DEHowie

Members
  • Content count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

87 Good

About DEHowie

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

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

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.vortexaviationphotography.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cairns

Recent Profile Visitors

513 profile views
  1. Having used Orbx's KSAN a bit and compared it to MisterX's free San Diego in xplane i must say Orbx rendition is very average. Poor rendition of the ships particularly the docked carrier and the rest of thecboats left me clearly preferring the Freeware xplane version. Looking at the photos of the new mesh and the revamped detail in the LVFR version im off to buy it now. Orbx has a huge load of followers and they do so,e staggeringly great airports. However of there big ones the only one i like is LOWI. Brisbane is a huge performance hog, Ksan the airport is nice but the surrounds are to my eye lacking and combined with Socal it has significant performance issues. I could go on about the cumulative performance loss that has lead me to drop all the regions except those i use for light aircraft flying PNW, AK etc. I love there smaller airports which are simply incredible but ill be going LVFR for KSAN.
  2. Well its been over 6 months since xplane 11 was released and we have heard only the slightest murmor of if/when an update might occur. It took only weeks to get recoded 64bit 747's, 737's and 777's yet its been over 6 months to get no news on the xp11 update for the 6. So Pmdg do you have any news or information as to when or if its being updated? Flying her it in P3D just highlights the deficincies of P3D's flight modelling and the experience is SO much better in xplane that i can live with the graphical anomalies, overly reflective instruments, lack of PBR etc in preference to the P3D aero model. So help us xplane lovers/preferrers and let us know whats happening.
  3. If you have addon scenery added the old method you need to backup your scenery.cfg file as well. This update process dropped on us by LM is pretty average at best. Completely forgetting that older addons exist and function well leave US to write XML code to enable them and god knows what happens with files inserted in scenery folders etc. While LM marches on leaving developers and the community behind. Thanks for nothing LM. Meanwhile over in Xplane land 11.10 Beta updated pushing ONE button.
  4. x-plane 11

    Agree. Xplane update equals one button. P3d means mutiple back ups, etc etc etc... Xplanes aero model is far ahead particularly the turbulence modelling and the 747 would be welcomed with open arms and wallets. Having just gone to 4.1 i cannot believe LM thinks this is an "Easy" way to update. As time goes on xplane becomes a better and better option. Better aero model, easy updates, very open developement process, huge freeware content, easy to add photo scenery. Xplane seems to be the future and P3D a look at the past.
  5. Lockheed Martin really have a lot to answer for in inflicting this system on people who are actually paying them. A system where you have no control over layering and causes so much confusion especially with complex cenery which adds textures etc to base folders. Do they have any idea about how there product is used or do they just blindly change things without consulting anyone. Guys having to be able to write in XML to add scenery so it is safe when updated is becoming beyond laughable when i can simply hit the update button in Xplane and its done perfectly. LM need to get back to reality not everyone has years of PC experience who is using there product. A high unacceptable way of running there product.
  6. No idea what some people do with there installs..lol. Mine is in pulling 25-30 FPS in the Pmdg 747, 55-60 exterior view. No complaints in fact only compliments that such a complex massive airport can pull that performance even with Orbx UK as well. Well done Aerosoft.
  7. If your not interested in looking at failures etc i find it a very cool little jet to fly. A lot of complaints come from people who have never learnt to fly and rely fully on autothrust then when they mess up the get frustrated at the jet. When they fix the tracking issues im intigued what people want if they continue ro complain. Having only come back to simming after a long break due to real flying travel etc the simming community has changed. Numerous complaints because people want to be spoon fed, the inability to deal with basic things like flying aircraft without autothrust and the immediate criticism of any product without it even if accurate to reality. The placement of PMDG etc on a perch of perfection which to anyone with real jet time knows how great that they are they are far from perfection. The CRJ is a great little jet "pilots" like to fly and from the 10 or so flights i have done is reflected nicely in the sim. The fact that people dont know how to fly it is not warrent for criticism of the manufacturer but only of themselves. Next time you fly the PMDG 737 or FSLABS A320 turn off the Autothrust they are just aeroplanes. You never know you may just learn something. In short id buy it again in a heartbeat.
  8. Has anyone tried dropping the Nameth/Milviz Skycrane into V4 to see if it works? A few of my FSX aircraft work ok and wondering if this beast works for some water bombing. If not it will be the Milviz Huey..
  9. I was very surprised how good the Lear 25 is from Xtreme Prototypes. That kind of surprised like with the AOA Connie where you go wow this this is completely awesome. Very accurate systems and the flight model feels right with astonishing performance. My only flight in the early Lear waa a blur of altimeters and brain lag. Easily the best business jet on the market from a systems and handling and the visual model is gorgeous. Excellent support to.
  10. An excellent article on a truly great addon. The B-377 was fabulous as well and between these two if your a hard core piston head you will be in heaven. There is an excellent addon called weatherships for trans-atlantic and pacific crossings for long range radio navigation. Well done AOA!!
  11. Because i dont need to. All the Bieings run the same FMC which is based on the system developed for the 737-300 way back when. FMC's have advanced far beyond that point except for Boeings. The list of missing features compared to the MD-11 FMC system is quite massive. It may hurt your feelings that the Boeing system even in the 787 is the same basic system with none of the advanced planning features of Airbus or MD. A perfect example is conducting a missed approach to an alternate. You will NEVER be cleared direct EVER. Yet all Boeings only give you the ability to get a fuel figure for that. With RTE 2 being used for your second approach you dont have acess to a final fuel figure oherhead your destination except via direct tracking with no allowance for an aporoach and landing. I could go on with the number of features missing even from the current Boeing FMC on the 787. In short it hasnt changed, its been the same for over 30 years and other that its great ability to show visual information which is great its missing numerous important functions covered since the late 80's by all of its competitors. Having flown the 717 which has the same FMC/Autoflight system as the MD-11, the Airbus A320/330 and a Pegasus FMC as per 767/757 I know them all. The Boeingbthing is boring per se as that simmers realy need to see "why" real pilots prefer the other two in operational use. In fact if in the reao world we could have MD's FMC combined with Boeings displays and an Airbus flightdeck you woukd literally have the ultimate aircraft. In short the Boeing thing IS boring in simming because yes they are all functionally the same and simming gives the unique chance to view multiple aircraft easily something many professionals never get to do. Hence why have another same same Boeing when the chance for seeing the great MD system exists? Or just go buy the TFDI 717 and see the best system going...
  12. Pmdg's decision(apparantly) to abandon the MD-11 is a boon for Xplane. Many simmers are Bored of reiterations of Boeings ancient FMC system and setup. Basically every Boeing is the same. Works for airlines but not for people after interesting aircraft. The success of the Rotate MD-80, the TFD 717 and the new Aerosoft CRJ is showing simmers are looking for new challenges and the one size fits all FMC and autoflight system of Boeing isnt that. With an excellent MD-80 in xplane and soon the much loved MD-11 lots of simmers will make the jump to xplane to get a modern take on the Mad Dog an aircraft with a flight management well ahead of its time and today still far more advanced than any of the B or A aeroplanes. The MD-11 is a pure powerhouse and its high approach speeds, great FMC/Autoflight system and advanced setup is something people tired of the Boeing way will turn to gladly. Far more capable in the planning and execution of flights being very similar to the Airbus system in most respects but with extra capability. Seeing Pmdg are interested in doing the Jetstream than an MD-11 and there is already a rather incredible Dash 8 out the worlds best turbprop dominating P3D the owners of xplane will be thanking them for not reissuing the MD-11. In turn encouraging a huge number of users to jump to xplane to get their Mad Dog fix.
  13. The biggest issue with the Boeing system is the weight on wheels scenario. In every normal scenario you will be initiating the go around by pushing the TOGA button a single time to initiate the soft go around. Then all of a sudden after years of training in soft go arounds "if" the wheels have touched it will not engage. Firstly on a widebody it is very possible particularly in turbulence to have wheel contact without the crew knowing it. So having already decided on a go around a click of the TOGA button to initiate the soft go around and "if" the wheels have touched nothing will happen. It is a MASSIVE flaw in an otherwide excellent go around system. If you have ever flown an aeroplane for 12 hours on a back of the clock you will know how dependent you are on automation for the clear purpose of safety. Your brain operates FAR more slowly and your reactions and startle factor are multiplied significantly. You make errors and a system which 99.9% of the time works perfectly in the single time you need it the most ie fatigued, early morning arrival, poor weather will let you down because of the weight on wheels disabling of go around. Almost all go arounds after long flights will be soft ones because the last thing you need after a 14 hour duty is 4000'/minute into a 2000' level off. To top it off there is no warning it is disabled!!!!! The soft go around has just been incorperated by Airbus into its FMGC suite as its a great feature but to have it disabled with no warning and relying upon the crew after huge duties to "sense" if a large aircraft has touched which can easily be missed or not sensed is and was a disaster waiting to happen.
  14. Crj is a much more basic aircraft to fly without autothrust. 717 gives a great look at McDonnell Douglas at its best as the 717 used the MD-11 Autoflight system. Both have a place in anyone who interested in the different way manufacturers work. 717 is about as advanced as you can get being light years ahead of 737 and several features better than Airbus. MD did a great job with the Mad Puppy. Get both if not and you prefer manual flight go Crj if you dont get the 717.
  15. OPs center update was released but still cant install...