psychedelic_tortilla

It's not gonna fix people walking in the air, the arduous task of downloading and copy-pasting a GSX airport profile you will still have to undertake yourself. Other than that, it completely removes any interaction with GSX when flying the Fenix (well, almost, you still have to specify the pushback direction). Takes a bit of learning/reading the README on the Github repo, but once you figure it out it's really nice! That is, as long as GSX doesn't word not allowed its pants (which it does sometimes), then you're stuck with repeating the whole boarding process or just using GSX for pushback. One thing I don't like is that you have to specify any extra fuel you'd like to take when exporting your Simbrief flightplan, since GSX takes the amount of fuel specified there and uplifts it. I often forget that (since extra fuel is not part of the flight plan you get from OPS IRL, either) and have to re-export the Simbrief plan. Honestly, if you're not a big GSX fan in the first place, Fenix2GSX isn't going to magically fix everything that made you quit GSX the first time around. But for me, I use GSX anyways, and the integration is really nice! On the other hand, a few mouse clicks when using the PMDG aren't exactly killing me either.

Oh please, relax. It does support different profiles, you just have to manually select them. It's a regrettable lack of a feature, not the death knell of serious flightsimming, jeez.

No, there is not. You have to go into "Settings" --> "Control Options" and change the profile of the peripheral yourself. You can, of course, create a new profile for each peripheral for every airplane, but there is no way to associate a created custom profile with a specific aircraft. I'm also a bit sad about that, since X-Plane has been able to do that for...I don't know...a decade, but hey...

Scott from JustFlight has confirmed that the Duke will be getting a custom PT46A sound set, which once released on the Duke will also come to the TBM. So there' something to look forward to!

Absolutely, especially considering its all done internally in MSFS and Asobo has done a real hatchet job on the turboprop simulation in this sim. This required some serious magic to get it that close to the book

Alright, here are my two cents: PC-12: Not released yet, so we don't know. So just speculation - Flight model seems to be really, really close to the real plane, Alex (the Dev) is a wizard in that regard - Systems fully modeled - BendixKing Weather radar missing on release, will come at a later date - No failures, so hot-starting the engine etc. will have no effect on it. Will come later as an upgrade TBM 850: - Very deep electrical and hydraulic system simulation - Engine model is OK but not without its flaws - Flight model feels alright to me (altough what do I know, never flown the real thing) - Sounds are default, so pretty bad IMHO - Big plus: TDS GTN750 NXi literally **is** the real Garmin GTN750 NXi, so that's very nice! - 60 KTAS faster than the M500, which is nice Overall: Love the plane, the systems and avionics are simulated very deeply, only the sounds let it down (and I've come to realize that sounds are really important in a Turboprop simulation) FSR500: - Also very deep systems simulation - Spot-on PT46A engine simulation - Custom WT G1000 NXi --> Might be a flaw, since the WT G1000 is missing quite a few features the real unit has - Really, really nice tablet - The sounds are absolutely outstanding - I love, absolutely love the flight model of this thing! So stable, a joy to hand-fly - Really cool Discord community, Raul (@simbol, the developer) is just an amazing guy ❤️ - No paint kit yet, but coming very soon - A few minor niggles in the G1000, but those already are rectified or will be very soon - Big minus (😉) : White glareshield --> Can be fixed by replacing the texture with a black one from one of the liveries on fs.to Overall: For me the best release for MSFS in 2023 (well, the A2A Comanche is better yet, but it's just so insanely slow, I can't fly that) As you can see, I really like my SETPs in a flight sim 😉

On the real M500, you can manually set your DEST ELV in the Tmr/Ref field, at the very bottom, below the field for the minimums. This is not simulated on the WT G1000. So no, there's no way to manually set your DEST ELV on the WT G1000.

Because people do more with their PC than play MSFS and maybe they'd like more bandwidth for whatever else they do? My work PC is on my home network (via a VPN) and I'd really like 1 Gbit upload speed just for clearing the whole CI/CD pipeline faster or easing remote connections for development.

I remember seeing a discussion on that error a few months back, where it seemed to happen with increased frequency. What I think is that this error message is just a catch-all for "we dereferenced a bad pointer/nullptr somewhere and have gone tits up. Sorry for that!" MSFS is a towering achievement of software development, it really cannot be overstated what magic Asobo has achieved with this sim, but the user-facing error handling is so, so bad. Compared to X-Plane, it's really night and day. In MSFS, there is just no public logging of anything whatsoever. But logging is certainly implemented on the developer side, and it would be so helpful to have more insight into the state of the program at the time of the crash instead of the error handling equivalent of throwing your hands up and shrugging your shoulders.

Unless it happens frequently that's just complex software for you. Sometimes it breaks, a bit flips in memory and Bob's your uncle. Could have a billion possible causes, so unless it starts happening with increased frequency, don't worry about it. MSFS is super bad at error handling, so anything you get from EventViewer is completely useless for debugging purposes, and the sim doesn't tell you anything about why it crashed, really. Your error message literally means that some part of code had a pointer to an invalid memory address and then de-referenced that pointer and tried to access non-existing data. That crashed the program. It's super non-specific, sadly.

I was referring more to ping and/or packet loss than to bandwidth with that remark. In interactive/reactive applications like FPS or racing games, bandwidth isn't the problem (the amount of data iRacing multiplayer is sending is most likely negligible for modern connections), but rather latency/reliability is more critical. Those are also the two metrics that suffer most when trading a rock-solid wired Ethernet connection for a WiFi signal that has to traverse multiple walls.

Oh that's where the jerky A/P engagement on so many default planes comes from? Good to know! Weird though, that this is such a simple fix, yet the default TBM and others just don't bother to set this variable right or at all.

I have 250/50 Mbps, my router is in the hallway and I have a cheap WiFi dongle on my PC in another room, which means in actuality I'm getting around 150 Mbps of the rated speed, and I have absolutely no problems in MSFS whatsoever. A setup like mine just would not work at all playing multiplayer FPS or racing games, but for MSFS it's absolutely non-critical.

Absolutely! The Universal FMC especially is an absolute trainwreck in any airplane it's installed in, be it a GA Learjet or the Dash 8-Q400. Just mind-boggling engineering and UI/UX decisions that went into that thing during its development.

Oh that is good news, I'm really looking forward to that! Their C414 is absolutely amazing, and the Lear was as well, back in the P3D days.

Well, I gotta say...I don't know if any of you have ever written anything resembling a serious software product, let alone something as complex as a complete aircraft simulation, but this word not allowed is word not allowed hard to do! Just on the physics/airplane side, there are aerodynamic characteristics, avionics, control algorithms, mechanical components, navigation equipment, heat transfer equations and so, so much more to understand, conceptualize and physically model. That's a mini engineering degree right there. And then you have to put it into code, you have to render it, preferrably rapidly, so as not to drain performance. For that you have to have an understanding of programming (and not just hacking together a JS webserver, but actually implementing fast and robust algorithms), computer graphics, optimization and then some. All this is to say...it takes a heck of a lot of skill, time, money, people, and a lot of energy to do. I just had to write this, after seeing all this word not allowed on here and especially on every word not allowed Fenix thread. The patience these Devs have... man.

I think he means the JetProp Carenado did for FSX/P3D. Had a really nice panel with the G500 PFD/Map combo and a navigator (GNS530 or Flight1 GTN750). Man I wish somebody would "TDS-ify" the G500 TXi or G600 TXi, that would be amazing!

Absolutely! I've sort of always been in the camp of "I'm fine with an 'OK' sound set, it's not that important", but after flying the FSR500 I must chalk that up to ignorance on my part. The soundscape of that plane is just so immersive, and it's especially noticeable coming from the Blacksquare TBM which uses the default sounds.

On a different note: Somebody needs to make an interior mod, the white glareshield, floor and seats are...not my aesthetic, let's put it like that 😄 EDIT: Just noticed that this repaint here comes with a black glareshield. Nice!

Try assigning "Throttle Axis (-100% to 100%)" to your axis, you probably have the normal "Throttle Axis" assigned in MSFS, which stops at Idle and doesn't move into Beta.

And of course you'll have to keep advancing your throttle lever as you climb, since torque decreases with altitude. Watch the ITT and NG, though!

If you watch steveo1kinevo's videos you'll see that the UP/DOWN rocker switch is literally never used, only the V/S dial on the altitude selector.

After watching a couple of videos, the engine simulation seems to be...well, lacking, to put it mildly. ITT at startup is all over the place, RPM sit in the yellow arc after engaging high idle (which they shouldn't), torque during climb seems to be off. Would be nice to see some improvement on that front until release (or after). To be fair, I gather MSFS really doesn't play well with turboprops and Blacksquare acknowledge as much in the manual, but still, I'd be lying if I weren't a little disappointed.

New video by 737Driver (or A330 Driver now, I suppose) showcasing the TBM. My goodness am I excited for this one! 😄