JohnH90

Thanks I will take a look. For the reheat times it was just purely a comparison with the Concorde X. Ive only really done the comparisons at those weights so far. I will have do some more in time. Didn’t realise that Vr was so low at those weights. Always assumed it to be around 170 knots. Thanks again

The plus is just the name given to the product that Navblue produces.

Is that a solar eclipse in the last imagine?! I used to play around in fs2000 trying to get the 1999 eclipse to happen. 😂 Great to see the charts being included as well as Navdata. Navblue might sound like a new company but you should look up the history but parts have been around for quite a while in various forms.

Hello, Thanks for your insight. This is exactly the sort of reply I hoped to get from others. It looks like I’m in the right ballpark with this then. The reheats do have to be cancelled manually and they have to be cancelled well before 1:20 in order to stay below 250 at those weights. I said I would try to give the developer more constructive criticism directly in future but it’s very difficult to find resources that go into this much detail. I’m hardly going to just send the FSlabs manual and tutorial. Are you aware of any websites or books that might contain the relevant info, performance graphs etc? Thanks

Hello I mainly post over in the other forum but I thought it might be useful to get as many peoples inputs as possible on this aircraft . My reference to compare this add on is the Concorde X for P3d but I also have various bits of knowledge I’ve collected over the years from all sorts of books and videos. Firstly the developer is promising a new update after X plane 11.50 comes out of beta with more autopilot functions which I look forward to. The one major thing that’s bothering me however is the performance of the aircraft. Correct me if I’m wrong but with 93 tonnes of fuel and a full passenger load I should not be hitting 190 knots after 30 seconds? Also it’s rather easy to bust 250 knots at 20 degrees pitch up with these weights. The engine power entered into plane maker looks correct but the plane seems over powered. Unfortunately the developer and many users don’t seem to be aware of any issue with the flight dynamics. As I said on the other forum, it would be nice to have an aircraft that handles like the real thing, not just something that handles like people think the aircraft used to fly. E.g behaving like a rocket at MTOW.

Why does the 747 look like it’s in space in those screenshots. It looks like one of those bad photoshops of something that’s meant to be from space. Even with the sun so low on the sky, it does not look like that from 36000 feet

I think you might be correct. The only issue i'd have with that is that even at initial condition, the models can be wrong when you're talking on a local scale. I suppose its still better than creating the weather from METAR's. Active sky is supposed to be accurate, maybe on a regional scale yea but its still not that great.

I’m a little confused by this update. Are they saying FS2020 will have forecasted weather as well as real time? One thing I’d say is that the lightning looks like slow motion.

The poor AA is making me hold off too. Seriously needs improving soon.

Apologies for the double post, i realised the two were different things. I was getting more at the head movement. Sorry but small stuff like that should be in from the start in my opinion. I really do hope DTG the best, im a massive fan of train sim and as much as people shoot it down i think its great. Lets see how this goes. I got my refund but i may purchase if i see improvement.

They really need to add the head bob effects back into the cockpit. Its a minor thing but as their brilliant rain effect show, its minor things that make a huge difference.

They really need to add the G effects or head bob effects back into the cockpit. Its a minor thing but as their brilliant rain effect show, its minor things that make a huge difference.

I thought i might stick with it but I've requested refund. The more i use it the more things annoy me. Even basic things such as aircraft shadows don't work properly.

Oh yea it does. Its almost as if the game was made for this setting. The lighting looks right in this mode. I just wished it looked as good in the other weather.

Just trying out the missions. Not sure i'd call a pan pan on an engine failure! Its not too bad now i've messed around a bit. The sky colours are a bit disappointing but the ground stuff looks quite nice. Not bad for 20 quid, im going to keep this and see what happens in the next few months. Yea its not P3d with all of the add-ons etc but lets see.

Ive finally got the AA looking better through the usual methods and turned the LOD up in the CFG and it looks quite nice. Id love to see more FPS but considering the scenery density, its quite a smooth game.

Did you manage to get the AA looking good? If so how?

Its not bad but 3 things need attention. 1. The performance. 2. The sky textures, everything has a weird purple tint, and from high alt theres a strange brown haze. 3. Anti alias. Its terrible.

This sounds very petty but i think its an important part of the visuals. Will there be cloud shadows at all? Also will we see atmospheric scattering? The PTA tool for prepar3d added this to the game and it really does make you feel as if your flying at high alt.