JYW

Really? So you're saying that the frustration for you with having these features (for those who want them - I don't, incidentally), is that support then becomes difficult, as those providing support will insist that you use them? That's the oddest, non-event I've ever heard. Sorry but can you link examples of this "phenomena" please, because it sounds hugely obtuse and unlikely? As I said, I don't use failures or synoptic pages either, but I would have no appetite to have them removed from people who do use them. Sound like the best plan 👍

Hey Bert, at my end, I only need to turn failures off once, and the state is then persistent. Is that not how it is for you?

Looks like a fanastic update. Personally, I would love a retrofitted ND, as th eonly thing I don't like about flyign the 146, is having no depiction of situational awareness. But I know, it's completely realistic as it is! I'm not criticizing the JF product one bit. Just a preference that I prefer flying the Fokker F28 because there's the option to have the GNS fitted, which gives at least a basic navigation map.

The last beta mini-update solved the "always loading in windowed mode" issue for me. Once SU15 is released, this annoying problem will be gone for non-beta users too 👍

If it's just engine start speed that you measure quality by, CTRL+E is your friend.

There's always the option to turn failures off, just as in the weather radar interface on the existing BS aircraft. I always do that. I like some wear and tear, but like you, it's realistic avionics and flight model that float my boat 😊 I've never set failures in FS in my life. Just doesn't appeal. It looks like the BS Dukes will offer everything; the wear and tear, the failures, the avionics, flight model and the rest. Hapy days!

Exactly! Well said. 😎 In the X-Plane world, there are a few devs that contract out the FDE to a specialist. Like Aerobask; they contract out the sound to the most talented sound engineer in the FS world (IMO), Daniela Rodriguez, and they contract out the FDE to X-Dynamics (may have got that name slightly wrong). The result = a darn near perfect model! I wish SWS would bite the bullet and get someone else to create the FDE. The PC-12 is so darn good in every other area; model, textures, and gorgeous sound. But you cannot put up with the worst FDE in FS history* just to enjoy those ancilliaries. *Yes, I'm erring on the side of hyperbole there!

No, I think you're right. I couldn't remember if the TBM was £24.99 or £29.99. In that case, I'll revise my guess to be £29.99 each and £44.99 for the pair. 🙃😎

I reckon it'll be £24.99 each and £39.99 for the bundle.

There were about 50 posts in his last video, telling him how to get the plane working with VATSIM. His response was "I shouldn't have to press that button". 😄 He's obviously decided to give it another go.....

Here it is:- Tablet is amazing! Cannot wait for these "Dookes" to be released! 😃

What's the punch line to your joke? If a video states (constantly, on the screen) "these are NOT the textures", then what is the point in commenting on the quality of the placeholder textures? I hope your jokes at the bar are better than this..... 😄

I was going to say that - given the FDE disaster of their PC-12 - I think SWS struggle with flight dynamics. Then I remembered my all time favourite LSA in any flight sim platform is the SWS CH701 STOL. I have over 200 hours in the real aircraft, and (although the simulated aircraft has the 80hp engine and I've only ever flown the 100hp version) that thing flies remarkably well and is very convincing. But yes, despite all the praise for it, I've never found the Kodiak pleasant or convincing to fly. It's a heck of a lot better than their (sideways landing) PC-12 though! ... that thing turns into a helicopter on short finals.

So if we're talking "non-aircraft addons", (which also does not sppear to include scenery), are we therefore referring to utilities? I'd say MSFS has more utilities than any other platform - mostly because of the plethora of free utilities available on FS.TO. Addon Linker, Map Enhancement, Better Toolbar, etc, etc, etc. There are dozens. Do miss one of two of the old utilities I had with FSX.

Are you turning the volume of the little "PA" knob right up Bob? You need to click the knob (which lights up), then turn it to the right to get max volume. The standard announcements are quite loud at my end whe I do this.

What you quoted seems to be about state saving rather than being able to assign the condition lever to a hardware axis? Or have I missed something? If you add those pieces of code, what variable do you then set your hardware axis to? Would love to get it working and be able to assign the lever 👍

Despite hours of messing with it, I've never manged to assign the condition lever in the BSq TBM850. It's the first lever I've never been able to crack in terms of assigning it to my hardware. 😡😄 (This is with Lorby AAO). Really bugs me having to click an axis lever with the mouse, but I've learned to live with it.

Thanks, and good points. It was the ATR 72. ISA was at standard (I was using a really simply, plain weather preset). My TOW was 17 tons. On the flaps and gear, it's funny you say that because I kept checking the flaps and gear multiple times, even at 11,000 😄 ... that's exactly what it felt like - like the gear or flaps were still out. I can confirm I never saw above 1100 FPM .... not even during climb out with flaps retracted and the gear up. And yes, definitely in IAS mode (not VS mode at 1000 feet, which I also checked 😄). It seems the ATR72 really is just very sluggish. I didn't make any screenies and don't plan to fly the route again soon, but I think I'll try the ATR42 at a lower TOW and see how it goes. Cheers.

I kind of agree. But, under IFR, will BATC be able to understand and process a "can we deviate 15 degrees to the left for weather?" request? In other words, there are components of IFR flights that are unplanned, and therefore not scripted. But for the most part, I agree with you. PS.... I am not for one moment making this a SI versus BATC thing! They are completely different for the most part. I'm excited for BATC and will probably buy it for airliner IFR, and use SI mostly for VFR. 😎

That's not a timetable. It's a very loose release estimate. Anyway, I just thought it was unreasonable of you to complain that Just Flight were somehow failing you as a potential customer; by not giving you whatever it is you meant by a 'timetable'. They haven't done anything less than any other FS developer does - they've given a loose release estimate. Nothing "frustrating" (to use your words) about that.

And you publish them all to your external clients and customers? You're getting confused between project milestones, and some sort of odd "timetable" where you publish your entire chronological steps and plans for customers. 😄

Give me a minute, I'll ask it now and see what happens 😄

Today I reinstalled the ATR after about a 6 month period. I flew the plane with a Simbrief flight plan, and a load which was just under 75% of the MTOW. On climb out, after engaging CLB mode on the power knob, I was seeing only 1000 FPM at 160 knots (IAS mode) - all the way to 17,000'. 😶 I checked and was definitely in 'Notch' on the power levers. In cruise I got only 195 KIAS at 17,000' ..... with a TAS of around 242. Surely this plane is not this gutless IRL? Perhaps it does have a very slow cruise speed, but the climb cannot be right at 1,000 FPM, down on early climb out? Anyone else notice this, or is there something up with my set up of the plane? I don't have many hours in this bird - so may be user error, but can't think what else could be the cause.

I never said 'unreasonable'. 😉 I don't think I could fly without it. But I do feel the cost it too high. (They're not mutually exclusive 😃 ) However, if we believe what Brian says (and I have no reason to doubt him), it seems like about 75% of that cost goes straight to the AI provider. Let's hope he can negotiate more favourable rates, now that the beta is open and he's hopefully got plenty of subscribers.

Really? You expect a "timetable" for release? That really isn't how software development works. What would the purpose of having a timetable be, if that timetable needs to be changed constantly. Which other addon has ever provided a timetable for release? All we ever get is hopeful estimates - up until the development is finished and (some) developers give a "it will release next Tuesday" announcements. I think your expectations are misguided - and unreasonable towards the dev.