roesti

Thanks, that's exactly how I feel sometimes. I like SI and will continue using it when I fly with ATC, but yes - there are times, where it feels like you report bugs, even those who were resolved before and now made it's way back. And it's a bit frustrating, because it feels like to pay for being a tester. Yes, no software will be always be perfect and most of the time, it works. But often bugs were excused with "it's realistic, the reality isn't always perfect" which is a bit odd. One example is runway operations (SI sometimes uses questionable runway operations with live weather, differing from RL operations) - yes, you can lock runways to your SimBrief plan, but this eliminates flexibility when the weather changes during the flight. So with the flexibility of AI, I think "Hey, it's okay - software has bugs, but I just can request another approach" and explain why - which get's denied. This doesn't make sense, it only would if the software had no bugs. And even if you can "convince" the controller to change your approach and ATC acknowledges it, it forgets about it 5 minutes later and clears you for the old / "wrong" approach. To be fair, they now introduced an option, that they will accept your requests, but they explained "it's unrealistic" - it would be, if the software wouldn't make mistakes in advance, so this can be frustrating sometimes.

To be honest, I think this is a very concerning and weird reaction from SI if it happened like you described it. So if I voice an opinion, I now have to fear somebody else forwards it to the CEO of SI (which is one thing), and this CEO actually reacts to something like that and can close my entire account? I‘m a long term customer of SI and like it in general - but it‘s far from perfect and there are several areas where it could be improved. It‘s fair that you got your money back, but still this behaviour is not very professional. I doubt it‘s a good decision to go after unsatisfied customers, because they will always exist. I think it‘s better to focus on the product instead of wasting time and energy on something like this. And it also concerns me, that (if this is true) SI just ignores privacy and make connections between user accounts here and their database. That‘s a shame, as I think SI has potential, this is unneccessary. Flight simulation is such a cool hobby with many smart people, so much to learn - Too bad theres also this part of unneccessary drama. And it's not only users, also developers sometimes.

.0919 is the old beta 2 build, nothing new.

Isn‘t the WX pulled by these planes coming from SimBrief / OFP weather forecast? Maybe it helps to adjust the times / WX source in the SimBrief flightplan.

If you move backwards and don't zoom (so don't scroll - just go to Spot View for example and press Alt+Down Arrow (should be the default bind and can be changed)), nothing stretches. If something stretches, zoom in a bit (decrease FoV). That's a feature //42 even advertised when ChasePlane released first for 2020. The "Zoom"-Function does exactly what you said. It changes FoV and that's why you get the stretched objects / fisheye effect. You can of course combine both the default zoom (FoV change) with translating back, but you don't have to. But translating back ("zooming" without FoV change) can come with it's own downsides and that's probably the reason it isn't implemented by default. You recognize it when you go out to far and it's a probably specific to MSFS, the terrain / LOD starts to decrease. So ground / distant objects can become blurry if you move "too far away from your plane", a problem which doesn't exist in X-Plane. When using the zoom function, you don't move away, but it just increases the FoV like a wide angle camera. But there's really no other way to show more / less information on the same screen space. Either increase / decrase FoV (default zoom) or move away / closer to the object. EDIT: Example pictures, both 3440x1440 like you, same situation, both in Spot View. First picture = zooming out with the scroll wheel, second picture is moving the camera backwards. Goal was to have the 747 in sight on the left, the stretching is obvious and exaggerated in the first picture, while "going away" from the plane keeps the field of view more natural (2nd pic). https://ibb.co/v6r0Gx4p https://ibb.co/ns1ZsZz6

FoV in MSFS changes when you zoom (use the scrollwheel). If you want to move out / zoom without changing FoV, translate backwards. Aren‘t you using ChasePlane? When you are in the outside view, instead of zooming, try to press Alt+Up/Down arrow. This doesn’t work with MSFS default, only ChasePlane. I don‘t know any way to directly alter the numerical values for changing FoV, only zooming exists. But there is a table which shows you the degree of FoV per zoom level percent.

@Anthony25368 I recently switched to 2024 after using 2020 and got some occasional stutters from time to time when flying along which did not occur in the older sim. I remembered that 2024 is streaming all of it's content and although my connection is quite good, I thought it may be the culprit. So I went ahead and downloaded all "streamable" content which was approx. 300GB worth of data. Disk space is no issue for me and it was the same with 2020. After I did that, the sims smoothness is now quite similar to 2020. When researching about this topic online, I found that this solution worked for several people but not for all. So I can't say it's a definite fix for your problem, but if your internet isn't too slow to download the content and you have the disk space, it's worth a try.

Same. And if I then see that the negative review is based on "the user didn't read the manual or his negative review is based on a user error" (many 1-star reviews on big vendors are like that btw.), then I know I can ignore it. That's not true, ChasePlane is far from perfect and it has bugs. Perfection is almost impossible. Some issues an be fixed by //42, some are limitations due to the lack of API access we already discussed. But that doesn't make the product "bloatware". It's not all black or white. Maybe it's your language you use, but that's my impression. Experienced user or not, you certainly got things wrong. And when corrected, you jumped to the next item you don't like. And this gives the impression you need to talk it down instead of just saying "Okay, I got this wrong - I think it still isn't for me, but my point was obviously invalid". But I think we won't reach this point of a normal discussion, so I head out again. Cheers, happy landings and merry X-Mas everybody 🎄

The thread is evidence enough that you are not an experienced user of ChasePlane and you made wrong claims based on assumptions like "I need to redo all my keybinds again" which are not correct. You did not read the manual or didn't ask for help on their Discord / here on AVSIM to get your problems solved but instead pointed out flaws that only exist on your side. I tried to show you the import function, but after this problem was solved, you jumped back to your original point of missing tower or fly-by views in the default system. So here we are again: "The default system is perfect and ChasePlane not neccessary, but..." which is still a great contradiction. Absolutely not true and another misinformation. Recent experience: I got ChasePlane 2024 for free as an existing customer, did not pay a penny for it. I started MSFS2024 (which I rarely used over the last year because it wasn't ready for my use case), installed ChasePlane. And every single view and keybind was there without any work. The only plane where I had to press the "Import" Button was the A350, as iniBuilds renamed the plane into "A350 (no cabin)" and "A350 (default cabin)" which wasn't the case for 2020. But it was one button click to tell ChasePlane "Hey, this A350 is the correct one, please import" and everything was back. Setup time was maybe a minute. Altogether for all my planes. How long did it take to setup everything by default you said? But anyway, I have one question: Is it possible for you to just not use the software you don't like, don't use polemics (call it "bloatware")? Or is there a particular reason you need to be vocal about a thing you don't like and don't use? I hope it's not the case for everything you don't like on this planet, because then your day must be very long.

I use them, converted them to force feedback and am happy with it. They are amongst the pedals with the biggest throw on the market, which may an advantage for some and a disadvantage for others (bit it's adjustable). But quality wise, I'd say MFG crosswinds are still ahead (they have similar / same pricing). Not saying the WinWings are bad, they are solid. I love mine - but be aware there's maintenance to be done, some screws may come loose etc. and the original damper (which I do not use anymore) had a damaged bearing.

This was dedicated to the generalization "it is not needed" from one person here in this thread instead of saying "I don't need it" and the rest was a simple misunderstanding. I was an early access customer of CP for 2020 and used it with past sims, like I said. I don't know how long this option is in there, but I'm quite sure it's been quite some time. And yes, the "10 configured views" are your set views. The default views should be the preset-views by some developers that come with the aircraft. That's my confusion: These issues you describe with unassigning / reassigning stuff is something I never encountered. It's a one-time setup and they made it as easy is as possible from my point of view. The reasons you say why you don't use this software (which you still don't have to) are for me like saying "I don't play MSFS, because I don't like the installation process".

Yes, I bound it to the pinky button of my flight stick 🙂 But like you said, it's not the default drone but CPs own version.

Which proves my point, that ChasePlane is either "ALL on" or "ALL off". They can't use the default drone, they had to create their own. Because the camera system is completely separate from default. But what you quoted, in case you misunderstood: The existance of 3rd party software like ChasePlane doesn't take anything away from anybody. Don't need it? Don't buy or use it. But don't say "it shouldn't exist, because I don't need it" - other people appreciate having it. It's like saying I don't need whatever brand of your car you drive, so nobody else needs it and it shouldn't exist. (It just doesn't make sense to be against it) But one question: What do you miss from the default drone what ChasePlane in your opinion can't replicate? Huh? Older sims offered more possibilties regarding the camera even without ChasePlane. One thing ChasePlane can't even recreate nowadays but older sims could: Attach to AI / multiplayer traffic.

Nope. I try to explain it better, in case of it's not clear what an API is. It's an interface for 3rd party developers to interact with the sim. In this example, the camera. If such an API exists, I just can "piggybick" on it and can access all ingame cameras like you as a user and can manipulate it. But this API does not exist in MSFS. So //42 used tricks to manipulate the camera in MSFS without relying on Asobo, Microsoft or a software interface to MSFS. Yes, ChasePlane can disable itself. But like you said, its "ALL off" or "ALL on". You can't just disable it "partly", that's now how these things work. It will only work if Asobo implements this interface for developers, and if they do: Chances are high many other tools pop up, creating exactly the things you want (maybe even as freeware on .to) or like you said, //42 improves ChasePlane to work in conjunction with the default. But that's not how it is right now. This import box? It exists for quite some time🙂

Obviously, people need features that ChasePlane brings, even users who don't want to use ChasePlane, as shown on this thread. So a bit contradicting. Asobo should be "enough" to develop everything neccessary, yet they just did not. But the frustration is now dedicated towards ChasePlane or it's developers instead of Asobo. This doesn't make much sense, sorry. 3rd party software like ChasePlane don't take anything away, they just add stuff (for people who buy on a voluntary basis) so I certainly don't get the attitude "I don't need it, so nobody else should".