Don Quixote

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Good

About Don Quixote

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Hiking, Photography, Flight Sim, Flying, Music.

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

About Me

  • About Me
    Finally saved enough money to start my PPL training!
  1. Don Quixote

    MilViz T-50 Bobcat released!

    I've replied by PM, as it's not relevant to the topic. I'm looking forward to purchasing the Bobcat one day as it seems like a really fun aircraft.
  2. Don Quixote

    MilViz T-50 Bobcat released!

    If that's how you feel about your customers, don't expect them to treat you any better. FWIW, I'd be very much interested in the Bobcat, which seems to be very well done and considering that I'm very happy with the C310 and the B55 I'd normally buy it without hesitation. However, due to the KingAir situation I won't be buying any more Milviz products. I'm NOT saying that to spite you or to complain, I simply want you to know that it does influence your business, even if only in a small way.
  3. Don Quixote

    Across the Alps in a Kodiak (XP11)

    The mesh is created by Ortho4XP (along with the photoscenery). The source data is from Viewfinderpanorama ( which, I believe, is also used by the UHD mesh. However, Ortho4XP does its own interpolation of the data, so the resulting mesh wouldn't be identical.
  4. Flying the Thranda (Dan Klaue) Kodiak. The new lighting in XP11 is pretty good, I think.
  5. Don Quixote

    RealAir Simulations Closure

    Sad news indeed. You guys have earned the community's respect and admiration throughout the years, and your work will be remembered as some of the finest ever done for flight sim. The Lancair Legacy is, without a doubt, one of the very best virtual vehicles ever created. All the best to both of you.
  6. Don Quixote

    Airfoillabs Cessna 172

    I agree, at least about the last part. I've recently started my PPL training as well and it's absolutely correct that a sim won't teach you how to fly the aircraft. However, I've found it easy to replicate many real-world maneuvers in the sim, such as the effect of different power settings, or the angle of attack for example. The result may not be 100% true to life, but close enough in many cases. I think the issue isn't that the sim's realism isn't high enough. The simple reason why a sim isn't any good for learning to fly is that you don't have an instructor sitting next to you, teaching you how to do it! Although it's possible to figure out some of the basics by yourself, but that will only get you so far, and you might end up "learning" something the wrong way. Anyway, I wouldn't want to miss X-Plane (or any other sim, for that matter) as a training aid. No, it won't teach you how to fly a plane, but I've found it to be extremely valuable to learn about many things that you need to know in order to get you license: The effect air pressure has on an altimeter, the way a trim tab works, how to read taxiway signs, or the way flaps increase lift (and drag), just to give some examples. You learn about all those things during training, but I've found much of it much easier to understand because I've seen it previously in the sim (even though I often had a totally wrong idea about how something works... ). Also, the sim is a great tool to train some basic procedures or help memorize checklists. Perhaps not everybody realises that even when flying VFR in a little bugsmasher, there are a lot of rules and procedures one must adhere to, from preflight briefings to ATC clearances and descent checklists. Not to mention basic navigation skills (using a paper map and a ruler rather than a fancy GPS) to make sure you don't stray into the next Charlie airspace by accident and having to be "escorted" out of it. X-Plane is great, by the way, for flight preparation: Thanks to free orthophoto scenery (Ortho4XP) and W2XP buildings it's easy to navigate by real-world charts, in order to get a rough idea of what the terrain on a certain flight will be like.
  7. No performance issues here either, seems similar to XP10 so far even with the reflections on medium. However, the default clouds drag performance down severely (just like they did in XP10). Had several crashes while configuring my controls (TM Warthog) but it does work fine once it's set up. The new user interface is a huge improvement to say the least. I'm very happy with the default C172, they did a stellar job! The visuals, sounds and apparently the flight model as well are top notch. I also tried the 747, only to find that the horrendous tire screeching sound is still present.
  8. Don Quixote

    Wow! Dan's Kodiak!

    Looking very much forward to the amphibian version. The screenshots look amazing - the detail on the water rudder is just stunning. The Kodiak has quickly become one of my favorite aircraft to fly. The quality and attention to detail remind me of RealAir products, and that's saying a lot.
  9. Don Quixote

    FF 757 v 2.0

    I'll pass. I have both the 757 V1 and the 767, and both are good addons - the 767 is very good, actually - but they're not good enough, in my opinion, to justify spending $45 for this update.
  10. Don Quixote

    Wow! Dan's Kodiak!

    I don't have this issue. Performance was a bit below average with version 1.0, and 1.1 seems to have improved it somewhat. But overall it's smooth without any stuttering. Your issue sounds like a driver problem to me. What kind of hardware do you have?
  11. That's a great suggestion actually! I've used the tool too, very useful if you don't want to move or rename the entire config file around. Probably the smartest solution if you only want to change a few parameters (like the autostart option). It can be found here, by the way:
  12. I use simple batch files to start XP10 in different configurations, and also start additional tools like the FSGRW weather engine. These files simply replace the X-Plane.prf with another one (by renaming the files) - for example, an "IFR" configuration file which has extended DSF enabled, and a "VFR" one without the option (to maximise performance). The same could easily be done to have a profile "autostart enabled" and an "autostart disabled" one. example code: IF EXIST "D:\Programs\X-Plane 10\Output\preferences\X-Plane_IFR_inactive.prf" ( Ren "D:\Programs\X-Plane 10\Output\preferences\X-Plane.prf" "X-Plane_VFR_inactive.prf" Ren "D:\Programs\X-Plane 10\Output\preferences\X-Plane_IFR_inactive.prf" "X-Plane.prf" ) ELSE ( Echo Already in IFR mode! ) start "" "D:\Programs\X-Plane 10\X-Plane.exe" start "" "D:\Programs\FSGRW\FS Global Real Weather.exe" dynamic xplane 15 y n Also, for having different controls for different aircraft, I highly recommend the freeware X-Assign plugin: It works somewhat like FSUIPC in FSX and allows you to save different profiles with their own axis and button assignments for your hardware, and automatically loads them for the selected aircraft.
  13. Don Quixote

    X-Plane 11 Living Airports

    There are many freeware airports for XP10 which already have moving traffic (although they don't interact with the aircraft much), and those don't seem to drag performance down too much. Also, the lighting is awesome, as has been mentioned above. But it appears that only the aircraft itself casts shadows, but not the trucks or the terminal buildings - I guess that means that having global shadows will still be quite heavy on performance (same as it is in XP10).
  14. Don Quixote

    Wow! Dan's Kodiak!

    Absolutely. The only other aircraft that comes close would be the Soulmade Sims DHC-2 Beaver, which is excellent in its own right (although I've almost stopped flying it due to how poorly X-Plane models friction, making taildraggers a PITA when there's anything but the lightest of crosswinds!).
  15. Don Quixote

    Wow! Dan's Kodiak!

    I think you're onto something there! I completely agree, Glass cockpits in FSX and its derivatives always seem arduous to use, no matter how well the systems are done. I usually avoid even GPS of any kind for that reason. But in X-Plane it feels much easier to use these systems. One reason is possibly that the entire sim feels more fluid, even when the actual framerate is the same. And the excellent camera system also helps. Back to the Kodiak, I've done some more flights with it and didn't encounter any severe bugs this time - perhaps I did something wrong the first time? In any case, I've had a lot of fun flying this thing. The amount of thought that went into the aircraft, as well as into the extras, is just stunning. I love details like being able to open the engine covers, no matter how irrelevant this might be to the actual flight sim. Also, the little electric tug is a work of genius! Once it's attached to the aircraft, you can control it with your joystick/yoke and let it drag the aircraft where you want it. Again, a small detail, but it adds a lot of immersion. One thing I noticed was something I've missed from most X-Plane aircraft: Ground effect. Although it's supposedly present in XP, I've never encountered it to a degree where it was actually noticeable. With the Kodiak I encountered fairly pronounced ground effect (perhaps a bit too much, considering it's a high wing design?), which is a welcome additional challenge.