Domini99

I've been gone for quite a while, flying X-Plane 10 and DCS only. Specifically DCS. I didn't like FSX that much anymore But I am really considering making my return to FSX now. It's a shame A2A doesn't develop for X-Plane, it runs so much better on my PC.

I've been hit on the wing before, but every time the plane spun to the side of the broken wing, and I was on too low altitude to recover. But today, I was flying high enough, a missile hit my left wing, causing it to break in half. The plane immidiatly rolled left, but I had enough altitude this time. Aileron control was lost, because the hydraulic system went leak, so I could only use the rudder to steer the plane. I made it back to the runway and made a successful gear-up landing: After the landing little more damage was done, the right engine took damage because it hit the ground first, but other than that the plane was OK ^_^

Thank you for your very friendly reaction........ On a low-ram PC FSX has less place to take, so crashes sooner. This is personal experience. I think "powerful" is more subjective. One finds 120hp in a small car powerfull because it accelerates quickly, other person would find 300hp in a heavy car powerful for holding up a high top speed.

I'm also looking into ways to keep my VAS low, as i'm planning on installing FSX on my laptop, which has only 2GB ram, but a very powerful CPU. I'll test out a few things and report back when I found something

Looks strange... Have you tried a tool called "FS Water Configurator"? It has solved many water texture errors for me and improves water quality. It's freeware, google it up and try it out

I played X-Plane some time, and while landing the DC-9 it touched down way earlier than expected. My viewpoint felt more realistic. I have only landed cessna's in real life, and the A2A Cessna feels somewhat relatable. I use Ezdok Camera in FSX.

Repairing goes just fine, but uninstall all service packs and acceleration first, and reinstall them after repairing. It has caused trouble for me, FSX didn't start after repairing with sp1 and acceleration installed.

I think so I really hope they join the simulator side, even though they are absolutely not the people you'd expect to play a sim, but who knows what's hidden inside them. Haha but ain't gonna deny that. But I'm sure you also play the simulator as a Simulator

I really fear the realism of those new "DLC's" i fear they're going to be arcadish because t's on steam. Half the steam community doesn't know anything about aircraft. I got a friend who bought fsx:se. He thought the default 747 was very realistic and it could prepare him to fly a real one...... the ultra realistic planes like how PMDG makes them won't sell on steam. I don't think most steam users really want to put this much into learning aircraft. They'd seem to rather be just flying around. Most people I saw buying them told me "geez it ain't that hard this simulation is very realistic but you're exaggerating", and giving them the complete wrong image of this "game". Most people I see flying prefer to just take off, fly a circle and "land" (aka slam into the ground nose-first with 350 knots 200 feet next to the runway) while most real simmers do actual flights. I sometimes spend hours behind the screen, and people call me crazy for doing that. The PMDG planes require pretty much time to be set up from cold and dark, plan a route in the FMC and actually fly the aircraft. Most people don't seem to take that time. I fear Steam is going to turn FSX into an arcade flying game. nearly all my friends who also play Battlefield and Call of Duty also bought FSX during the sales, and they use it like a Grand Theft Auto flying game.

Wow just wow. I don't even....... Wow.

I'm not really a fan of CLS. The last few addons I have seen lacked the realism I want to have. I don't think the DC-10 is going to be very realistic. Or will it be? Can someone confirm?

Today I decided to try this "Foreign Object Damage" thing in the Maddog. I was amazed how the engine responded, and it felt very realistic. I was trying to stabilize the engine by reducing throttle. At some point the N1 rotation was 0. Normally you would have already shut down the engine, but I kept it running just to see what happens. (It's a simulator, what's the worst that can happen?) I still had N2 rotation and an EPR of about 1.30, and the engine kept running with the throttle on idle. At some point, the N2 gauge also showed 0. EPR was still up, but unstable and EGT was fairly high. When I increased throttle EPR, Fuel flow and EGT increased, and after a couple of seconds N2 came back up to about 20 and N1 to about 5 or 6, and than the engine caught fire. How is it possible for the engine to still actually run with 0 N1 and 0 N2? I'm not a professional at jet engines but I would guess that with the blades running so slow the sensors cant pick it up anymore it must be running so slow the engine will shut itself down, but it would still power back up when I pushed the throttle up (and than completely destruct itself) How does it keep running like that?

Stuttering upon loading textures, but nice and smooth afterwards can also sign on a dated or damaged hard drive. I suffered myself, I was noticing longer loading times and FSX would start stuttering when it was loading textures, I ran a HDD check and noticed a lot of bad blocks on my hard drive and replaced it.

It might work, but don't expect anything good. PS2 controllers have very bad dead zones so the aircraft would probably be uncontrollable. Why don't you pick up a wired Xbox 360 Controller for just €20? They work fine, i use one myself too as i can't afford a flight yoke.

I don't really know if this works for the Dash 8, but i've heard of a tool called WideFS, it should make it possible for multiple computers to be connected to each other. So like... you use your main computer for Graphics rendering, another computer for the displays. I don't know how this works through WideFS though, I know that iFly 737 Cockpit Builders Edition has a very nice integrated tool that makes you use seperate computers for the displays, causing zero fps drop.

OH my god, this looks so beautiful! Is this seriously running in FSX? Wow. I've been thinking of building something like this for a long time, but i simply don't have the money

If the landing was without using the autopilot, the only 2 things I could think of that could cause your aircraft to slam into the ground is either late flaring or flaring too early causing a stall. If you were flying with the autopilot, you should noticably hear and see the autopilot disconnect. (Atleast it does for the aircraft I use on non-CAT III airfields)

+1 This one looks amazing! Shame tough I don't have X-Plane

I can backup my effects folder, zip them and send them over if you want to

The MD-80 is a fs9 port, fs9 models cannot use high-res textures and models, so that's why we can't get a crisper cockpit. A full new fsx-native model has to be created in order to use high-res textures and modeling.

B717 or MD-90 would be totally awesome, as we have none for FSX right now.

The problem is that this requires the entire aircraft to be rebuilded, because the aircraft is a fs2004 port. It's not a native model so the graphics can't be improved. A total new native-fsx model has to be made. And after that all the features need to be reasembled on the new model. Just a VC update is not really possible. I still really hope to have an updated MD-80/90/717. I hope too

I followed that project too, but it seems abandoned. The development forums are down, and i haven't heard anything from them.

I have Fly The Maddog addon for my FSX, it's a very nice simulation, but i'd still like something new which is also realistic, but by today's graphics standards for FSX. The Maddog i have right now is not a native model, so the graphics are quite poor. Is anybody with me that we need a new realistic MD-80/MD-90 or B717?

I'm fairly surprised because i don't have any mods to improve my graphics, this screenshot still popped nice: Don't ask me what an Alaska MD-80 is doing in The Netherlands