ndts

I was just in SBA last week (I fly for QX), and we were discussing whether the RNP-M was something QX had paid to develop, or if we'd just borrowed the Alaska procedure, since Horizon doesn't fly in there anything resembling consistently enough to warrant spending the $$ on a proprietary approach ourselves.

Horizon Air also has a number of custom, proprietary RNP approaches, so I'm curious if the RNP-M approaches for places like PUW, EAT, and SUN show up, or if they didn't get added because they don't work with the 737.

Disregard, double post

Horizon Air also has a number of custom, proprietary RNP approaches, so I'm curious if the RNP-M approaches for places like PUW, EAT, and SUN show up, or if they didn't get added because they don't work with the 737.

Someone who worked for Bombardier in sales. They had a couple of airlines back out of contracts late in the process when Airbus came in with a stupidly low price if they bought ATR's instead. Obviously, it's not an unbaised source, but Boeing did the same thing by offering suspiciously low prices on 737's (especially after the MAX debacles), so that tactic isn't unheard of in aviation. I'm not saying that Airbus was entirely responsible for the Q400 line shutting down, since Bombardier didn't run their commercial aircraft division well at all towards the end, but Airbus likely sped the process up a bit.

I wouldn't expect much of an impact on MSFS, since Microsoft doesn't own Asobo, and MSFS/FS24 have sold pretty well, and are clearly drawing players on Xbox. The Xbox division has been a mess for years, since MS massively overspent buying studios, then couldn't decide what Xbox really was, so the division was barely profitable, and the new Xbox CEO decided on the current bloodbath of layoffs as an attempt to right the ship.

The Q400 went out of production at least in part because Airbus was approaching airlines and essentially offering them suitcases full of cash (really, just massive discounts) to buy ATR's instead of Q400's, since Airbus could afford to make significantly less on the airplanes themselves if it gave them a monopoly on the regional turboprop market, since they'd make that money up on parts/support down the road. I spent about a decade flying Q's, and they're absolutely great for getting in and out of hot/high airports (The only time I was ever payload limited was at a 7,300ft field elevation surrounded by mountains) and they'll carry an impressive amount of ice without issue, but they were a maintenance nightmare, and some parts for the first production models were essentially unobtainable, since the suppliers closed down.

I think that's slightly misleading advertising at this point. Unless something changed, the only airplanes that are allowed in career mode are ones sold through the MSFS Marketplace, and FSG hasn't been approved as a vendor there, so the Simmarket version can't be used in career mode unless Asobo decides to change that setup.

Asobo seems to break that for random airplanes every time they release a sim update, but it does seem to get fixed if you report it as a bug on the official forums.

I spent about seven years flying the Q400 for my day job, and I'd guess part of why it hasn't shown up in MSFS is that there's a lot of systems on the airplane that don't work like you'd expect them to (it's possible to transfer fluid between hydraulic systems with the parking brake, and there's a handful of flight deck controls that are inoperative (or are overridden by another system) but had to be installed because the -100 thru -300 models had them), and some of the odder quirks of the airplane (like the two FMS's and VNAV systems not actually talking to each other) would probably be annoying to recreate virtually. On the plus side, since Bombardier has abandoned the Dash 8 line, it's now owned by a company (Viking/DeHavilland Canada) that Asobo already has a licensing agreement with, so maybe we'll get a severely broken Famous Flyer or Local Legend Dash 8 out of it.

At least letting people beta test updates for free will be an improvement, since Asobo charged people $60-200 to beta test FS2024. I do find it entertaining that one of the reasons Asobo gave for "everything has to be streamed" was "we can push patches faster", when at least a couple of the aircraft (the Albatross and C-17) have had fixes waiting to be pushed since some time before Christmas.

My day job is flying a jet (specifically an E175), and I actually use both VNAV and FLC on descents. For the initial part of a descent and on a STAR, we're in VNAV most of the time, but once we get down into the terminal environment and ATC takes us off the arrival, many of the descents are in FLC, since that's usually a fairly efficient way to get down, and it also helps reduce the workload when ATC inevitably wants us to both slow down and descend.

AFAIK, they're all streamed, and aren't saved locally, and the ability to remove specific FS2024 content hasn't been added to the SIM yet.

This is actually pretty easy to do, but there's zero documentation of the easy way. On the controls menu, select the controller you want to use, and then find the command you're looking for, and click the gear icon to the right of that command. That should bring up a page listing every assignable button, axis, and POV hat with that controller, so just scroll down until you find the one you're looking for (it'll be "POV" with an arrow pointing the relevant direction), then just click the box to the right of it, which should then show a check mark.

After some messing with settings (turns out the lens correction setting in MSFS causes some issues), I got this working smoothly, but I'm getting a weird tearing effect only on the landing gear and parts of the runway when on the ground. It goes away as soon as the airplane lifts off, so I'm wondering if anyone found a fix for that particular issue.

I forgot to put it in the original post, but I tried forcing a rebuild of the fsx.cfg several times, and it seems to have no effect on the hanging issue. I'm running a single monitor.

I recently installed Windows 10 (an upgrade from Win7), and I'm running into an issue where FSX will not actually start a flight unless I have the "Dx10 preview" option selected. If I don't have that option checked, FSX boots fine, but as soon as it finishes loading a flight, I get a black screen with the Windows "processing" circle, and nothing happens from there until I restart my PC. I've updated my video drivers (a GTX 660Ti), tried downloading uiautomationcore.dll and putting that into the FSX folder, running FSX in Win Vista 7, and 8 compatibility modes, and am running FSX as the administrator, but it stubbornly refuses to start a flight running in DX9 mode. Any ideas how to solve this aside from using the "I've made a huge mistake" option and just reverting to Win7?