kneighbour

I have been watching this space for several months now. I saw an earlier post where this was supposed to be released in January, but obviously this has slipped a little. Any better estimate for when it might be released?

In his defence, I did watch the video, and he has 'Flight Simulator FSX' plastered all over it. Bit confusing at times. But to answer the question. The plane does NOT do procedures, SIDS, STARs, etc.

I am looking forward to this more than the IXEG Classic. I would rather fly the -800 than the -300, so this looks like the perfect answer. Will have to get x737FMC just to be ready.

yes, not 30 minutes ago

what is UWXP?

It will have a SayIt function. This brings up a text line of what you are supposed to say to ATC. You can either read that back, or let the computer SayIt for you. This is just what I want - I am trying to learn the proper ATC communications, and if nothing else, this is teaching the user what to say. Seems a top feature.

I did - way back. I see that a new V2 is about to be released. It is pretty expensive, but it does look pretty good. I understood that you also had to generate taxi ways? This is the same problem that World Traffic has - and it is just not practical unless you just happen to fly in a very popular area. But since Sydney is out - that does make it more interesting for me. I will certainly check it out. I tried to go to the purchase page on the website - but it does not seem to be active just yet. Are they putting the paid version on hold for the time being?

The SayIt function looks perfect!! Apart from the actual speech part, it also teaches you the correct readback - one of the things I would like to learn - and this seems a brilliant way to learn. Am keenly looking forward to the actual release.

I downloaded V1 ages ago, but never got around to trying it out. Now that V2 is almost out, I am more interested. I was wondering if you can set the pilot->ATC communications to text only? I am not that confident that I can do the voice commands. But of course I still want the ATC to talk back to me. All the other features (moving map, flight planner, etc) look very impressive and might be worth it just for those features.

I agree. I bought it, and still cannot set it up. Well, I went to great effort to setup 2 airports, but even there it is marginal at best. Like many, I surmise, I just gave up. If this system can generate traffic ANYWHERE, it will be a winner for sure. But while traffic is a nice plus, what I am really looking for is a halfway decent ATC system. As everyone knows, the X-Plane ATC is not even worth considering. I have been looking at EasyATC (my current favourite) or 124thATC64. It is still early days for both of these systems, but I am hopeful.

Well, if it only works for a limited and specific range of airports, then for me at least, it is totally useless. It has to work at ANY airport. I fly a lot in Australia and SE Asia - unless it works in these locations, then it is useless (to me). But since this is the development phase, I am watching it with great anticipation.

This is still a bit confusing to me. Does this only work at a handful of airports in Europe?

I am a programmer myself - so I do understand some of their issues. But I am thinking that the bugs in the FMS would have been simple to discover. I have not done one single flight where the FMS has worked. Even the tutorial flight that they provide will not work (on my system, at least). I think the Xmas rush was the problem - and getting it out when they did was probably a good move commercially. As long as the x-plane community can see updates in the near future (within a week or so), then no harm done. None of us expects a flawless and bug free system. Hell, even X-Plane itself is rife with problems. For me it is my first aircraft with a working FMS that I have actually flown much at all (I have the CRJ-200 but I never fly it). I am guessing it will take me a week or so to get to learn how to fly the plane in all other respects, so I do not mind waiting for some patches for the FMS to come out. One problem is that the IXEG will be coming out very soon, and it has a fully working FMS. The MD80 is somewhat limited in comparison as far as I can see. If patches to the MD80 are not out by the time the IXEG comes out, there is a fair bet that I will relegate the MD80 to history. One very big saving grace is that the MD80 is a weird aircraft to fly. Not at all like a Boeing or Airbus, so that adds a lot of points for me. It also flies very well - as smooth as the 732 I think. Apart from the FMS it is a very nice plane. I like the look of the 767. The few Youtube videos I have seen of it seem promising. But I am not sure if I want yet another aircraft of around the same vintage. I am guessing it is around the same age as the 733 roughly, and perhaps much like the MD80 in technology as well. I would rather go to a newer aircraft like the 737-800 I am thinking. Anyway, no more flying for me today - too much food! Edit : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTvmHKVh9A4&feature=youtu.be Just found this excellent youtube video by Frooglesim. He took up a real MD80 captain and his comments are instructive.

I was wondering the same thing - was trying to hold off for the IXEG, but gave up and bought the MD80. I am more into the short haul than long, so was not that keen on the 767. The MD80 has been a bit of a disappointment. My FPS has taken a bit of a hit, even with 2K textures, so is barely usable. But the big problem is the FMS - it has a lot of bugs which the developers are working on. But in the meantime it can be challenging to fly because of the FMS problems. In fact, was looking at the online videos of the 767 with a bit more interest - just because I want an FMS that actually works. A few of us are also getting random CTD when editing the FMS in flight. VERY annoying as you can imagine. It does not seem that they had a very good beta test program, or were rushed to release a bit early. I am thinking that if they fix the FMS problems, it will be a great aircraft. But until then I would hold off for the IXEG.

Pardon my ignorance - what is 'PFE' ?

well, a GTX680 is a pretty high end card, even though it is only 2gb. I am trying to get a secondhand one myself at the moment, so good to see that one of these cards is good enough.

Well, I use (and select) XPUIPC on the FS Connection page. Then set the following Network mode : IPv4 FSX Computer : localhost Server Port/Pipe : 0 Also, in Locations, set the path to your X-Plane folder That should be it.

I have come from FSX (and all previous flight sim software) myself. It took some time, but here is what I think is essential - XCamera https://www.stickandrudderstudios.com/x-camera/ without a doubt, the most essential addon for x-plane. - Sky Maxx : very nice. Have used it for so long not sure what it is like without it. Apart from looking good, it increases framerate. - Plan-G http://www.tasoftware.co.uk/. Pretty good moving map and flight planning software. Mainly VFR level stuff (no SIDs, etc), but good enough for most flights. - FSEconomy. I doubt I would fly very much at all without the FSE community. It gives flying a purpose. Not much else really. When I first got into XP (and FSX) I downloaded every bit of scenery and every aircraft I imagined I would use. I spent more time doing this than actually flying. Forget all that. Get one of two aircraft that you love to fly - preferably payware, and stick with that. I have never found a freeware aircraft that I like or was good enough. I also concentrate on narrow areas of scenery (Australia mostly), so now do not have to spend any time at all looking for scenery. I also like TrackIR, but it is not essential (but I recommend it).

seems it requires a video card with 4G ram....might have to hold off a bit....

Well, I am definitely in the technical camp. I like the plane to have real systems, and the graphics are a distant second. I started simming on Sublogic:FS1 way back in 1976 or so - no graphics at all then. I also spent countless hours on Flight Assignment:ATP - with only very limited graphics (probably only 4 colours, I am not sure). In fact, some of my best remembered flights were in ATP. I still remember doing a flight from somewhere into SFO on a STAR and coming down through cloud and finding the runway where it should be. All with virtually no graphics to speak of. Good stuff. I just love getting a new study level plane and getting the manuals out. I read every page before I take off. This can take me a week or more, of course. Then I print out handy to use checklists, work out fuel loading and fuel flow in various flight regimes, etc. So when I take to the air, I know exactly what I have to do. I generally fly for FSE now, so going for a flight can be a time consuming exercise. I also try to emulate what real pilots do - that is fly similar/the same routes over and over gain. It sounds boring, but that is what real pilots do and I like that feeling. Also, by flying the same plane day after day, you can get pretty good at it. I take great pains to think of my paying passengers (I fly in FSE after all) holding a glass of champagne - and I fly so that they do not spill it. Smooth switches to autopilot, no steep turns, etc. I rarely look at the outside of the aircraft - unless totally bored. I do sometimes sit in the back as a passenger. But each to his own - my brother is in the graphics only camp. He does a quick take off and crash, and that is it. I can spend the whole day doing a flight.

I bought it and only used it a few times. For me it was a waste of a LOT of money - it is not cheap. It is VERY slow to load, and that bugs me. The flight planner is frustrating to use. I gave up on it and then just used it as a moving map. But then I found Plan-G, and that is a better moving map - plus it does a few other things that EFASS does. check it out http://www.tasoftware.co.uk/ The flight planning side is not comprehensive, but it is good enough for my flights in FSE.

The PC-12 shows the input vs output - ie 0. In fact, the checklist requires that the readings be below 15A before takeoff is allowed.

Well, I am somewhat biased because I flew the STMA one for a long time before I bought the Carenado one. So I was already used to a certain flight model. The STMA version is light and fast - very much like a sports car. It goes where you point it and is very responsive. The systems are also very good - detailed exactly. The Carenado one is totally different. Not the same aircraft at all. It feels like the B1900 (or really, any Carenado aircraft). It is slow and heavy. It even looks bigger from the outside. The HSI is totally unreadable - and as that is my main navigation instrument, it makes the plane unflyable. The ammeters are also totally wrong - they show readings all the time, when they should be 0. My system takes a 10 fps hit, which is very bad for me. Little documentation. There are probably other things, but these are the main things just off the top of the head. The HSI is a show stopper though.

Nobody is bashing anything - perhaps you should re-read my comments? I think the 340A is a great plane. I was commenting on the complexity of this aircraft as Phantom88 intimated that it had complex systems. I was suggesting that the systems were not that complex and this should not be a turnoff. This is a GOOD thing.... I would also like to say - EVERYTHING in these forums is personal opinion. The OP actually asked for opinions (ie thoughts).

Well, this is a bit off topic, but I would LOVE to work out how to do this. When I fly the Saab, I generally have to set the CL 4 or 5 times and it gets very tiring. My axis indexes are always the same (31 and 32) so it beats me why I have to assign them so often. I also get the 'engine won't start' problem, so that again means an aircraft reload and yet another CL assignment. I have the CLs set for other aircraft no problem. Any tips most welcome.