mSparks

Because .org was intended for use by not for profit organisations.

It really was, first one so far Ive sat and watched pretty much from start to finish with not much in the way of a break. This is what really turned me against the org and brought me here.... LR really encourage tinkering and learning by experience, org seems to do the opposite, oh its too hard dont even try, dont touch my sh.. etc etc. Her back story is exactly what 2022 needs to hear more of, and not just in flight sim. Most of todays good paying jobs didnt exist 10 years ago. Someone even told me today, John Lennons answer to the question "what do you want to be when you grow up" was "happy"..... Before I wrote the next sentence, I suspect I was one of only a very few who is insanely excited for.... The scenery deep dive entry... Welcome to my impatience lol.

I also find "your mum" jokes hilarious. Glad you were entertained. 😇

hmmm, that sounds like an easy assumption to make, but I haven't really seen it materialise. PMDG haven't exactly given MSFS heaps of undue praise, I don't think anyone is under any illusion that xplane is or will be a AAA blockbuster anytime soon. I ran into a decent gist that reflected a lot of my personal experience in the key differences between the two just this week. Its heavy developer talk and not flight sim specific, but everything in here is likely why I - personally - won't end up devving for ms. https://gist.github.com/slimsag/c01bb6508e3dfa744bf3bdafa0cfe07f Even if it does go the distance. What I do see, (and I do try to avoid myself) is a lot of wrong and untrue statements, and a lot of "defensiveness" - from all isles. But hey, we are all so married to our flight sims our PCs earned themselves the nickname "divorce rigs"... Saying bad things about anothers sim - even when true - sits somewhere between insulting someones wife and "your mum" jokes. As for XP12 specifically. I suspect the fuss is mostly because this stuff will "soon" be a reality rather than marketing BS. And anyone not worked up into a dizzy fuss about that isnt a real flight simmer imho.

I think Philipp is probably my favourite of the LR staff, it really seems to be his attention to detail and real world experience that contributes so significantly to setting XP apart from the competition. (I'm one of his few hundred YT subscribers..) So happy to see him sharing that more publically. Hooo Raa. He's also a pleasure to listen to once he gets going.

kinda, I was more on FSX up to XP11.10 (when they did the real world data logging & matching vs the Bell 206), went back to FSX shortly after when all that got broken, didn't do much on flight sim at all up until early/mid 2018 when I ran into the ATC barriers (needed lots of ATC practice, didn't want to spend $750 for 5 minutes of practice - AutoATC was born to overcome that hurdle), passed my PPLH end of 2018, discovered VR around the same time, didn't get a VR setup really usable until XP11 was finished several years later. Now, among other general flight sim interests I have some kind of VR flight in XP at least a couple of times a week when I'm in the home office, and do sparky744 stuff while listening to various reports/conferences.

just never got into it, I went FSX->XP10->XP11->PPLH->XP12 Not really an airliner guy pre 744, but know enough to say the PMDGs on P3D deserves their price and reputation.

Well. maybe not everyone would. However as far as I'm concerned FSX is still the better flight simulator in a head to head between FSX and MSFS. FSX is one of very few applications I actually miss not having a windows machine of my own anymore. Sure its old, and has significant problems that could never be fixed, but at least it had the basics pinned down. I think microsofts biggest mistake was actually trying to compete with Laminar on the flight dynamics, just updating the art assets for FSX and leaving most everything else the same would have been infinitely better than breaking everything and then doing nothing well. But, the need to get it on the xbox trumped sanity. At least the light they shone on XP in that process means that XP12 should end up getting the recognition it deserves.

There is only 6 months of 2022 left and they have no plans for 2023. huh? no, missing non aviation specifics is a very different problem. One that is, was and should only be addressed once the basics of flight simulation are rock solid. What I see in MSFS is the typical "when you have a hammer" problem. Their suits, who only care about graphics, looked at XP11s scenery, decided they could do better, and that meant it would be better. Oblivious to the absolute fact that most scenery is among the least important aspects of a flight simulator - FSX was competitive with XP up until very recently and it doesnt even have global scenery....

correcting for wind and turbulence is exactly why it takes a lot of practice. Also entirely possible to fly a helicopter a lot of sideways even with no wind.

The key factor is MVFR, I even bolded it for you, nothing clearly stands out - even 3d objects, you can barely see the ground directly underneath you and nothing further than about 3 nm away. As I said - its NOT about the navigation - its a question flying accurately and precisely when all you can see of the area is soup and you have no other aids to assist you. And no, you are not going to remember 100 VRPs on a 300nm trip you never did before, there may not even be one for 100nm or more, huge chunks of the world are just 100s of miles of non descript fields, hills and forests with no civilisation of note and you are out of radio contact while you are there. Justify to yourself that such basic "aviation buildings" were so low on their priorities list they still are not in years after launch with only 6 months left of budget all you want. Just dont expect me to call it a serious innovative flight simulator created by people that had the first clue about aviation, Im too busy spending time on a flight simulator that is both serious and innovative, created by awesome people with decades of experience of pushing the entire genre forward, who have saved countless lives doing so and also offer all of that at a price even teenagers with no income other than a paper round can afford.

IMHO, people get very very vested in their flight sim - and not just because getting them set up is a complete nightmare time sink even when "ease of use" is very high priority (which isn't a criticism - it is absolutely true - imho - that MS sims have a much lower barrier to entry than XP probably ever will, and that is great for those first few hours ever in a flight sim, or just "something different"). Easy to get overly defensive to "flight sim politics" is probably the most extreme of any computer related politics, but very different than something like XBOX vs Playstation - mostly because on balance its old timers bringing the pitchforks out, rather than teenagers.. Doesn't mean we can't navigate it, and all try hard to be objective trying to understand the best way to get the most out of all this awesome tech.

PPL radio navigation requirements are theoretical only afaik 061.08.03.00 VOR 061.08.03.01 Principles x x 061.08.03.02 Presentation and interpretation x x 061.08.03.03 Coverage x x 061.08.03.04 Range x x 061.08.03.05 Errors and accuracy x x 061.08.03.06 Factors affecting range and accuracy x RNAV stuff is IFR/CPL - doesn't mean you wont learn/use it, - just its not tested in flight for PPL. No one on the core MSFS team got that far..... I wouldn't say I had any problems with it - but I did a large number of hours in XP practising it and learning all the reasons why the VOR/NDB doesn't appear right in front of you after 15 mins+ coping with turbulence in poor vis. Not being in the sim was never one of those reasons... One of my favourite feelings in the sim was when they would persistently pop out of the fog a couple of degrees left or right.