JJ_

Thanks @hs118!

I got the Azupoly Bronco and they did a very nice job on it, but I'm having trouble figuring out what to assign the throttle and prop axis to in Spad.NEXT for the Honeycomb Bravo. If anyone has done this, I'd appreciate some guidance. Thanks!

While not the answer I was dreaming of, YES it makes total sense. Thanks @btacon for nice explanation! While on the subject, is the lack of the TDS GTNXi / AP VNAV (automated) integration due to the APs not being up to par on MSFS? For example, Working Title made significant GPS / AP VNAV automation progress, so I know it can be done.

I'd appreciate it if anyone can help me with this question. Which airplane(s) with the TDS GTNXi Virtual Cockpit integration have an autopilot with working VNAV functionality?

Wow! Do let us know if you find out!

Love this story, LOL! When I decided to get VR it was mainly to exercise at home, but when I tried it on MSFS, I went to all my VR friends and complained why no one told me how awesome an experience it is, what a HUGE difference it makes for situational awareness, helicopter flying, much better approaches, landing and pattern flying, instrument panel awareness, as well as the sense of vertigo you get in real life, OMG its a game changer!

ohh, that's 2 votes for this one with the TDS as an added bonus, thanks!

100% agree, I couldn't land helicopters until VR!

Oh man, this a great list, thanks for this feedback!!!

Exactly!!!

Now that we can use Navigraph with the TDS GTNXi, I'm considering this plane. I'm looking for a good cross-country option with an advanced autopilot. Thanks!

Yes, I agree 100%, its like being at freaking museum! All that's missing is that old cabin smell lol.

I didn't know about a Bronco freeware. I loved that plane for its awesome cockpit view in P3D, so I must try it in MSFS VR, thank you!

I have that aircraft and with that bubble canopy, you are right, its great to fly it around the mountains, because in 2D you don't get the sense of vertigo you get in VR. Additionally, when I flew it in 2D, the eyepoint seemed too high but in 3D it just makes sense it being that high.

I recently acquired VR goggles, and after trying out some of my aircraft, a few have stood out as I got into the cockpit because I had that WOW! moment. So far for me, the DC-3 was one that I felt 2D doesn't quite do it justice, it is such big difference in 3D! It got me thinking about getting feedback in case I am missing out on an aircraft I don't currently own. Please share which aircrafts give you that WOW! moment in VR? Thank you!

For those of you wanting to upgrade to a new PC and wanting to purchase the new MSFS2024 game, consider holding off if you can/want to see what the hardware requirements will be. Depending on what Asobo / MS do (i.e. online gaming), you may not need to spend as much money, but if things stay status quo, the new graphics requirements may increase. Just something to consider if you want to play the new MSFS2024 game.

Like others have said, I also have the i9-13900KF with the ARTIC Liquid Freezer II 420 and you absolutely DON'T need or want to OC this baby since it runs at 5.5 already. For MSFS2020, I have everything turned up and CPU is doing fine. The one thing I did have to do is to limit the wattage (in the BIOS) to Intel specs to keep it from running too hot. This is an issue with motherboards not limiting to specs by default nowadays.

The number of download managers required to install mods is increasing. Pro's: Helpful for non-computer savvy folks (maybe) Helps me manage mod updates to know if I have the latest and easier to install Con's Too many so now I have to track which one to use depending on the mod Some of them are poorly designed so they are confusing to use More applications on my computer! More Ads and marketing More User License Agreements to understand and keep track of If you have a lot of addons and you are not careful, you could buy the same mod from 2 different Addon Managers I'm curious what others think of this trend?

On one hand, competition is good, but on the other, GA developers are not quite getting to the A2A level yet. Regarding Carenado, there has been lots of wishful thinking of them teaming up with a developer who could add realism into the systems since they started developing eye-candy...I mean aircraft, but if I recall right they had no interest and I can't blame them since it would just complicate things for them and they are doing just fine. Thinking outside the box, I'd like to see developers' only conventions to discuss teaming up and propose their next projects to each other to keep moving the realism bar higher and if they don't agree, then back to competing.

@Jocko Flocko, you beat me to posting the same. I had been thinking about RealAir as I flew ALL their aircraft almost exclusively, but I am disappointed that no one has mentioned the SF260 Marchetti. I flew that one and the Citabria, Decathlon and Scout and then on to the two versions of the Duke and the wonderful Legacy. All are greatly missed! I'm frankly surprised that given their popularity, no MSFS developer has created any of those airplanes yet. It would be a no-brainer as a lot of us would likely buy them mostly based on the longing for the experience (given they are decent). Anyway, thanks for the memory-lane post, it brought on a smile and dare I say almost a tear 🙂.

If you are good with waiting, its always better to "pull the trigger" as late as possible to take advantage of the latest and greatest options, as well as the reduced prices on prior options (depends on your budget). I waited 7+ years and just built a PC with "the best" of everything available right now, so now I'm going to see how long I can keep the new system 🙂

In general, I find this to be more of a sim issue rather than a specific aircraft albeit, it affects small planes more. IMO, crosswind effects on takeoff and landings need tuning to better reflect reality. I am guessing that aircraft developers are getting around this by making aircraft adjustments. Having said that, I don't expect this will be given attention by Asobo for a while, so your best bet is to give this feedback to the aircraft developer and see if they can adjust it.

I can't speak for VR, but after 7+ years, I just built a system (1st time building). I went from an i7-4790K, MSI 1080ti with 32GB RAM (with 4 monitors 1080p) to a i9-13900KF, Gigabyte 4090 with 32MB DDR5 RAM (with 4 monitors 1080p). The 4090 was not available for several months, so used my 1080ti with the new system and wow, it was a huge difference even without the new graphics card. MSFS is still very CPU dependent, so that's where I noticed a difference. My original system was bottlenecking on the CPU. With the new CPU and 1080ti, it bottlenecked on the GPU and now with the 4090, the bottleneck is back on the CPU. I was putting money away for 7 years, so my goal was to buy the best possible hardware, so it can last me a long time while I save over the years for the next one. I hope that helps. Feel free to reach out if you need more specifics, glad to help if I can.

Great, thanks!

Hi @Bert Pieke, thanks for sharing your mods. The WT team recommends we use the default G3X instead of the "legacy" WT G3X mod. Is your mod only for the WT G3X mod?