SirBismuth

GSX works fine on my low-end laptop (Intel HD Graphics etc.), but haven't tried Level 2 though.

I have used PMDG and iFly's 737 successfully on low-end systems. Note that there will be an issue if combined with payware scenery, and even certain freeware scenery, when your FPS goes down the toilet, but generally had no issues.

Indeed, I currently only have FlyTampa Amsterdam, but do plan on expanding my library with FT airports.

Oh hell, it's too late for that, it hasn't even been released yet, and people have shredded FSW!

I only fly tubeliners in FSX, and would like to do the same in FSW. However, don't mind waiting... but not too long. Hopefully will be able to fly something of PMDG-quality, if they end up not developing for FSW.

I had the same type of freeze/panel lockup as in the 2011 post, which PMDG support suggested it could be a corrupt panel state, amongst others. I have switched to another one, and so far no freezes, but haven't flown much with the alternate state, so will see with time.

Ok, no problem, that does make sense then.

I would also like to know who else, besides PMDG, have made such a public statement? In any case, it's not a big deal, make it available on the Steam Store, with the required markup to cover the respective costs, and on your store without said markups. Obviously you will sell more through your own store then, than on Steam. I have no connection to DTG, but I haven't read anywhere that you can't do this as a dev

Lol, indeed. I was merely referencing something at the same standard as PMDG's aircraft, can you imagine?

I have not seen the stream yet, but will also join the "positive gang". As I stated elsewhere on this forum, I hope that FSW is a success and becomes a worthy replacement for FSX. Early days yet.

I agree with AirCanda235 here, a sim at PMDG's standards would blow all the others out the water!

Heh, I agree here. I only went with the NGX. because I wanted a fully functional 737. However, the 737 was a good "demo" for the T7, which has recently arrived in my hangar! :D

I am not a dev, nor do how know how the business works, so bear with me here. I develop an aircraft for FSW, and sell it from $150 in my storefront. Now, as per the EULA or whatever agreement is in place, I have to also make it available on Steam. I can't price it at $150, as DTG and Steam will take their cut (60% in total, if I remember correctly, and if I work it out correctly, comes to about $92-94). That means as opposed to the full $150 I get from my storefront, I now get about $56 per sale. However, if I am allowed to adjust the price, then I can increase the Steam price with at least $50-75 (depending on my margins, which I think in game development, are pretty narrow). If this price adjustment for Steam is NOT allowed, then I wouldn't touch FSW with a barge pole, unless my storefront sales can cover the losses made on Steam sales. Just my layman's analysis of the scenario. C&C allowed, no need to sugar coat.

Never had this issue with PMDG's website. Then again, never "sampled" their products, so can't say. I wonder if I don't know you, had a friend who initially straight refused to buy the T7 from PMDG, and "borrowed" from a site. Needless to say, he had endless hassles, engine failures, etc.. The good to come out it, is that he bought the darn thing, and has been flying happily every since. Then again, maybe I don't know you, as he bought a legit copy of the jet.

Yes, would be great if there was also a YT video of the Twitch stream, for those of us who can't/don't make it. Are 3rd Party developers going to be required to sell their product on Steam as well, or would that be optional? Will the SDK be freely available? I want to fly an airliner as realistic as PMDG's NGX and T7, for example, will I be able to do this in FSW? That is all I can think of for now, apologies if I repeated a question already asked in this thread.

This has been an interesting thread. I really hope that FSW gets the success it deserves, and joins the likes of P3D and XP as a major contender. However, a key requirement for me is that I can buy PMDG products for it (Steam or otherwise, doesn't matter to me), as well as for other payware addons that I currently use in FSX. As far as I understand, they are not restricting developers to Steam, but are requiring them to use that distribution channel as well. Correct me if I misunderstand here. The beauty I have found in the various iterations of FS I have used, but primarily FS9 and FSX, is how much you can customize them. I can download free or payware addons as I desire, or if I want to keep the defaults, can do that as well. That is key to the success or failure of FSW, imho.

I like to keep it as realistic as possible on the approach. I will switch to outside views during cruise and boring parts of the flight, to admire my aircraft and scenery, but once descending tend to stay in the cockpit, especially when IFR (which virtually all my flights in the NGX are). Of course, If I am self-vectoring, I usually use the ND in conjunction with looking out the window, to setup the approach (don't really like switch to outside few in such cases, as the cockpit workload is fairly high). I might briefly switch to outside view to assist with situational awareness if required, but not for long. For Visual Approaches, I use a combination of the ND and external references, and obviously once on final, the PAPI lights to maintain glideslope. In the absence of PAPI, I usually pick a point on the runway to aim to, so can sometimes land a little bit long, or even hard. Not really an issue with the longer runways, but can get interesting on the shorter ones. In such a case, I am looking inside and outside (out the cockpit window, not camera view) the whole time to verify my position. Once I've touched down, I might briefly switch to outside view to visually verify spoiler deployment. That is basically my procedure (on switching views) when approach and landing either IFR or VFR.

I use FSX Boxed, and everytime I install a new addon, it asks me if I want to run the DLL just that one time, or every time FS is started (I obviously choose the latter). Just read the popup, which will guide you to run it everytime without the popup.

I had something similar to FAGG. Once I realized that I could be making acquantaince with the nearby mountain range, I ignored the descent instruction, and only descended to the requested alttitude AFTER clearing the mountains. Besides repeating themselves a few times, ATC continued as normal after that, as if I HADN'T delayed responding to their descent instruction. This was FSX and Pro ATC/X. Since then, they haven't tried to fly me into any mountains, got me rather close to them into KLAS, but not enough to even trigger the EGPWS, but did have me eyeing the yellow and red blocks on my terrain radar.

Lol, #3 will have the entire plane gunning for the relevant pax, not just Airport Security!

Why do you think that statistics indicate that you chance of having an accident on the way to the airport, are considerably higher than being involved in an aviation accident? This idea in human control would be a disaster. It will have to be automated with almost zero human interaction/control. I feel much safer in the air, than I do on the ground. Take my commute this morning into account, 90% of those people can barely drive, can you imagine them FLYING to work???

Interesting commentary on the whole situation with United: https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/

I had a response from PMDG's Support within a day, and also quick response to subsequent communication the same ticket. My issue appeared to have resolved itself, but have absolutely no complaints about PMDG Support.

I am on UAL's side here, they gave pax the chance to volunteer, no one did, so they, or the computer, randomly chose four people, as I understand. The other 3 deplaned, this one refused to, so the forcibly removed him. Does it not state somewhere in the Ts&Cs that they can ask to to leave, with or without assistance, for pretty much any reason? However, this is indeed going to be a PR nightmare for United, and this guy will probably get a pile of cash from them as a result. I worked for a local regional airline that had a server dedicated to calculating how much they can overbook a flight by. I somehow doubt they are the only one that does this. The airlines do this so that they can get their flights as full as possible. As already stated in this thread, that works 99% of the time, for the other 1%, you have pax that are denied boarding, usually at the gate/checkin, or in this case, dragged off the flight.

I agree, use AIRNAV for all my US flights, it's an invaluable resource.