Jump to content

Baylorguy

Members
  • Content Count

    300
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

39 Neutral

About Baylorguy

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/21/1981

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    TX
  • Interests
    Running, flight simulation, college football and basketball

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes
  1. I will keep his family in my prayers. Sorry to hear this.
  2. All do respect, I don't know of a single developer that ends up releasing a product on their target date... and almost always push it back months (in the case of one of the developers you mentioned, even years). I have the Aerosoft and they are exceptional... will probably pick up their A330 as well even though I have the BB. I think the key here is to approach BB exactly as they claim... it is truly an unfinished product. I look for progress in each iteration, and V.80 is definitely solid progress from the prior version. To the other poster... I am not sure i would use the word "antics." It is a different way of developing a product. I don't mind unfinished cockpit textures and a few quirks here and there if it means I can fly an otherwise solid A340-600, fully knowing it will get finished. I flew on VATSIM last night and flew a DCT as per the instructions of ATC... I had no issues, so maybe a bad install, etc?
  3. Two different simulation platforms entirely. Let's see what PMDG does on XPX and then we'll talk... FF aircraft are plenty good and will only get better. Be careful as well to correlate the amount of time it takes to complete a product with the quality of the product. While this can be true, there are countless other factors such as how efficient a team actually executes during the development phase, etc. PMDG basically said going forward they will be changing their philosophy in releasing updates to be more nimble in future cases (i.e. a full year for a service pack)... it is entirely possible other teams are already doing things more efficiently. Also, from a very basic standpoint, FSLabs is not out yet, so none of us know of the quality until we actually use it and reviews start hitting the web. Nor is the FF A350 out, and as such, premature judgments on its quality and features are exactly that... premature.
  4. I already have the SSG, but your way of thinking is how I am approaching it right now in terms of buying additional aircraft for XPX. That visibility issue is killer.
  5. Vincent - I apologize for being a bit on the crabby side. You caught me at a bad time and I think I read your comment out of context. Agreed it is a WIP, but fortunately it is still being worked on. Again, sorry, I value your posts.. except this one. Just kidding
  6. Yep, if you do a bit of research the "same 747" has been updated to V 1.03 as of April. The textures were redone and they look much better. Your assumption based on the tone you are using is that an aircraft that models more is better. If that is what you enjoy, great, but not everyone is like you. No need to pop in a thread and make a condescending remark like that.
  7. Agreed! My first flight was YSSY to KLAX... followed the VNAV and LNAV paths really well and performance has been great. The sound in the cockpit is really pleasant as well... you really get the sense that you are piloting the plain. I found though that running with the engines in TOGA that thing is a thoroughbred... got up to speed very quickly, even with tons of fuel and 360 passengers.
  8. Had to resurrect this thread. I just purchased the SSG 747 and I have to say with the new revisions and cockpit textures, it is SOLID. I am a PMDG guy but have been putting a lot of time into XPX and P3D. My current long haul is the FF 777 but the SSG will get at least as much time if not more. Very pleasant aircraft, well done! The one thing I do hope is that more liveries become available. Would love to have a fictional United livery, so hopefully the liveries keep getting churned out! -Phil
  9. Tried it but did not get as dramatic of a result... maybe I saved the notepad file wrong... will try again with Tom's instructions. -Phil
  10. Tom was kind enough to meet with me this morning and give me a sneak peak into the IXEG 737 As you all know it is not completed yet but I was able to see firsthand the full cockpit, cabin and a short flight to view the external model and various animations like gear up and gear down, flaps, thrust reversers, etc. I can tell you all of the hype is justified. It will not simply deliver a good quality tubeliner for X plane 10... even at this point it would be a top performer on ANY simulator, period. Even at this stage, the 3d model of the cockpit is better than anything currently offered on Xplane and the systems fidelity is quite advaned. I was able to see such detail in the gauges and how they respond to various triggers in the process flow. For instance, the difference in battery voltage with the APU on versus off. The difference in speed (how quickly the landing gear operates)when deploying the landing gear with full hydraulics versus a simulated emergency where hydraulics is lost and a manual drop is required. Also, Being a huge PMDG fan, the FMC is always important to me. I like in depth functionality, not a generic system. The FMC had all of the screens and options (i.e. PERF, INIT) I am used to seeing... V1, V2, V3, weight, departure, arrival, SIDS, STARS... all there! I am stoked about this plane and can tell you... yes, it is unequivocally the real deal... and will be well worth the wait! -Phil
  11. Whatever the time frame, will be well worth the wait. I swear by PMDG... I love them because of the immersion and the attention to detail... the finger print smudges on the instruments, the dust in the cockpit, etc. And so far from what I have seen... IXEG is at least the same level of detail... which makes for a very exciting product -Phil
×
×
  • Create New...