bennyboy75

I tried FS HUD for the first time this weekend and apart from the rather torturous install (needed to install run times and do stuff in powershell to make it start) I actually really like how it works. The voices aren’t bad at all and it’s very easy to use.

The only drawbacks for me were it absolutely hammered my frame rate even at small airports, although I’m used to running with minimal AI due to my rig being quite outdated these days. Hopefully my 7800X3D/4080 Super combo arriving next week will solve that.

Secondly and most disappointing was the vectoring to final was hopeless. Not just poor, but on both flights literally I had vectors from downwind that put me 150 degrees off the localiser course. As I’ve read that one of the strengths of this program is very realistic vectoring, it’s a bit of a bummer. 
 

Weird choice for them - especially as MK are one of the more renowned developers and did a great job with Lisbon. 

17 hours ago, JYW said:

Yes, the RJ brings integrated VNAV but more starkly (in my opinion) brings the vast increase in situational awareness afforded by the EFIS.   (The lack of a navigation display on the 146 is the main point that prevents me from enjoying it - that's no criticism of the product as it's realistic.  The tiny map that appears in the radar screen is non-adjustable and doesn't help much).

With the RJ, we'll have all the fun of the 4 engined Jumbolino but with decent RNAV, VNAV and situational awareness through the EFIS.   The RJs use the same Honeywell MCP as older 737NGs.

 

....then of course there's AUTOTHROTTLE! 😉

I have to agree with you about the nav display. 

The fact that we have to self vector a lot of the time in the sim is made much easier by being able to visualise where you are in relation to the nav course/localiser etc without having to twirl a bunch of courses and VORs and build a mental picture. Autothrottle also takes a lot of the workload away. I passed on the 146/F28 for precisely the reason that they’d barely get flown. Am very excited about the RJ and Fokker 100/70 though. 

4 hours ago, JYW said:

Can you spot the paint-based oddity going on here? 😄

The funny thing is, I'm sure I've flown this (official Ini) repaint before and never noticed that gremlin with the DHL logo.

 

I had exactly this problem and also wondered the same thing! 

Nice to see the return of another big name from the FSX/P3D days but I’ll sit this one out until some reviews are in. Unpopular opinion, but I find the weather engine in MSFS to be pretty solid at this point. AS’s metar to metar injection model is well behind the tech under the hood already.

As previously pointed out, we are also getting back to the stage of bloating the sim with lots of third party apps (I’m running fs realistic, real turb and the FPS LOD program already) so am reluctant to keep adding more unless it’s really good. 

Looks like we won’t have to wait too long to find out.

AI traffic is more trouble that it’s worth. After a long flight the last thing I want is a plane landing on the opposite end of the runway I’m using, which is quite a regular occurrence. 

I now use FSLTL to spawn traffic at the gates so I don’t feel lonely but I have the IFR traffic set to almost zero. 

Anyone who can fly the Q400 will be able to handle the UNS FMC in this which is a good thing. Unfortunately I’m quite a lazy flier these days due to the wonderful scenery in MSFS that I enjoy sightseeing instead of grappling with flying old iron so the lack of glass and autothrottle means I’ll probably pass this time. 
 

I will be all over the Fokker 70/100 and RJ like a rash though! 

I have their Dubai and Abu Dhabi and they’re decent enough, although I’d certainly not put them up with Flytampa or Pyreegue. Abu Dhabi needs a bit of patching on things like taxi ways that don’t have lead in lines etc. It does feel a little rushed to me. 

Performance is fine on my mid-tier rig with some of the interior stuff switched off.

This looks good though, I’d definitely give it a go. 

On 3/11/2024 at 3:00 PM, Farlis said:

You know how many simpilots are. Handflying jets is not their forte. So I was just lending a helping hand, like a virtual First Officer who knew what caused the problem and how to resolve it.

I mean the A320 is really easy to handfly. I had my first occurence of that disconnect on an approach to Zürich, also on VATSIM and at that time I did not know how to resolve it, yet. So I just flew it by hand, and didn't bother to tell ATC about it.

 

 

Quite agree with you that most sim pilots aren’t great stick and flyers but handling a desktop sim with consumer grade hardware is way more difficult than the real thing. 
 

Even very experienced RW pilots/simmers who stream struggle to fly within the parameters that they would be expected to in the real aircraft. Excessive sink rates, landing off the centreline, rather unstable approaches etc are regular features of many of these videos. 
 

I flew a brand new Level D A320 NEO sim a couple of years back and it was way easier than the desktop sim to fly, and the skipper who was next to me said the the real one is easier still! 

2 hours ago, Claudius_ said:

Today I got an INVALID F-PLN UPLINK message, solved the problem changing the route in Simbrief, it's my first time about this bug. The Fenix app is requires login every 4/5 times, I tried a new install, without success.

My flares are quite good now, but it's very difficult to control the throttles and going to full reverse, my solution is pressing F2 more times at 30ft RA.

This is usually the result of the simbrief route having waypoints or airways that aren’t in the database.  I kept getting this after a reinstall and then realised that I’d forgotten to update the navdata. I’ve never seen it with a route generated with current navdata from both simbrief and in the aircraft. 

The DC6 sold pretty well but it was the first PMDG high fidelity model for MSFS. I think I flew it once as the learning curve is very high. 

I’m fairly sure if you looked at Vatsim or Simbrief data then you’d see the number of people flying not only the DC6, but other classics like the 146, Fokker F28 and even the A300 to be absolutely dwarfed by the 737 NG and A320 crowd. 
 

The money is in the new stuff, which is why I’m astonished that no one’s had a go at a 787 yet. 

Can’t help the feeling we’ve seen it all before, since 2013 in fact, as alluded to in an earlier post. The lack of real innovation will hurt at some point. 
 

That all said, it’ll be a typical solid and dependable PMDG release and we know exactly what we’re getting. It will get the job done and do it well. I’ll buy it, as will everyone else. 

But in the longer term, is just enough really going to be enough? 

One thing they definitely got right was the ground handling. It’s a nice solid bird to taxi on the ground and feels well coordinated through turns. The same can’t be said for other add-ons. 

GSX is certainly more feature rich but it still has its idiosyncrasies and does seem to fall over at inopportune moments. This would be a nice backup to have, for sure. 
 

I do love the simplicity of drawing the pushback to be perfect every time. Would be amazing if GSX could incorporate this kind of drag and drop simplicity into the pushback. 

Fuelling this thing is weird - it seems to start at 20 tons and then de~fuels itself slowly to the desired fuel level when you select the load. I like the idea of real time fuelling but going up, not down!

For one, it’s incredibly rare to de~fuel. 

Honestly doubt that they’ll go with anything as old as a 707 or 727. These things are an enormous handful to fly period, yet alone in a modern RNAV environment and by all available data (vatsim/navigraph etc) there’s a vast amount more interest in modem glass airliners than the old stuff. 
 A 75 or 76 is probably a reasonable mix of old and new but is now lost to Bluebird. A 787 would make the most sense as the freeware stuff is good, but it’s not PMDG good. However, the gap is closing all the time….

The B777 has a tiller on both sides and certainly at the airline my friend used to work for (a sandy one in the gulf with a lot of A380s) the FO would taxi and park it when it was his sector. 
 

The images look good, but we’ve seen it before - twice. PMDG make dependable and solid products but they definitely aren’t in the innovation game any longer. 

2 minutes ago, Flic1 said:

Are you taking off in Profile mode?  That's the only time it will automatically engage. I don't use Profile for takeoffs so not sure if something changed on this latest version.

Ah that might be it. I didn’t know it only worked automatically in PROF. There’s lot of subtle little differences with this bird and the newer Buses. 
 

Apparently you need to revert to a basic mode rather than PROF when not in NAV as the VNAV gets very confused. Of course in the A320 in HDG it won’t let you use managed DES or CLB at all, something they intentionally locked out in the later aircraft. 

Is the TRP broken in this update? I don’t seem to be getting the thrust reducing to CLB at the thr red altitude. 
 

i will say however that taxying this is really nice now. It has a solid inertia and goes where you steer it in a nice linear way. 

The transition from air to ground is very screwy in MSFS. It’s been acknowledged and hopefully will be worked out for the next version. Watch the number of YouTubers - many of them real pilots - who wobble all over the runway or fishtail left and right in a way that isn’t realistic. A large jet has a great deal of inertia and simple doesn’t behave like that. 
 

The only viable solution is to dial down your sensitivity settings and have a big dead zone as suggested. Some aircraft are more twitchy than others. Let’s hope this is resolved in the next version….

5 hours ago, BadKarmaPT said:

I can't get this to work with my RTX2080TI. I was hoping the new version would solve the issue I'm having but it's not the case, unfortunately... 

As soon as I set Frame Generation to "on" and hit apply, Msfs2020 becomes slow and unresponsive. It takes several clicks for any option in the menu to register. 

Anyone had a similar experience? 

Same, I also have the same card. The whole install seems to really dislike this tweak and I’m seeing stutters, jitters, cracking of the sounds when loading in and out and generally the whole thing is a mess. I’ve gone back to FG off, TAA and vsync at 50% of my refresh rate (so a constant 30fps with my 60hz monitor) and it’s way smoother. 
 

Interestingly I was limited by main thread always with the FG tweak but back to DX11 it’s almost constantly limited by GPU. 

59 minutes ago, ThomseN_inc said:

I just calculated them. Actually not a big difference.

But i'd like to know how the real deal is. When to use slats only takeoff and when not to.

Edit: In fact V1 and VR are the same with 15/0 and 15/15 config. It only changes with 15/20 though.

Interesting. I do recall from the XP version you saw some very high V speeds in certain situations. My guess is that if ini are using 15/15 as the default setting then this is the most common config, but if performance allows  (and with those big CF6s, it probably will) then go for a flapless departure. 

Not much to it - expect very high V speeds though! 

Got it, nice texturing and it feels a more complete product than the A310. Performance is patchy but my rig is mid tier at best now (9900kf and 2080ti) so will reserve judgement until I’ve upgraded at least the CPU. Only issue I had is the nose wheel steering stopped working mid turn and I ran off into the grass. This issue also affects the PMDG 737 and Fenix to a certain extent so I’ll pin the blame on Asobo. From a bit of digging around it seems if you have a tiller assigned (I use the twist on my Airbus joystick even when using my yoke for the A300 and Boeings) and you push any rudder input, the nose wheel steering stops working. Anyone else ran into this? 

A300 can takeoff with slats only, so no surprise that your F speed is low. Try a slats only (15/0) takeoff and see how the profile looks.