Jump to content

SimeonWilbury

Members
  • Content Count

    297
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

220 Excellent

About SimeonWilbury

  • Rank
    Martin Richards
  • Birthday 12/01/2001

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Interests
    Non-Standard approaches (Kai Tak, Toncontin) & Classic Jetliners

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

About Me

  • About Me
    Hi, I'm Martin. I'm a Student residing in the UK with an interest in flight simulation. Currently using P3D v5.3

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. WIth it having been this long I think it's safe to say we've been abandoned at this point.
  2. For an MD80 in P3D I can only recommend the Leonardo Maddog, still a really stellar aircraft.
  3. A few thoughts on my end Iirc the shallower bank-rate was(?)/ is to maintain climb performance on the LHR-BAH routings? Or at least that was the intention. There doesn't seem to be much impact on climb performance with HDG-hold method in your case, but I'd be interested to see this on a heavier-loaded aircraft in case it makes any difference I think you might also be able to do the equivalent to the HDG-hold without engaging the Heading hold by setting the INS to 'manual' so it doesn't change waypoints as early. Same effect I think but no changing modes on the AFCS. I don't use an EFB (beyond navigraph charts) or anything that makes me worry about whether I get registered as 'hitting' waypoints or not so it doesn't bother me (and the curves look nice on the ground-track to me lol), so not much of an issue to me personally, but if they can get some fine-tuning into the next update that makes things more accurate I'm all for it. I've no idea how things were calibrated in the actual aircraft so I'm speaking from a certain level of ignorance.
  4. Well, they intend to make a MSFS version and their dev effort seems to be primarily going into MSFS ports, I think I can gather that much, though they are unclear as to whether the bulk of the effort is going into Concorde or the A32x. With FSL time-frames I wouldn't expect anything soon in the conventional sense; I imagine they will maybe try to push the airbusses out first before concorde but there is already a very saturated market for Airbusses on MSFS so I don't know how well that will turn out.
  5. At least the GPS spoofing would be no problem for Concorde, given it doesn't have one 😆
  6. I'll need to do a few more custom routes to have a look (so far just Bahrain to Hong Kong via Bangkok), though I haven't had too much problem resetting the accel/ decel points, the VCS seems to follow it more or less ok. The documentation does definitely still show the 'original' points, which I ignore.
  7. Supersonic over land was added a little back, you can modify the acceleration and decelration points in the HPLX when loading a custom route.
  8. I had a problem a little while ago having not touched the sim for 6+ months where nothing in Chaseplane worked. If I remember rightly I had something weird going on with simultaneous versions of Chaseplane installed on my PC, at least one of which was completely bricked and wouldn't connect to P3D. It's still a little buggy for me to this day (every time I launch Orbx it wants to update it) but it's worked since I got rid of the offending duplicate. I'm not sure if my symptoms were quite the same as yours, but it might be worth sniffing around your files/ registry in case there is another version hanging around like I found. It is possible that something in ORBX Central is causing it to break in some way.
  9. Didn't have any problems on my end, If you're still having trouble, I can send you the .zip file and the afcad I made with the updated exclusions (assuming a v5 install) if you'd like. If installing for v5 you will need to create a fake v4 install so the installer runs.
  10. Thinking pure stability, v4.5 is probably the best option as it's less prone to using up all your VRAM than v5 is, otherwise I would recommend v5 for giving better performance and slightly better visuals.
  11. Oh wow, I am really happy to see this! Sometimes I'm reminded just how lovely the flight sim community can be at times; this being one of those!
  12. Hm, it does apparently give some custom airport markings and the such, although I can't seem to find that much specifici information as to the airports on there. If it's just changing up the markings and not really changing up the buildings/ textures much I might just go with NZAA
  13. And indeed in my searches, there just so happens to be a Legacy FSX Scenery for NFFN, offered for free as it's no longer supported. Threw that into the sim, redid the exclusions via ADE, and now I have a pretty decent Nadi scenery. Would be nice to see this from more former FSX/ P3D developers.
  14. Yes, I was thinking about that one too potentially, although 6000ft is probably pushing it a bit for Concorde in terms of runway length. I think they did up until the end of last year, so I think I missed the boat for that. I'm not against trying the latter though I do try to avoid that when I can.
  15. From what I can tell the Developer retired, and no longer wanted to offer any support. I can understand the not wanting to offer support anymore, but I'm generally more than happy to use scenery without any support. I might just buy Flightbeam's NZAA scenery instead and use that in place of NZCH, not the same airport but would be nicer than flying into default.
×
×
  • Create New...