Q_flyer

Hi Peter, I fly EasyJet into EGGD (from EGNT) every week, and as you say, they are always vectored off, usually pretty directly towards a downwind, about 15 miles north of the field. The STAR is just there as a 'default' position that says "if you're not told otherwise, you're going overhead the field", although it almost never happens that this occurs. Almost the same happens "up the road" at EGNT; most flight plans will have a clearance limit of NEW VOR, which again, is on the field, but they too get either easterly or westerly vectors, at around 10-20 miles out.

Well after a few disappointments lately, I said I was not buying Carenado's offerings any more, but the problem is, in real life this plane (in piston variant only - don't like the JetProp one bit) is my all time favourite piston single .......... so I caved in and bought it today..... It's ok, far better IMHO than the ultra bland CT206. It has a nice immersion, decent views, it performs as expected. As Scott said, I too find the sound set unspectacular and nothing close to videos of real PA46-350Ps on YouTube... but I will probably fix that one myself with a replacement :wink: But so far, my admittedly low expectations, have been exceeded ..... a bit. It's usual Carenado; beautiful texturing / modelling, ok'ish FDE, slightly lower than average sounds, and nothing special in the systems department, but all that aside, it's a nice fly. :smile: It is not even in the same stratosphere as the Duke B60 2.0, but the aircraft type is one that I prefer vastly in the real world, so I'll still use it. I fly the Duke because it's a RealAir but the type itself (just like the Legacy) is too personally obscure to interest me. With the Carenado PA46-350, it's the opposite; I forgive the usual Carenado quality issues, because it's a Piston Malibu. I'll be posting some pics from it, in the Screenshot Section soon.

The DMAX model? One of my favourites when I used to use X-Plane 9. Lovely pics!

I personally see it that we simply choose to have a hobby which is at it's very core, complex. Everything about this hobby is complex. As you pointed out, if we all had identical machines and hardware it would be a lot less complex; but as things are, we have a hobby where something that works for one person may be detrimental to the next person. We have no real consistancy or uniformity. So the task of getting 'tuned' (which is what we are all ultimately doing, by tweaking) is an art and it becomes the personal responsibility of the individual user. We can't really get anything more than some basic ideas from the likes of a "FSX Guide" or "Bible". We have to test and try everything ourselves and 'filter' out those that are not good for us, and keep the few ideas that were beneficial. Its............... complex! :lol: Everything about this hobby. It's not like we are using a simply flying game on a games console, where everything sits on the same benchmark. But all that accepted, I disagree that any of this is sad or ridiculous (both adjectives that you used). It is just the nature of this hobby. From the figures you quote though, it does sound like something is specifically wrong on your system. The FPS and performance you describe for each scenario, seem very low compared to what I would see, and I have a similar system to yours.

How is the release of new features by LM, "thanks to AirDailyX" ? If it's anything like the completely incorrect reporting that AirDailyX did, that the Aerosoft Thessaloniki project was suspended, (when the developer was actually working 50+ hours per week to get it completed), I doubt it........

FLIGHT! used the DX9 engine.

I think for most, it's nothing whatsoever to do with being 'scared'. When I was younger, with no kids and few responsibilties, I used to fly 4 hour flights all real-time, on VATSIM, in targetted areas with full coverage. I'll never forget my first fully ATC controlled approach on VATSIM, it was at Dubrovnik in Croatia, and the VATSIM controller did an awesome job. I was jaw-dropped and gobsmacked :cool: .....but.... I never ever use VATSIM now because it is quite an undertaking to get set up, get your FP all done and logged, have your charts and/or know your proper departure and arrival stuff, and to be at the PC throughout the whole flight. I dream of having that time and freedom now! So for some, VATSIM - with all it entails, with how brilliant it can be - will never be for them.

Thanks Mike but as I said in an earlier thread, I bought P3D the day the academic licences were released.

Thank you - that helps a lot.

Mmm, I understand your general point, but I don't believe that those who are using flight simulation for type rating purposes are the majority (in contrast to the 'bulk' of users you referred to at the beginning of your para). Yes I agree that there are many flight sim users not represented by the AVSIM community - perhaps even the majority of flight simmers are not part of this community - but I don't see many of those 'non-AVSIM' users being professional pilots, in pursuit of a type rating. Aren't they more likely to be just more entertainment-based flight simmers, who just happen to not be into the forum community thing?

+1 This is my 'issue'. As much of an Airbus fan and follower I am, I am also a simmer who has his own specific definition of realism, and the Aerosoft jobbie is ticking those boxes at the moment. Of course as and when the FSL is ever released I will be as excited as the next man to see what it offers *in the flesh* and will abandon all loyalty, and 'jump ship' if it gives more of the things that I value. Obscure failures modelling has never been something that I've valued though. I like the every day things, done really well. :smile:

Apologies for my ignorance as I've never been on the LM forum and I also did not catch all of the 'other thread' but is there any known 'upgrade path' or discount on P3D 2.0, for those that own P3D 1.4 ?

I bet some people will be like "Oh, err, just flying.... I'm bored!". :lol: In all seriousness, I think the tweaking is part of the hobby for a lot of people. But yes, I bought P3D (not quite Day 1, but the day the $49 academic licences were released) and really value it as a future pathway to improvement and development, of the existing platform. The great thing with P3D is that although we hope it will eventually develop beyond recogintion of FSX, it's starting point is essentially FSX; that gives us certain familiarities and similarities to build on. (In contrast to X-Plane, where your average FSX'er tends to try it and find the interface and ethos so confusingly different to FSX). I love FSX to be honest, but thinking forward, I would definitely say; P3D - I'm in.

Turbine Duke V1 is excellent. You really won't be disappointed. I have always preferred the Piston version so hence the Piston B60 2.0 is a real treat for people like me :smile: ... But the T-Duke is a superb product. I think it is just a case that, with the v2.0 of the piston version, RealAir have shown us that they can do even better........

Downloading! ....... Qatar 777 here we come :smile:

Phew! ...... I'm not going mad! :lol: But I will still get your British Captain's "Go Around" call done this week :wink:

+1 +1 ...... and a very worthy trade off.

And you should learn not to randomly pick on a guy over pointless semantics....... It's you that needs to get over it, not Eric. They discounted it for me Chris! :lol:

Well it's hardly a 'problem' is it.... :rolleyes: We're talking about reasoning for a higher retail price. We're talking about an explanation, not an excuse or a problem. Quite funny how some people are outraged and demand it be lower in price. It's that free market that you capitalists love you see ... :wink: They can charge what they want. Perhaps the scenery is good value in the Japanese market, and perhaps that's as far as they want to attract. If you are Japanese and sell to international markets, you have to provide international support and the Japanese aren't the world's greatest multi-linguals :wink: (In case anyone get's outraged by that, I used to work for a Nissan supplier and have visited Japan on 8 occasions. I adore the place, and the people, but I'd still say they're generally not the best at interfacing with the rest of the world).

.....just landed, and arriving in Norilsk, Northern Siberia; the twice weekly Aeroflot A320. Local Time: 15:00 Temp: -18C Nice and snug in the A320 cockpit though .......... the "Foot Warmer" is on :wink:

Bandwidth alert? ...... I can't think of a better use of my bandwidth than looking at those gorgeous shots! :cool:

Hi, Unfortunately, as nice as these shots look, I started having the same problems that you describe and abandoned DX10. I am now using DX9 with ENB and have never been happier with FSX. RadeonPro is a bit of a beast and not a program that I really wanted running everytime I used FSX (which it would need to be, as there is no vsync with ATI cards in DX10, unless you use the lock in Radeon Pro). Sorry I can't help more.

I do agree. But the risk is that with one draw call, there could be one heck of an initial stutter, before the full vista of autogen is drawn.

I'll be in a huge minority here, but my favourite Carenado planes are the Cessna 340 and the C208B. My least favourite Carenados are the PA46T and the CT206H, the latter which I just find mind-numbling bland and lacking in character. As I said though, I'll be in a minority there, and it's all just personal choice anyway.

Oh ok, sorry if I misunderstood, but can you tell us some of the aircraft that you're flying while seeing these great results with Bloom and high settings?