FDEdev

Looks definitely cool, but I disliked the tiny windows on the CRJ. The 'slightly' bigger windows on the 767 were a dream. 🙂 Especially since you can open the windows on most 'real' jets. Not possible on Challengers, CRJs etc.

It's only the side windows on the Challenger that are so small. Don't know why they are that small, but they are big enough to do visual approaches etc. It's only the (rather useless) downward viz that's restricted. The windshields are of a more 'conventional' size, even on the Challenger, but generally you want the windshields to be as small as possible to minimize drag and to increase structural strength. The correct seat height is important for optimum viz and the cut-off angle in the Challenger and other jets is e.g. a lot greater than in e.g. a C-210 or C-182.

One of the main drawbacks with boots is the timing. If you use them too early the ice will freeze over the inflated boots and further cycles will not break the build up. If you use them too late, the boots will be unable to inflate at all. Flying in icing conditions with a jet is one very the big advantages over a turboprop. The ice build up on the screenshot doesn't look excessive IMO and it definitely wouldn't throw the aircraft into a spin. There have been various contamination tests with large styrofoam blocks glued onto upper wing surfaces to test the loss of lift/controllability. Deicing is overrated anyway 😉

I wrote my first (DC-9) flightsim in Basic on the Vic 20 a 'few' years ago.🙂

Not anymore AFAIK. These two (20min & 30min) videos have been uploaded to e.g. youtube but they were only online for a only a few days (each with more than 30000 views)

This doesn't make sense since Asobo/MS are creating the SDKs to be used by 3rd party developers to design/develop aircraft, sceneries etc.

DCS was also not built for VR and they did a great job. Btw, as long as you are 'stepping into the world' with diving goggles, the realism is still noticeable restricted.

That's exactly why they IMO want 3rd party developers. The Asobo/MS teams wants to create the most efficient and powerful tools, so that 3rd party devs can design aircraft, scenery etc. with the tools they provide.

MS has posted this info almost a month ago on their flightsimulator.com webpage.

Sleep deprivation!! Now that explains a lot! 🤣

Just found this one: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1IJYlVvT9fy9VQ9voO6cp-JS3LCBGCetW&ll=-3.81666561775622e-14%2C-94.31516294999994&z=1

Same IRL, but PITA? With the mousewheel I'm scrolling through the numbers very quick.

Don't have it presently installed, but what are the increments? IRL it's 10ft steps on most aircraft.

This did the trick for me as well....let's see how well this works. (Edge) There are numerous reports that a log in works just a single time.

It says for subsonic aircraft.

This record is simply a by-product of the strong jetstream and hence they broke a record, but the British Airways PR nonsense in the linked article is hairraising.

Doesn't work either here.

That's one of the reasons why it's a good thing that Asobo and not Microsoft is developing the new sim!

Can't remember exactly but AFAIR this depends on the default aircraft and state. You need to load FSX with an aircraft with has e.g. a 'both' position fuel switch and preferably with the engine(s) running. Then you can start a flight the 1900.

No. The heavily compressing nose gear is a good indicator for a pretty strong brake application.

The walkaround on a 707 wasn't noticeable different from a 787 😉

1. I have no idea how can get to this conclusion without seing the actual control inputs. We don't even know what kind of joystick (if any at all) this guy is using, let alone how much this behavior can be tuned within the FDE. I can make such 'wobbly' FDEs with FSX/P3D as well. 2. And what's so bad about x-planes general turbulence model? 3. Didn't notice anything special here either.

Care to explain in more detail?

That's the beauty and the advantage of big aircraft. You don't touch anything during the walkaround 🙂

A classic case of lack of system knowledge. You learn such things either through experience on type, or Captains usually are being told such 'specials' when they are doing their line training on the new type. It was a big advantage that e.g. at JFK and IAD the guys on the headset were always technicians who knew the quirks of our aircraft.