mtrainer

Members
  • Content count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About mtrainer

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

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

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Chicago

About Me

  • About Me
    Flight Sims since the C64 to PDMG and everything inbetween. RC Aircraft Flyer. Flown a KC-10 Singer-Lync simulator twice at Barksdale AFB in Bossier City, Louisiana. B.S. in Computer Science in 1988 - Software Engineer for Fortune 100 firms ever since. Flown a Cessna a few times briefly.

Recent Profile Visitors

748 profile views
  1. Oculus Rift V2 has to be right around the corner - anyone thinking about one should probably wait a few months. I read their website last year regarding applicants, and they are assembling a cracker-jack team (Phd level in multiple fields) and I'm feeling confident their next product will be high desirable. Give it a couple of months. Mark Trainer
  2. Also welling up a bit, I am so sorry. At a loss for words. Mark Trainer
  3. Active Sky 16 for Prepar3d P3Ev4 for me w/ REX Direct s/ w Soft Clouds seems to work perfectly- old enough to have all the bugs worked out and works just as expected / advertised. Mark
  4. Well, there is an advantage to having it in digital form - the search function makes quick work searching for a particular term. Mark
  5. And happy new year from the United States, where everything that could happen in 2017, did happen in 2017. Hoping for a much calmer and stable 2018. Mark Trainer
  6. Exactly Kyle. And since I'm straight out of surgery for gallbladder removal forgive me if I get rambunctious, I'm full of the good stuff. If converting a plane from FSX to Prear3D were not much more than a simple port, you might have the beginnings of an argument for a cheaper upgrade path. Anyone who develops complex software knows the nuances involved in what the average user might conceive as being "minor". But the last 10% of any software engineering project is the hardest. There was a post a few weeks ago that I summed up as, "The FSX platform must die, so that future aircraft on modern Flight Simulator Platforms will become cheaper for all of us." Supporting multiple code bases across multiple flight simulators will eventually become as difficult as supporting multiple simulations across multiple operating systems. You can have it done best on the top of the line simulation platform (Prepard3D), or dumb it all down to support obsolete technology (FSX - last updated....I don't even recall). Let's please drop FSX, which is a dead product, and embrace the future- Lockheed Martin's Prepar3D platform, and if you want to take that realism to the next step go get the best add-on aircraft available for it, PMDG products. Go big or go home. Mark Trainer
  7. I have that same list of products, but I never run AI traffic over 5%. Guess I'm a bit of a loner. I'm on a NVIDIA 1050ti, 24 GB system RAM, an SSD, Windows 10....but....the main system (CPU 3.0 GHZ / Motherboard) is approaching 9 years old....so take my input with a grain of salt but when on approach to some airports I've seen the frame rate fall to 8 FPS. Yeah it bites, gonna build a new rig w/ the tax refund in a couple of months though. My guess is that the ORBX "Region" isn't going to hit you that hard - at least I never noticed they did but I've heard Southern California (which I also have) can be a bit tough. But your system seems to be doing all the heavy lifting as it is, adding a region shouldn't send your rates into the gutter. Wish I could give you more specifics, but all systems are different and everyone runs a different set of slider settings. Good Luck! Mark
  8. Actually, Not a bad suggestion here so far. I hope they eventually get around to implementing all of these suggestions / fixes. Mark
  9. This year I decided to upgrade the control inputs, and in 2018 and going to build a new rig to properly support the quality hardware inputs. But in 2017 I went with this setup, which I mostly use for PDMG 737 flying: Joystick: The HOTAS Warthog with the crosswinds 4.5" metal extension (allows more fidelity and reduces the amount of force needed to move the stick). HOTAS WARTHOG throttle, a serious piece of gear for throttles, with metal toggle switches, etc. A mechanical keyboard with LEDs under each key. Kind of cool but it is a noisy keyboard. Crosswinds rudder pedals. Admittedly, they are used on takeoffs and landings for the most part, but what a great piece of gear. A bit pricey, but you'll never find yourself buying another pair of pedals, ever. Am pretty happy with this setup, but it wasn't the cheapest route to go, by any means. Mark
  10. I suspect, with some effort, I could indeed get FS2004 up and running on Windows 10, but it doesn't seem worth the hassle anymore. And I'm a software engineer by day- and I'm still to lazy to bother with it. This spring the tax refund is going to fund an all new PC (I think this one is nearly 9 years old! Although it has some upgrades like NVIDIA 1050ti, 24 GB of RAM, and a SSD) and am hoping for a much improved frame rate. It's just my simple opinion of course, but Prepar3D V4 feels like a superset of FS2004 / FSX / FSX Steam, as well as Prepar3D V1-V3. The reasons for hanging onto the older stuff are starting wane. This coming from a 50s-ish curmudgeon who generally hates change! Mark Trainer
  11. KevinH has a good point, if developers are free from having to develop multiple versions for older, less capable platforms, it simply takes away time they could be spending giving more goodies in the top of the line version of the product. This, from a fellow who flew 2004 FS for nearly 10 years (Level-D 767).....even though I had FSX during most of that time the FSX platform felt like a stutter-fest. The high frame rates in 2004 version allowed for some of the best landings I've ever accomplished in a sim. Nothing like high frame rates for landings! Anyhow, my vote is to drop FSX, old versions of Prepar3D, and once we're all on the same page the add-on community will start delivering new features in spades. I'm on Windows 10 and I can't even get MS FS 2004 to work any more and I think FSX (boxed version) is busted too. Not worrying about it. Mark Trainer
  12. Yes I agree- just finished watching it, funny thing is- before he started it up the crowd was right up against the tape, once it started to kick in, they all backed off down the hill a bit! Mark Trainer
  13. I had Ezdok for about a year, and now have Chaseplane - it's a lot easier to setup for sure. It does everything I need. With enough effort, either one can be made to suit your needs. Mark
  14. Greenbrier Resort in WV rocks! Mark Trainer
  15. When I first switched from FSX to Prepar3D, my hope was that many of the add-ons would have been replicated in some way under the umbrella of the main Flight Simulator code base by Prepar3D itself. I believe this would lead to less bugs because the same development team would be working on, and testing, the code all working together. By allowing 3rd party products supply large parts of the functionality, things will never be 100% stable. 20 times a second (or more for some of you), you've got a main loop running through millions of lines of code...in some ways it is a miracle it works at all. Add in an ever changing Operating System, which seems to continually favor the newest motherboards and BIOS, and you've got yourself setup for a pretty "iffy" set of conditions. I always reboot my PC prior to any flying, and I would recommend this to anyone else out there too. Even Froogle on you tube frooglesim once said he generally reserves one day of the week for just "fiddling" with Prepar3D and all the add-ons. It's a high-maintenance piece of software for certain, but as someone pointed out earlier, when it works it's absolutely stunning and beautiful. I would like to see Prepar3D bring into the fold a camera system worthy of not requiring an add-on, and a dynamic weather system also worthy of not requiring an add-on. After that, enhanced scenery and airports. I suppose the package would cost more but I believe that by having all the software managed from one team, the bugs would be fewer and the platform more stable. My two cents. Mark Trainer