JWNoctis

Pretty amazing nobody made any Shorts joke yet. But yeah, day old chicken..are cute! Pretty messy with powdery fluff though, if what I read in another forum is true. Amazing story, too! Thanks for sharing!

Getting expensive is still really the only option for some really good first class stuff aka Aerowinx/PMDG/Majestic/A2A, and presumably this, and some fine hardware with Hall effect sensors or head tracking. There's only so much one can do with a small budget but if it gets the job done for one's hobby then it is good enough - and yes, I knew Aerowinx B744 is entirely another beast well above any FSX addon. Going to have to wait for a few reviews myself before getting something this expensive, though I do hope it is as good as it claims to be, and worth the long wait.

I see nothing out of place on that image? 737 series' gear doors do not cover the tires.

I remember such thing happening at the end of a 777X flight I did a while back - No damage to anything were noted, but the right landing gear clipped into the ground and the aircraft veered off the runway to the right. Probably something transient. Still provided a rare justification to pull the evac alarm...not that it's a good thing, of course^^;;

I'm under the impression that different last characters for arrivals into Kastrup leads to different runway, such as all -D arrivals leading into runway 30 and all -B arrivals leading into 12, but the latest data I had is 1603. Also do note that things like this can be different at different places. Some had no such suffix and some used preceding number to correlate the runways such procedures would have belonged to. I'm also under the impression that real ATC would have given you a vector or direct to final approach fix with a descend and an approach clearance instead of letting you do that loopy track 3000ft above the already congested airport. not unlike this: http://code7700.com/netherlands.html

Maybe try it again while running rthdribl and prime95 at the same. Use that as absolute maximum. Also yeah, most home computer setups consume little power compared to A/C and heating(if electrical).

If I may hazard a guess, 60fps is kinda that much smoother.^^;; I also think what OP actually wanted is a performance buffer for when high-detail addons catch up. For when default scenery go slow, what would high-detail addon ones do?

That would be P-factor. Counter it with rudder input. I think on some warbirds you do pre-trim your rudder on the ground to counter the large amount of yaw generated by the powerful 1000+hp engine, but details vary per make and model, but on everything else you counter with rudder input only.

It's under Antialiasing/Antialiasing - Setting. Also I do fly with DX10 fixer now which would negate most NI preferences including those, but that's what I did before I got the fixer, and it did look pretty good if a bit expensive performance-wise. Even the CDU display was antialiased and readable without zooming in on my tiny 1600x900 laptop screen with that on...Now I read your signature...Guess that would not apply, then. If only there are more anti-aliasing options with DX10 fixer.

Try something like 2x2 supersampling in NI if hardware allows and not on DX10. The result was quite pretty on mine.

Easiest way to do it: Set trim to takeoff trim when indicated on trim wheel, or otherwise specified in checklist when not, on light aircrafts before takeoff. Make sure the trim is in green band indicated on trim wheel on heavier aircrafts. Use stick to point to where you want to go, then trim to neutralize stick input.

As MDFlier noted, ASN is not supposed to conflict with REX as long as both are installed correctly. I myself had reservations about how FSX:SE integrated Steam DLCs...As if FSX's folder structure is not already complex enough. Haven't bought anything from there aside from a couple of addon aircrafts, and (thankfully!) those worked all right. Also make sure weather theme is set to the one ASN came with. The one time my weather showed anything close to what you described it was set to default fair weather with ASN running in the background, resulting in no clouds beyond very small distance from aircraft while descending in some heavy IMC. If all else fails, do a clean reinstall with all fresh cfgs if possible.

That's a good tailwind, at least...Still somewhat faster and much higher than most turboprops. Guess that's how most of them sold.

You're not supposed to fly if you know there will be icing conditions unless the aircraft is known ice certified in any case. Even then it's a judgement call about personal limit - as it would likely be IFR uncomfortably close to minimums - and icing strength. Not even TKS would do much against severe ice. Ice and anti-ice simulation is the weak point of FSX and all current flavors of it. If there's one thing I would like to see in a new flight sim, it's frost on wiper bolt when there should be, with appropriate effects. EDIT: Rephrase - just realized how accusatory some of that sounded. My apologies!

What you need is carburetor heat instead of prop or pitot heat. However, Seneca V had fuel-injected engines which are supposed to be resistant to engine icing - Intake temperature drop is supposed to be much less than carb temp drop, and by definition these engines do not have carb heat. This is beginning to sound like a case of problematic modeling to me, but do check weather conditions - Ice would still collect on intake filter in the right condition even on fuel-injected airplanes, collect enough and as far as I know from other similar engines, a backup unfiltered intake inside each engine nacelle would open...which means the engine should not outright lose power unless that also iced up. Something smelled off here, though I am likely wrong.

Bobsk8: I haven't read anything about P3D revamping icing modeling - They probably should, given their intended customer base. Readme text in ice gauge package suggested that FSX weakened icing intentionally, to avoid frustration and bad word of mouth from casual simmers flying into severe icing and going down. EDIT: Punctuation

About icing in FSX, this could make a good read: http://www.avsim.com/topic/323006-icing-in-fsx/#entry1904219 For personal experience, you can set up and spend some minutes holding in icing overcast(which should be common around this season) with anti-ice off. I read once somewhere that someone lost their 747v1 after 20 minute of holding in LAM stack in overcast with anti-ice off, while flying online. FSX icing is weak, but it's there - Newest ASN update supposedly made that slightly better too.

To be fair, boxed FSX received similar endorsement back then - But for all I can tell it's still -the- most accurate simulation of a 777 out there nearly on par with some level D simulators minus the motion platform, and just short of the actual thing as far as flight-relevant systems are concerned. The introduction manual would have made a good read here...Maybe, just maybe, PMDG could release that on their product page just so people could get a taste of what to expect.

Optimum CI is a function of fuel cost, time cost and fixed cost - If fuel cost is high and time cost is low as is the case with most LCC, then CI would be low. Supposedly real-world airlines had tools to calculate them, but I'm just parroting what I heard. EDIT: Too low a CI would result in a considerably slower cruise speed closer to those of Classics', and probably annoy enroute ATCO's in busy sectors as they try to fit an aircraft cruising at .75 into a stream of other narrowbodies cruising at .78-.79. Way much better than VLJ's cruising at .55 up to FL410, but still...I think I once read something about that.

Check which buttons are assigned to pitch trim in your FSX setting, and set aside two buttons on your stick - preferably within reach of your thumb on your stick-hand - to them. Also, just in case - I don't think you can set stablizer trim on 777 without hydraulics, unlike NGX.

Got L-1011 and it looked great, and system programming's pleasantly deep - Somewhere between QW146 and NGX but closer to QW146 would be my current impression. That INS is going to take a while to figure out, though. Now if only there's a PFPX profile for that - CS modeled L-1011-1 while one that came with PFPX is for Just Flight's L-1011-500, the difference between the two being akin to the difference between B777-300 and B777-200LR in terms of seating capacity and MTOW. Also got into a bit of trouble by accidentally purchasing wrong version for my sim - Customer service sorted that out in no time with an exchange.

Fly higher and it would be a even darker blue - Though those vertical banding on the horizon does look strange and horrible. Then again maybe that's JPEG artifact.

Track Clip Pro connects via USB port, but it also comes with a port of its own on a short extension cable - It basically is an USB extension cable with a somewhat thinner clip cable branching off from the plug, and you can connect anything that does not demand absolutely full power from the port to it, including TrackIR receiver itself. At least that's the one I had from about 2 years ago...Though I don't think things like that would change by much.

Payware is generally more refined, with higher quality mesh, sound and texture, as well as some neat instruments. I haven't flown gliders in real world to tell anything definitive about FDE, but both Aerosoft's and Wolfgang Piper's felt about right. You may also wish to read this blog: http://blog.allen.asn.au/recommendations/wolfgang-pipers-gliders-for-fsx/ Discus K is the aerobatic version of Discus.

CumulusX! does add thermals anywhere they should exist and does not have stratus layer anywhere near. That latter one is useful to know if you have any third-party weather engine running. Glider flying in FSX is sadly a bit of niche in niche.