andy1252

Got myself a copy and had a couple of drone camera tours. In many ways I now don't get what a lot of the build-up was all about. A lot of the exteriors and the various ancillary bits and pieces are very impressive and nicely done (visually - I have no personal knowledge as to accuracy but then that doesn't worry me anyway), but the interiors I have seen leave much to be desired. Lots of the terminal buildings seem to have blank interiors that you can still "enter" and then find yourself missing exterior walls, ceilings, floors etc. Where there are terminal interiors they seem quite low quality, and certainly the people models are a long way from the best I've seen. I don't regret buying it, but for my taste it's nothing special. There are a lot better out there.

Which would rather suggest that eye candy is precisely what people want. Otherwise presumably developers would be flocking to produce high performing but not necessarily particularly good looking scenery.

Been wanting one of these forever in the MP. Almost certainly will never happen - in this day and age a dev could probably start a completely spurious legal action against MS if they felt they were likely to be excluded. I can quite see all the "no win, no fee" brigade leaping in to take those cases on.

I have an extremely well-rounded collection of aircraft. So well rounded it's positively obese. Couple of hundred at least, maybe even over three hundred. Pretty much anything I like to look of, and I can get away with this because I don't bother to learn how to fly any of them 'properly'. I'm way more of an aircraft nut than any kind of sim pilot. Everything from Cessna to StarTrek. For instance, last few days I've grabbed the TriStar, Bulldog Autogyro, English Electric Wren and B200 Kingair. And enjoyed them all.

I wouldn't normally bother, but I've had a couple of very large G & Ts, so I'd just like to say that I don't understand why folks get so invested in some of this stuff (well, I do understand but even after the booze I still feel the need to be somewhat polite). It really doesn't matter what anybody may have 'invested' in any particular sim over the years. Things change, not always for the better in every aspect, but mostly so. There is no avoiding this, so deal with it. If you really don't like a new system/sim/addon version or whatever - well, don't use it. I don't think MSFS2024 is better in every way than 2020. but it is so in enough ways that I rarely use 2020 now. They are both miles ahead of P3D but I still use that when I want to use certain aircraft, and I'm very happy to be able to do so without expecting LM to keep updating it to my own requirements. And I don't expect any vendor to do exactly what I'd like. The choice is always mine - buy it or not. Between all the sims and versions available now, we've never had it so good. It's unlikely it will ever be exactly what any of us want, but it's pretty **** fine right now.

Great link, thank you. I think if I ever turn out to be that nice Mr Musk's long lost uncle or something, I'll get myself a 777 kitted out as a log cabin, complete with authentic fireplace. Maybe somewhere up at the back of the plane for the goats, even. Wonder if PMDG might offer that as an option? Meanwhile, this high detail update looks great, and I look forward to it.

Got mine! And a whole bunch of liveries. One quick flight out of KSFO, great fun and looks wonderful. Interiors are excellent too. I shall have a few trips in an RAF version next. And as a complete contrast I also picked up the Wren and Autogyro (both Rara-Avis) from Just Flight today as well. What fun!

Ctrl-E (of course)

Probably for me the biggie is when you get some really nicely modelled features (terminals, hangars, sheds, whatever) but all plonked on top of really rubbish ground ortho. And it's not just airports - lots of other scenery packages do this. Having well modelled buildings sitting on top of something that belongs in FSX or earlier is jarring.

Not unless the particular aircraft absolutely insists on it. I seem to remember a Spitfire that would flame out after a while unless you managed it properly. Fortunately (for me), it turned out that you could turn the engine damage business completely off with a particular radio button press. You wouldn't believe how much time I save flying a big tube - so much more to ignore <grin>

I have a Tobii eye trackir (v5) which I don't use. It works perfectly, in fact I only had it set up for a couple of weeks before I realised that it really wasn't appropriate for my type of sim use. Given that I don't actually use any instruments when 'flying' it just acted as a distraction for me. So, I'm quite happy to donate this to anyone who wants it. Not sure I can find the original box (I know I've got it somewhere but can't lay my hands on it right now). Not much point in it sitting around unused if someone can make use of it. If anyone is interested, PM me and we can take it from there. Not looking for money, but if you want it you just have to paypal or xfr the shipping cost. Like I say, PM me and let me know ehre you are (I'm in the UK)

Talk about 'different strokes for different folks'. Pretty much all of the things people complain about as wrong or missing or non-functional with this (and many other) aircraft that are pushed out for MSFS are completely meaningless for me. One of the joys of being a seriously non-serious simmer. As long as it looks good and is an aircraft I like, I can live with not a single gauge or button being functional or accurate, just as long as it responds to throttle, brakes, ailerons and rudder I'm happy. It really does make for less stressful simming. I haven't been simming much the last couple of weeks, but I shall be back to my usual regular usage shortly, and I'm looking forward to grabbing this (and the upcoming Tri-star) and zooming around with all the pleasure my ineptitide can give me.

Hi Jack, the ad on SimMarket mentions landmarks being added to the sim's World Map - maybe the villas are marked?

This aircraft is another one of the reasons for my recent reinstatement of my old P3D setups - Very much looking forward to seeing this in MSFS

I bought this as I really like the DC9 and wanted to see it in MSFS, but I have to say I agree with this review - it is pretty rubbishy. Wouldn't go so far as to say "worst addon" but certainly down there amongst the crud. There is a lot of good stuff around for MSFS, but there is also a lot of rubbish. I buy a lot of addons, both scenery and aircraft, and you can't always tell the real quality from the publicity shots for a product, and I certainly don't bother with youtoobs as I find most of them relentlessy awful in themselves, so yeah, sometimes I end up with a dud.

Haven't actually been simming much these past few weeks, but I keep an eye on the various sites' offers, so - KDFW (Ini) EFKT (Ini) ZSQD (Samscene) ZSHC (Samscene) OEMA (Tuwaiq) OEAB (Tuwaiq) ORBI (Azrsim) ORMM (Azrsim) plus Milwaukee City & Bridges (DFFlyer) Grand total now around 1150 (but hey, we don't go out or have other pricey hobbies)

Well, I wouldn't say I rave about them but I no longer lunge for the "off" button when they come on <grin>

Found old email in moments, clicked link, pasted appropriate request (see post in original link), got two new emails with new links in less than two minutes. Procedure works splendidly if you've got the original emai, and to be honest I don't know why you (as in "one" rather than anyone in particular) wouldn't keep all such emails filed away anyway. It's not like email msgs take a lot of space, especially if you compress them occasionally. My "flightsim" local mail folder has almost 8000 msgs stored, and is taking less than 1 gb. In fact my entire email folder setup takes about 8 gb, and that has got everything going back around 16 years. Would have been even longer but I used to use Outlook Express as a mail client until one day Microsoft decided to delete all my folders. Thunderbird these days and regular backups.

There are times reading some of the posts in the forums here that remind me of the music press in the 1970s. People deciding some bands are "cool" and some are unacceptable, often based on nothing rational at all. And I'm fairly sure that more than a few of the hip young critters that scoffed at the likes of ABBA are now happy to groove along to their ABBA gold CD now in their trodden down slippers on a Sunday morning. As for Carenado, and indeed Captain Sim, all I can say is "gimme, gimme, gimme"

I'd probably buy it. But I would say that you can get most of these aircraft running in the likes of P3D already. Airports are another matter, and yes, I would like to see older versions, but not necessarily back to the 30s, 1950s and 106-s would work better for my taste. Now if Google could get their time machine working and do the same for the whole Earth/Maps environment, we'd really be looking at something. (and personally, study level not necessary for the aircraft - just beautifully modelled with full interiors and ideally a retro set of GSX passengers to match)

I got caught on this, but realised you have to select something for every line/row (i.e. you can't leave any line without an option checked, even if you have no interest in that line)

No idea if anyone is planning this, but if they are I'll buy it. Another one of the reasons I re-instated P3D on my system recently

Always on. Not always happy with it, but most of the time.

At a gate if I want to play with GSX, grab screenies at an airport or suchlike. Hot start on runway if I want to explore an area or just fancy a flight in a particular plane. Never, ever, do the whole cold start thing - life's too short. Doesn't mean I won't sometimes start at a gate or similar and then record a flight from the subsequent hotstart (ctrl-e or whatever) and taxi out and away. Then grab a few shots from the replay. Even if I actually wanted to do the whole startup thing, I've got literally hundreds of aircraft and that's way too many buttons to get to grips with.

What's making sense got to do with anything <grin>?