marsman2020

It was literally dead from 2006 until 2016-ish (assuming that's approximately when the the tech demos that became MSFS started). In fact I'd consider what happened with MS Flight to be worse than dead, where they came out with a new thing with my hype and fanfare about all the things it would do and then killed it again. Everyone should get out and enjoy this things and buy as much stuff from the Marketplace as you can afford, but I think it's really naive to think that it isn't subject to being killed again at any time if MS decides it's not in the interest of their business to continue it. And the consequences of such a decision would have a potentially much larger impact on our future enjoyment of the software given that a majority of the content streams down from the cloud.

Regardless of what MS says, unless the game is profitable I doubt they will continue to pay for a team of of developers, petabytes of cloud storage and bandwidth, and multiple external data sources that they have to pay to license. Everything is "critical to the company" until the instant it's not. That's how these tech companies operate. I bet they spent millions on the Kinect for XBox, and they canned it as soon as it wasn't profitable.

I thought I saw somewhere they said a million copies had been sold. $60-$120m in gross revenue depending on the mix of versions sold. However what really matters is the continuing sales on the Marketplace to provide a constant revenue stream. Recently Asobo broke the C182T and the Mooney with one of their "updates", and the Mooney still isn't fixed. I also noticed there have been no new Marketplace items the last couple of weeks. They need to get this stuff figured out, or the future won't be assured.

I don't think parking spots mean anyone touched an airport by hand. There is a bombing/gunnery target range near China Lake NAS in the desert military airspace near Barstow, CA that looks like an airport in terms of the footprint. In the sim it has an ICAO code (of another airport 1/2 way around the world) and parking spots. I highly doubt anyone manually created that. I think the Blackshark AI did it. I landed there one time just looking for the nearest runway to land at and I was like....this is a very weird and creepy shaped airport.... turns out it's a target range.... Also Attu Island, AK is uninhabited since 2010, but the Coast Guard station there has an ICAO code in the sim and has parking spaces and ambient aircraft there. As far as I know the only person to land there since 2010 was a person doing an around-the-world flight, and the island is infested with rats so overnight stays are not recommended.

I think you have to follow all the semi-broken ATC prompts for both Takeoff and Landing to get the logbook to reliably register.

Navblue is a product of Airbus and Asobo is a French company. Everything I have read indicates that Navblue's product is inferior and has errors/omissions even in the versions they sell to real pilots, so this is the only reason I can come up with. KLGB (closest thing I have to a home airport) has two runways that were removed in like 2016...still there in the sim.

This is on the Top 25 bugs list in the development blog every week. "Not started"/"Backlog". You would think they would spend the 5 min to fix it and get an easy win, but 6 updates in and it's not fixed.

Christ, the level of contortion people are willing to twist themselves into to make excuses for Asobo is just ridiculous. The updater is broken and causes constant problems for 100s of people every time a new patch comes out. Stuck downloads, downloading 1000x the patch size, it's a freaking bloodbath with every update. There is no 'domino effect of caching' or any BS like that. All of the caching is in the backend streaming content, not the installed game on someones PC or the servers hosting the content that is installed on someones PC. Except for the community folder and a very small number of settings files (menu options and controller settings), all that needs to happen is that the updater makes sure that the files on my PC match the current released files. When there is a patch, the current released files increment (all at once) and any deltas need to get downloaded. This is not rocket science, Steam has been doing it for games since Half Life 2 came out 16 years ago. I have several other games that are 40GB in size, and there's no reason that something only 3x larger should break the paradigm under which games are updated. Several upcoming PS5 titles are in the 66-105GB range. If Git can clone a remote repository with the entire Linux kernel - 1000s upon 1000s of tiny files - onto my PC and keep it up to date tracking the remote repository, there is no excuse for the terrible experience people are having with this updater. Stop making excuses for Asobo's inability to code. Even worse is the stupid work-arounds they post on the official forums like "Run it in administrator mode" or whatever, when every other large game updater that I have works just fine without such work-arounds.

I'm not one for bringing back dead threads, but things move pretty quick in this forum and looking back a page or to to see if there was already a thread on something that you can add to is generally useful... Edit: This one is also on the front page but doesn't seem to be released yet:

I personally wouldn't be messing with these nV control panel items. The sim itself has a full range of settings. Back in the days of DirectX9 games where the game itself offered just a resolution setting and maybe a single low/medium/high slider, this nV control panel stuff was useful. Not so much anymore. There are combinations that will do really bad stuff between the options in the sim and the options here.

Glad you got it sorted. I get the feeling there is a bit of a language translation/aviation knowledge challenge in the naming of a lot of the controls in the control binding window. Agree they could be clearer.

Did Photogrammatry get turned off on the Data page of the options by mistake? Perhaps you had an internet disconnect during flight which can cause the sim to turn it off? Check your settings.

In order for something to be 'installed' such that it shows up in the Control Panel, you have to have run a .exe installer that did the 'installing'. MSFS mods are simple .zip folders that get dropped into the community folder. There is no executable portion, and nothing that does any installing of items. I find it highly unlikely that this came from anything related to MSFS, and the title of the thread is frankly misleading because you have no idea where it actually came from.

I'm not sure you can do exactly what you describe as far as using one set of buttons for changing multiple settings, but there are keyboard controls for +/- of all the autopilot 'bugs' and to change between modes already in the control bindings, in the controller mapping section be sure you're looking at 'all' controls and not just 'assigned' and take a look at the 'Autopilot' section. The wording Asobo used in the keyboard mapping dialog doesn't match the G1000 terminology exactly, but they are there.

Agree that airports should use the ICAO code!

Both these forums and the official forums are already divided into a plethora of sections. I find more sections just makes it harder to keep track of topics you care about.

One issue I see with this is a lot of people are running into 'folder name too long' errors in Windows due to a max path limitation at 260 characters. The ridiculous nested paths of many MSFS installs are bumping up the limit. Having the items in the Community folder have super long names also risks bumping up against these limits. If you use a tool like the MSFS Addon Linker it will pull the add-on type, title, version number, and creator from the XML files in the add-on package. So I think a simpler shortened naming scheme for the folders is acceptable. Personally I'd go for something like <a single letter to set loading priority for addons where priority matters like the WT mods>_<a three letter type designation>_<three letter initials of the creator>_<a short descriptive name <=20 characters, all lowercase, no spaces>_<a three digit version number>, so as not to consume more than around 32 characters of the available path space. Very similar to your proposal, just condensed for space. Putting the creator initials before the description/name makes it easier to sort and see for example, all your aircraft made by one creator or all your scenery made by one creator.

https://unrealweather.blogspot.com/2020/09/unreal-weather-live-metar-released.html

All I can say after reading every update thread is I'm so glad I bought the sim on Steam and don't have to deal with the Microsoft Store. Seems like nothing but a huge hassle.

It has nothing to do with if I can afford $20. It's the principle of wanting what I was promised in the Feature Discovery videos (since I didn't have super secret Alpha/Beta knowledge to know what I was actually getting when I bought MSFS ) and being unwilling to pay for band-aids on things Asobo promised, or being willing to go around forums on the internet telling everyone to go buy another product to fix the failings of MSFS. Especially when there is a free alternative that does exactly the same thing, where how it works is fully documented and you can go talk to the person who did it. Polling METAR data and injecting it into the sim as global weather is stupid simple stuff that sims have been doing since FS9, why pay $20 for it when someone has done it for free?

Note that there is a free 'METAR Injector' weather mod Unreal Weather at https://unrealweather.blogspot.com/ I have not tried it - I still want to push Asobo to deliver what was promised before I spend any more $$$ - but I'd give that a try before spending money on REXX 2020.

I found this video to be useful information on managing the G1000 modes (it doesn't work exactly like you'd expect coming from simple autopilots), but the MSFS G1000 isn't 100% correct either,

Because the simulator is representing all aircraft, not some specific aircraft, the POH is the publicly available record of the performance of that aircraft, and it's also the only documentation that users of the sim have access to (since no documentation is provided with the sim). If they want to make the aircraft exceed the POH performance based on some extra data that shows the POH is being overly conservative (like with the Diamond aircraft) I could see that being reasonable, but it shouldn't do worse. This is an "if you give them an inch they will take a mile" situation, if we can't agree to hold Asobo to anything....then we get junk. I get the feeling a lot of people on this forum are happy to get junk though, as long as it has pretty graphics for them to look at. So whatever they need to rationalize the fact that it's "ok" that Asobo did a word not allowed job, is only A Good Thing.

All of the settings you mention are repeatable as part of a testing process. There is no excuse for the aircraft in the sim that don't have the right cruise speed, or range, on a Clear Skies day. It's just Asobo doing a crappy job, and people are more than happy to give them a pass because maybe the simulator that I just spent $120 on is somehow magically simulating an aircraft where the engine has been abused and it it has 5,000 hours on it? Guess what - that's not it, it's just Asobo doing a crappy job.

People need to stop giving Asobo a pass on this stuff and making excuses for them. All you have to offer is some throwaway line that covers for Asobo's poor testing, when everything I stated is factually correct. We can control the sim boundary conditions better than real life, and therefore will be able to repeatably test aircraft in ISA standard conditions in ways that you can't in real life. Getting the cruise speeds and fuel flows at a given altitude correct so as to produce the correct overall range for the aircraft doesn't require "Chuck Yeager". It's actually a highly repeatable measurement to make in the sim. If there is nothing else about an aircraft that is correct, this should be correct because it's 100% repeatable. It's not correct for many of the aircraft, and Asobo uses the aircraft vendor range data to generate the range circles in the world map....so you get repeated posts of people planning flights and then running out of fuel. I'm so tired of this BS people saying we are "obsessed with the POH" when all we want is aircraft that perform reasonably like the real world counterpart in standard conditions.