several years ago. In the meantime the sims have progressed through several versions of P3D and now MSFS. The aircraft addons could have progressed more during this period. Yes I confess: I bought Carenado's PA44 and M20R. I did shortly after I installed MSFS and saw on this forum that several people recommended them. It was early days and I was hoping for better. And sorry if the verb 'demand' has annoyed some of you, but as customers we deserve more and I think it is not unreasonable that we demand more of ourselves as well as the developers. Lockheed has delivered and now Microsoft has delivered. The aircraft addon developers can do better as well, but they may not if we as consumers do not make it clear that we want them to.

MSFS2020 represents a new generation in PC based flight simulation. It presents the world in which we fly - the earth, sky and weather – more accurately to the real world than anything previous. Yet aircraft addon developers seem to think they can just continue to sell their products without any significant upgrade in quality and accuracy. To my mind the only aircraft developers whose products are of suitable high quality for MSFS2020 are PMDG and A2A. PMDG so far has introduced only their DC-6 for MSFS2020, and most everyone seems to agree that this is a high-quality product worthy to fly in MSFS2020. I have it and agree. So far nothing from A2A. I expect they want to take the time to do it right and retain their excellent reputation rather than rush something out. Just Flight’s PA28 is pretty good, but not to the level of A2A and PMDG. Carenado has been quick to revise their previous models, with the quality we have come to expect from them. I purchased their PA44 and M20R out of desperation to have a twin and a fast single. Disappointing. Even their textures are nothing to write home about. JustFlight's PA28 has exceptional textures, better than Carenado. We flight simmers should not put up with this! We should demand high quality models, even if we have to pay more, and stop rewarding mediocrity. We need to get their attention. Vote with our wallets. It’s better to have 3 or 4 high quality aircraft that you are happy to fly in MSFS2020’s world than 10 or 20 inferior aircraft that are boring and we discontinue flying a few weeks after we purchase them and realize they are not worthy of our money, much less our time.

I is possible that the reason that Flightsim.to has a queue is because they have a very large selection of high-quality products? Perhaps more so than Avsim or Flightsim.com?

Thanks, I did this and it worked!

Yes, I would like to move my Community folder packages because the folder is buried so deep in the file archive it's difficult to work with. This would make it easer to unzip and install new addons. How do you move your Community packages (addons, I assume) to another folder so that MSFS still recognizes where they are when needed in the sim? And do you delete the now empty community folder? I am really confused.

Is it available in the MSFS Market Place?

I have installed all updates and never moved or renamed my Community folder and the two payware addons that I have purchased are still there. So it seems we don't have to do anything to the Community folder doesn't it??

Do these airports come with installers? Since they are asking for a payment (admittedly modest) it would be helpful if their products come with installers for simmers who wish to avoid the trials of unzipping and placing the correct folders/files in the Community. folder.

I don't know about this, yet another product to help us download and install non-MSFS addons. I have now been trying for three days to install Flightsim.to's EGSU Duxford freeware. I have finally found my Community folder, but when I follow instructions and unzip and install it, even though there is a folder called EGSU in the Community folder, when I startup the sim the new airfield is not there. (It shows in the Content Manager, but when you start a flight there, it is the default airfield, not the freeware one.) I also used a product (freeware) called ModManFX which claims to be an easy to use tool to install freeware addons, it didn't work. And I am sceptical that Add-on-Linker freeware that you mention will work as a straightforward tool to do this. I am glad that payware companies like Justflight and PMDG have tools that easily install their products. I know that Fligmtsim.to is a freeware outfit, but I really think that they should put some thought into an easy to use tool to install these products. I would be glad to pay for it.

I have downloaded the Flightsim.to freeware EGSU Duxford Aerodrome. Unzipped folder into the Community folder. Launched the sim and started a flight at EGSU - it was the default MSFS airport, not the Flightsim.to freeware addon. Looked in my Community folder, and the Flightsim.to version was in fact there. Any suggestions as to what could be the problem? Thanks

Yes I think you are right. I was there just last week and the colour of the apron and the adjacent paved pedestrian and aircraft display areas is not bright green. Otherwise a very good representation of the aerodrome.

Okay, there seem to be a lot of products on the site. How do we know which ones are of good quality. (I know someone is going to say "but there are free..."). I think a lot of simmers are interested in high quality aircraft and airports and whether they are free or costly don't want to spend a lot of time if the product does not have better than average features, in fact would prefer to pay a good price if it is worth it.

Who are Flightsim.to? Where are they located? What do we know about them? Are they legit?

I think it's because the people with problems seek help on this forum and generally want to vent their frustration, whereas of the people who are happy and not suffering these problems, only a few reply to the forum. I am one of these people. Over the last months I have seen scores of comments on this forum describing problems, and I have only once responded that everything is OK with me. I suspect there are many more.