Jump to content

CW46

Members
  • Content Count

    285
  • Donations

    $10.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

101 Excellent

About CW46

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

2,930 profile views
  1. I have the FSB GNS 530 and a single G1000 unit set to use a MFD, at near half the cost of alternative models I am pleased to have made that choice. I also purchased the Altimeter Motives C172 panel and after using it this week have decided to order the right side panel to complete it for a radio stack. I like the VESA mounting option as it allows simple change out of equipment for a different simulator and gear setup. Definitely would repurchase either product again if needed.
  2. Yes, many years as a client and the last 4 years of my career as a Level D sim instructor. The majority of training is for normal, emergency procedures and systems training and I am well aware of that. Most training was at night or in instrument conditions with very little day VFR because the visual quality was frankly mediocre at best. Hopefully newer sim systems have upgraded the visuals to more replicate a real world view. The benefit would be substantial, on the civilian side many of us would be faced with a circle to land procedure on a regular basis. Having a good visual system in the simulator would allow to train clients for their needs at specific airports. I would be shocked if the current state of simulation has not yet achieved that which can be displayed in entertainment software.
  3. If the case has been made that P3D is primarily for use in government training contracts then I would very much like to see how that version of the platform compares visually to DCS. If it appears even remotely similar to the civilian P3D release, then all I have to say as an American taxpayer it would be another version of the infamous $800 toilet seat. DCS may very well be for entertainment but it sure looks pretty to me.
  4. As pretty as they are none of those options would represent an actual era panel due to the fact GPS was not available at that time. In 1985 I flew serial number 369, a brand new 25G model and near the end of the production run. Only glass on the panel would have been a weather radar, and the long range nav would be a Loran C or VLF/ Omega unit mounted in the pedestal. That model was certified to FL510 but good luck getting there. I tried twice on dead head legs and 47,700 was the highest I ever got it to go and even then auto pilot had a hard time with it. Fun performance wise but an absolute PITA to operate in high density areas where ATC would keep you at FL230 coming out of Boston or New York area and you were screaming for a higher altitude. If you needed an alternate it was not going to be a fun day. SOP out of Teterboro was taxi out on one engine a request a two minute heads up for the second engine start just to save fuel. I have the Xtreme Prototypes version and it is a pretty nice product.
  5. When a new version of XP12 meaning not a beta is released, does the home screen show that the updated version is available for download?
  6. RSF was recently $15.99 USD on sale that's when I picked it up, I wanted to try another option instead of the ASCA I was already using. RSF includes a weather engine plus other features and replaces sky colors, clouds etc in default P3D. Active Sky works with ASCA weather display and cloud replacement, you buy both products unless there is an option for both that I was not aware of when I purchased them. What one option has over the other is purely subjective as suggested by the previous comments from others. It comes down to what appeals to you visually, either ASCA or RSF. I retain Active Sky as the weather engine in P3D but prefer RSF for sky and clouds and I like the random feature which I feel adds more variety of how the weather effects are displayed each new session I fly. I had used the older version of Rex products when I ran P3D V4.5 and always like the visuals they produced in that version. For myself RSF produces a similar result in V5.4,
  7. Beauty is in the eye of the holder as they say, I switched to Rex Sky Force from ASCA with EA on and volumetric off. ASCA just looked too repetitive at times, especially the thunderstorm depiction. At any rate either option is better than default P3D anything.
  8. No performance issues on my system with RSF ( I7-8300K with AMD RX 6700 XT) albeit my sliders are not maxed out. I have the volumetric slider set to off so the RSF clouds display. I never saw more than one cloud layer using volumetric clouds, and they tend to display the waffle effect which looks odd to say the least. I also use Active Sky with RSF and I must say that I prefer that combination over the previous use of Hifi ASCA with Active Sky. Going through a line of weather looks quite realistic, the position of thunder storm clouds agree with the NGXu radar display and the clouds themselves look very good. I choose the random setting option in RSF, each session has a different cloud style and sky color set for variety. It was on sale for $15 so after trying it I uninstalled ASCA. RSF has a detailed manual included and there are multiple options with in the program for personal preference.
  9. The latest V5.4 update has provided the best performance I have experienced with any previous version of P3D, however the volumetric cloud option as is needed work. The best visuals I see are with EA on and use Rex Sky Force for the clouds. The primary disadvantage of going to V5 was losing some add on product compatibility. I think V4.5 was the sweet spot for add on compatible products as it was one of the primary flight sim's before the elephant in the room showed up. My current V5.4 shares the PC space with XP12.
  10. In settings, other controls there is the "enable advanced mouse controls". In chase plane it drove me nuts until I figured out how to disable the zoom by unchecking that option.
  11. Do a new installation of the Bonanza, I made sure the original folders of any thing A2A related were removed from the system beforehand.
  12. After installing the V5.4 update I have not had any issue as you describe with either A2A aircraft that I have, both have normal avionics operation after loading. You might try uninstalling one of them and then do a fresh install. A few years ago I had the same issue where the A2A Bonanza avionics would not turn on and a new installation fixed what ever was causing the issue.
  13. The only reason I would even consider V6 is because these guys have made Chaseplane and Active Sky available. If it means purchasing again so be it, every one has to make a living and the products in my view are worth it. PS - I not complaining about my Navigraph subscription either, if that keeps the developers in business and supporting the different sims then that is good for everyone.
  14. Did you install the aircraft first and verify it works with no issues? I would try that before adding the radar. It has been some years but it worked with the radar when I was still on V4.5.
  15. V4.5 was the last version that had monthly updates available from the now gone FS Aerodata but he pulled the plug when V5 was released. Great having up to date Navigraph for charts and FMS but a sorry state to have to look at the P3D map for the an old ATIS and ILS frequency. At least I can use an up to date GPS approach to an outdated runway. I would have thought at a minimum LM would have updated the database for a new release but not to be. I will continue to use V5.4 for a few aircraft but that's the end of line. I finished my career as a instructor and there is no way we would have trained with outdated information for clients in the simulators. It was common to get a request for training at specific airports and runways.
×
×
  • Create New...