FL630

Do the F1 aircraft have NDB/ADF functions? This is important, I've only just realised the stock or modified stock G1000 does not support this, which mights cause problems!!

The lack of movement shouldn't be a huge issue, surely? You rarely use full motions in roll unless flying aerobatics, and then it'd be better to have a joystick! I've only used a yoke briefly and it was okay, but I'm a stick man (in real and virtual life). For the money, saitek products tend to be, so I've found, good quality and reliable. Ian

I was unsure on the exact differences between different aircraft's G1000's, I only thought it was the larger things like if it had AP or not. The Mindstar is looking more and more tempting right now to add into my already realistic Eaglesoft DA-42, if its good for FAA certified sims it must have some level of accuracy, certainly beyond the current modified-FSX G1000. I agree Bert, the 182 is more realistic than a light jet for my situation, but who can turn down a pretty private jet over an old spam can? Ian

Why do I want to integrate it? Well, a half decent FSX G1000 will set me back £30, my time is free to press buttons, make mistakes and ruin things without any real issues. To fly the DA-42 in the real world is £415 per hour, not including all the time I waste getting things wrong at roughly £7 per minute. Whilst I appreciate it that real world is better than FSX, one cannot argue that the costs involved with NOT knowing your way around the G1000 is actually quite prohibitive. I am not looking for the ultimate in realism down to the exact noise of the tactile buttons surrounding the screen, but if I can save myself a few minutes per flight by knowing exactly where I can press buttons to get the waypoint in the correct place, to program a STAR, change this or change that, it makes a difference to me. It would only require me to spend roughly 4 1/4 minutes of my time in the real aircraft looking for a menu which I could easily learn to find to pay back the price of the software. In addition to this, if I want to practise procedural IFR flight, I can do so in my own time at my desk to try to practice without all that money going out of the window, or into the fuel tanks. I'm not sure when you did your multi instrument rating, but I can assure you many trainee pilots in my position use simulators to practice procedures in IMC in combination with real instruction. So Ron, with all due respect I will ignore your advice and carry on my search for a suitable piece of software. For the others who have replied, thanks! I'm not sure the F1 King Air will be quite what I want, going from Maz4200's post the Mindstar seems to be a good drop in, though I'm concerned about the frame rate drop, my computer is hardly high spec. The actual F1 G1000 trainer looks great, but $250 is a little out of my league right now. Are there any other software developers who are producing realistic G1000's, or is it really just the aforementioned two? Thanks Ian

Exactly! Real life ATC is very much a "relationship" between the pilot and the ground, even for a short while, but one can't work without the other. It seems like some of the VATSIM controllers think they rule everything. What they forget is that a pilot can fly without a controller, but a controller can't control without any pilots Maybe I got unlucky, but every single real world controller I've spoken to (and I've pressed that red button tens of thousands of times) has been nothing but helpful, forgiving of mistakes and generally there to help traffic flow, safety and communications, perhaps some internet warriors should learn from what they're trying to replicate.

I didn't know the King Air was newer, my apologies, I don't really keep up with releases etc. I've just heard the Mustang being mentioned quite often. Unfortunately I don't own any Android devices so I can't take advantage of the F1 app. I'll look into the king air, but I'm still interested if anyone has tried the Mindstar.

Hello, I am starting training with the Garmin G1000 in the next 6 weeks, I am quite excited but daunted by the prospect, people say it's pretty tricky! Like in the real world, I'm flying the Diamond DA42 by Eaglesoft, but I gather this is just the FSX G1000 in the cockpit, and therefore most likely not the most accurate rendition of the avionics suite. So I've come down to two options, both are the same price, but one gives me more for my money. If I'm honest, all I am after is avionics realism with the correct menus and so on. My two options are either to enhance my Eaglesoft DA-42 with the Mindstar G1000, OR for the same price, buy the Flight1 Mustang. Does anyone have experience with either and can point me in the right direction? I understand the DA-42 Mindstar combo will give me the realism of the aircraft, but I'll be in the FNPT II sim in 6 weeks time so the aircraft isn't the biggest deal. If the Mustang's avionics win or come equal to the Mindstar, I'll go for that. Looking forward to opinions Thanks Ian

I don't fly online, for several reasons. I first tried to install all the necessary programs to fly VATSIM on my computer, found it too complex so gave up. I then went to a friends to try it out, and immediately I got some high and mighty arsehole controller telling me I was doing things wrong. I begrudge this, I am a commercial pilot in training with all the comms qualifications and several hundred hours of real RT under my belt, it annoys me when somebody with no formal training (most likely) tells me I'm doing things wrong. I was eventually kicked for disputing this, that was the last time I bothered to try. If there was a good way to fly with friends, for fun, in formation or just mucking about, I'd be all for it, but not what I experienced on VATSIM a while back.

Yes, all checked, nothing abnormal. I think for the moment I'll just leave the Maule's .cfg edited by name. If, on the rare occasion, I want to fly it, I'll just re-rename it and fly, or just use the ski version. Many thanks Ian

Interesting, I've just renamed aircraft.cfg to aircraft1.cfg, naturally the Maule has disappeared, but so has the error! So, what would this indicate? An error within the Maule's Aircraft.cfg file?

Thanks for the replies all. Unfortunately that is 121 folders to search through. I'm a serial freeware downloader so there is a lot that had been installed since this error occurred. Affirm, plus every time I select a new aircraft Plenty of aircraft, no repaints installed. No duplicates in that file, checked through. It's half tempting to un-installed the Maule, I don't often fly it but I'd rather keep it in there for stock FSX missions when I get bored. Am I right in saying the only alternative is to check every other .cfg file for a Maule duplicate? Thanks Ian

Thanks FScamp, I assumed this but, maybe I'm blind, but I can't see any duplicates? [fltsim.0] title= Maule M7 260C paint1 sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture=1 kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=N72163 ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" White, Red, Gray" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." [fltsim.1] title= Maule M7 260C paint2 sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture=2 kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=HB-MEV ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" Swiss" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." [fltsim.2] title= Maule M7 260C paint3 sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture=3 kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=N221CP ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" Civil Air Patrol" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." [fltsim.3] title= Maule M7 260C paint4 sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture=4 kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=N81868 ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" Blue, Silver" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." [fltsim.4] title= Maule M7 260C paint5 sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture=5 kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=N86DMA ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" Alaskan Operator" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." [fltsim.5] title= Maule M7 260C sim=Maule_M7_260C model= panel= sound= texture= kb_checklists=MauleM7260C_check kb_reference=MauleM7260C_ref atc_id=EC-527 ui_manufacturer="Maule" ui_type="Orion" ui_variation=" White" ui_typerole="Single Engine Prop" ui_createdby="Microsoft Corporation" description="Maules are rugged and simple. These traits, along with their short-takeoff-or-landing capability, make them popular among bush pilots. The Maule M-7-260C is a taildragger with spring-aluminum landing gear and a wide stance, suitable for taking off from and landing on rough, unprepared surfaces. Its 260-horsepower Lycoming engine provides power to transport up to five people at a relatively fast cruise speed. Ease of handling (with the usual caveats about landing taildraggers in a crosswind) and economical operation round out this plane’s sturdy virtues. The ski option adds to the 260C’s versatility." What do you think? Thanks FL630

Bump. anyone?

Understood. I'm confident I'll be able to work out the program, just getting it installed seems to be the hardest part! Not to worry, I'll keep working away at it. Thank you for your response.

Hi, This randomly and suddenly appeared a few days back for no real reason. "There are multiple objects with the same title name. They must have unique title names. Maule M7 260C SimObjects\Airplanes\Maule_M7_260C" This is the standard FSX Maule I gather, I have not intalled any new textures or modified it in any way. If I open \Airplanes there is only one Maule_M7_260C (plus a separate ski one). If I go into \airplanes\Maule_M7_260C there are no duplicated texture files. Any ideas how I can get rid of this very irritating error? Thans FL630

Hi, I'm wanting to start to design my first aircraft for FSX. I am experienced with Solidworks so assumed I'd be able to pick up GMax pretty quickly, or so I hope. Though, I'm stuck, I've tried to follow all the install instructions on FSDeveloper, but am having no luck. Is there any step by step tutorials from installing to creating, without having to try pick my way through a messy wiki site? Even this SDK installation into a non standard location is completely un-intuitive. Trying to make a Vans RV-4. Thanks FL630

I understand, thanks. I knew which folder to delete, but I get a little lost when it comes to .cfg files. I'll do the reverse of an installation. Many thanks

Hi, How is it possible to remove certain colour schemes from an aircraft I download. Whilst I appreciate some developers put a lot of time and effort into making 20 schemes for a single aircraft, I really only want one or two and don't want my FSX aircraft selection folder to be as large. Which files do I delete within the aircraft folder to remove these schemes without creating any errors? Thanks FL630

Hi, I bought an installed ORBX England yesterday, and if I'm honest with you, I'm disappointed. If I max out everything, it looks okay, nothing like as good as they show on their website if I'm honest. However, at max everything my FPS drop off massively, fine if I'm flying IFR, but then why would I be looking at scenery? So to make it acceptably smooth (considering my laptops performance) I take the sliders back a small amount and then the scenery looks terrible, I mean, I appreciate that its not photo-real, but to me, this is pretty poor considering how much people rate this software. See photo attached for a view over Harwich port. Yes I know I'm flying too fast Can anyone advise me on optimal settings for a medium performance machine. Only other addon installed is Open Clouds. Thanks FL630