Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BusheFlyer

  1. Heh sounds great.. but for that sort of dough I think I would rather spend it on avgas. Maybe some terrible weather over winter might change my mind.
  2. Yeah, definitely can't run the G1000 and G3000 mods together at the moment. 😕
  3. Sadly does not work for me.. the C208 screens are frozen when this is installed.
  4. Interesting.. I have no clue on why the control surfaces are responding as they do for me, I don't have any issues with the default aircraft. Just this one. It is basically too frustrating to actually fly because it is near impossible to maintain straight and level flight, it's either pitching up or down, if the nose is dropping, slight back pressure and instantly it 'jumps' to the up notch, forward pressure.. back to the down notch. There is absolutely no finesse.. it feels like there are about 4 deflections in all directions with nothing in between.
  5. I picked it up.. can't really attest to it's accuracy of flight model due to problem below, what I can say the landing gear is WAY too spongy, the sounds are so out of whack.. fuel pump is about 200% or greater too loud.. strange loud grinding noise on taxi. I refuse to even put the fuel pump on, because it so overpoweringly annoying. The flight model.. from what I can see this is very crude. The issue I have is the controls.. tiniest movement on elevators does not translate to anything other than a sudden jump up or down.. like the elevators are some how on a notch. You get absolutely no translation of small control inputs (slight back pressure for example). I have tried with response curves on yoke using FSUIPC but same deal. The ailerons and trim is also similarly effected. It is totally unrealistic. It seems that the controls are really coarse. I do not have this problem with any of the default aircraft. Very disappointed and this needs either an update or a refund.
  6. Scott, I can only go on my own experience of aircraft ownership (and the experience of aviation buddies) the fixed and operating costs are easy to assess from an affordability standpoint. The thing that gets you, is all the unexpected costs.. things like sudden oil leaks appearing.. because a seal has failed, dings in props needing filing, avionics playing up (crackly radios and so on). Most aircraft the majority of people own are old or near ancient machines which have in many cases changed hands a dozen times, little faults and snags come up all the time. I highly doubt you will find an aircraft owner that will make a financial argument to you about private ownership.
  7. So, your in a sim.. go to another airport and fly an ILS perhaps? You want to find something specifically that is not working great yet and pick that as the thing you must do just so you can whine and complain about it? Suspect this is a generational thing. Anyway it doesn't sound to me like your going to enjoy flying or flight simming at all, it is not for everyone. Have you consider train simulator?
  8. Currently, as far as I am aware.. the GPS is displaying RNAV fixes on the screen is it not? Yes the autopilot may or may not track them correctly. How exactly are you finding this impossible? What part of flying the procedure is giving you trouble? The approach plate will give you all the information you need to conduct the approach providing you have those fixes and can navigate to them.
  9. Why don't you elaborate that a bit more.. why not add to it.. "with an engine fire.." for extra effect? The answer to that question is you would do what you would do in real life when confronted with a problem, divert to a nearby ILS for your descent and then fly VFR above MSA to the RNAV only airport if weather permits. Read my post above.. I couldn't care any less about your experience going forward with MSFS.. perhaps you will continue to rant and rave on forums feeling impotent or perhaps you can learn some civility, and that you don't have to exaggerate everything you say.
  10. I'm happy with MSFS and you are not, in your world "totally broken".. I have tried to give you examples of how you can overcome the current limitations and gaps in your knowledge but instead you wish to persist in these childish responses and yet more instance that it's all broken. This is not going to go anywhere constructive.. so okay.. it's broken.. tough world kid, perhaps go do something fun.
  11. No, this has EVERYTHING to do with ability, this is not disingenuous, I have made it pretty clear because I am correct. There is no grey area here.. you are complaining about the GPS functionality being 'totally broken' and saying you can not use navaids or fly approaches as a result. I am telling you the fact that you are so dependent on the GPS is self evident that that is the only acceptable option you believe you have. I can do a full IFR flight plan just fine, I can do the approaches. The GPS is just not important to me. This is not brain science or some hidden art, this is basic rudimentary knowledge that anyone flying airways SHOULD have. Having a garmin do all the thinking for you is fine and acceptable but only if you know HOW it thinks. So in the meantime, whilst MSFS is developing and improving you might have to use your brain a bit more, is that such really such a bad thing to get all upset about? Look, I understand not all flight sim pilots really hold ATPL's or Instrument Ratings. In the real world, you can not pick up the knowledge to get one in a few hours of reading. Contrary to how some might think it to be, an IR is a bit more complicated than the instructor showing you how to select an approach on a garmin unit and press APR, thank you.. that will be $26,000 please. In the real world, that is the depth of knowledge you will need to fly airways (and if carrying paying passengers, you will need considerable experience in the right seat). In the sim world none of that is the case, yet people like to fly airways and do approaches without ever having real world experience or the appropriate training, which I am guessing is at the root of your current frustration. So perhaps I am being over harsh on you, I apologize.
  12. Elitist? Pilotage was taught to all students since before the war. Decades of accumulated aviation wisdom, that it was required that ALL pilots could draw upon to conduct safe and efficient flights. If today you are saying that it is 'Elitist' then I guess the warnings I heard many mention when GPS first appeared in the cockpit have come to pass. Turn off GPS and your lost.. you don't know what your cross track wind component is, you have no idea what your ETA is at your next way point. All because the simple and basic skills to tell you all of this have been deferred to a shiny glass screen. Elitist... Furthermore, why are you even bothering to worry about flying RNAV approaches? Because it is self-evident that you have no understanding on what an RNAV approach actually is. Your plan is to select an RNAV approach from the shiny screen and hit APR on the autopilot.. and convince yourself you have just flown an RNAV approach? Congratulations.. Any of the default planes that are in any way IFR capable.. can fly a successful RNAV approach as it stands.. they have working NAV/DME do they not? You understand how to get a fix using those right? You can even use the autopilot to follow a heading, and v/s mode to follow your rule of three to minimums. I am not espousing some elitist stuff. This is rudimentary knowledge that unless you understand how to do you have no business conducting RNAV approaches accept as a form of self-deceit that you can fly them. Sorry to be harsh, and yes this is just a simulator, but to hear the way you are complaining about the GPS and talking about RNAV approaches is ridiculous. Remember this, there are are entire generations of pilots who have crossed entire countries with pilotage, never once being lost, knowing this stuff wasn't the exception it was the rule..
  13. Very well, sounds like it is not for you. Probably best to forget the whole experience and try something else, after all, it wouldn't make any sense to spend your free time doing something you dislike so much.
  14. If it can be improved then sure.. but the flight planner works to do basic stuff. Personally I just use a sectional map because I am used to it (and probably a bit old fashioned), if IFR then JeppView for the plates and I am fine. Real world weather is superb and is working most of the time, the metar injection method is a huge step backwards IMHO. Metars are only accurate for the moment that it is taken and even then different stations will report inconstant cloud bases, there is nothing dynamic about that. What about weather over oceans? I agree the G1000 is limited.. There are some shortcomings which I am sure will be addressed, I am just puzzled however why some people think so much is wrong that they ignore all the good things. They say they can't do this and they can't do that.. that is just nonsense.. what they really mean is they can't automate this and they can't automate that. They have either forgotten how to fly or are so used to the ever increasing automation that they can no longer do without it.
  15. I think you are looking at what it not working as opposed to what IS working. All the planes have ALL of the critical systems modelled in some form.. the fact that some things like cabin heat or the cigar lighter might be marked (in-op) is really of no consequence. I fly in the real world and have done for coming up on half a century. I find MSFS to be very immersive, perhaps it's because I have many memories to fill in those blanks a bit.. I don't know, but I have been totally impressed with how good MSFS is.
  16. So modelling the entire planet, modelling 10's of thousands of airports and airstrips, 40+ scale 3D models of real aircraft, photogrammetry, the list goes on. It is an incredible achievement. Perhaps the issue is your expectations are set maybe a little too high. The weather, the flight models and so on will all improve over time. In terms of flightplanning.. my advice.. use a real sectional map and fly it like you would in real life. It has literally never ever been as easy or as good as this in order to plan a flight. Gone are landclass autogen cities and towns. Now you can visually see your waypoints in the photographic scenery. If you want to do IFR flights, then use skyvector perhaps and fly the route in the sim. Nothing stands in your way of doing that.
  17. Also another thought, if your concern is over the large passenger jets.. these are never realistic anyway. Nobody solo's a 747, intentionally anyway.
  18. In terms of community mods, they are definitely improving on the default stuff.. with the Garmins and such. But be wary of companies who rush products to market to meet the hype as a quick cash grab, especially companies who have a veritable army of shill accounts to constantly promote their products.
  19. I don't understand your comment at all. You don't need any mods or any third party tools. Plan a flight from your local airport, fly it with the default real world weather and look out the window. It is so close to real that is seriously impressive. I have repeated more than a dozen real world flights I have done in MSFS and everything from the aircraft sounds to what I see out the window really brought those memories back for me. When VR arrives it will be a massive step forward in this sim. I flew exclusively in VR in P3D, and as hard as it to go back to 2D I have enjoyed MSFS far more than I thought I would. I can't go back to 2D at all in P3D. Some people will never be happy I guess.
  20. What you are describing has not happened to me ever and I have around 88 hours in my logbook on the c208. I wonder if it something else causing it on your setup. Perhaps a control issue?
  21. Thankfully in light aircraft autopilots are superfluous.. just don't worry it and enjoy actual flying. I am sure in time they will straighten out these bugs.
  22. I have been playing with the AP climbing out on both FLC and VS, it functions exactly as I expected it to.. if you leave trim alone and just pull the aircraft with the yoke at your chosen speed then enable either mode.. the nose will instantly drop as expected until the aircraft trims itself.. it will then porpoise around whilst trimming out. If you however establish the climb at say 110kts trim it stable at that speed turning on AP will hold it as expected. The aircraft has only 1 elevator trim.. the thing you are describing is in a real aircraft the autopilot will be adusting the trim of the aircraft using servos.. the secondary effect is the trim wheel in the cockpit will also turn because it's linked by cables and pulleys. If you observe in MSFS you will see the wheel moving as the autopilot makes adjustments. The problem is with most simulator setups is you have a joystick axis (most likely a wheel) that only moves when you manually touch it. It does not move in sequence with whats happen on the aircraft unlike the real one. So if you disable the autopilot and touch the trim wheel it will cause the sim aircraft to suddenly react to whatever your trim was at prior.
  • Create New...