marsman2020

This might explain why NZ is smoother - not a lot of Class B/C airspace there.

A patch for the patch notes...lol

There is a Known Issue with avionics screens in the current patch: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/release-release-notes-1-14-5-0-sim-update-iii-now-available/375519

I won't be buying anything from them seeing how they treat paying customers on their forums, that is for sure. And the fact that MS is so hot to push their partnership with a company that treats their customers like this is very telling

I don't have the CRJ but from what I have read there may be some throttle calibration specific to the aircraft that you need to do in the EFB in the plane

I don't have the CRJ but from what I have read there may be some throttle calibration specific to the aircraft that you need to do in the EFB in the plane.

The aerodynamics of an airfoil or fuselage operating in the supersonic regime are much different then in the subsonic regime. There are also major impacts on how for example engine inlets work to manage shockwaves and ensure the engines stay happy. Just because you can change some parameters and get a fast KIAS value doesn't mean it's being properly simulated.

Interior or exterior view?

The aerodynamic impact was always there, just with no visuals. The only difference now is that you get some visual indication of what is going on.

MSFS is on Steam and has been since launch day. This thread is from 2019....

Folks who are actual 3DP developers and have access to the private comms with Asobo may have more info but... I've installed the last 3 or 4 versions of the SDK and really didn't see a ton of new stuff in there. Certainly nothing that leaped out at me "now PMDG has all their prayers answered". If they are just giving out info as answers to single questions instead of improving the overall documentation, that doesn't seem very effective to me.

Yes, so just leave it out entirely (saves works for Aerosoft after all) vs implementing what the sim has right now. Knowing where the clouds are is useful to avoid flying into a bunch of icing. But I guess tubeliner pilots probably don't care since they have FIKI capability. Still, I find it a lame excuse to leave out things that the freeware CJ4 or A32NX have in a $50 paid addon.

The stock G1000 has both weather radar and synthetic vision, and is written in JS/HTML. So the data has to be accessible.

What's really funny is there are glaring missing features in the CRJ (weather radar and terrain radar) because Aerosoft refused to write even a portion of the aircraft in JS/HTML so they could deliver features that other versions of the aircraft had and insisted on doing it 100% in WASM. And now we have PMDG doing a 180 about face and saying "oh yeah the SDK is fine" when if they also insist on doing a 100% WASM aircraft, they will have the same limitations. The only thing that makes this make sense is dollar signs.

Yes, they know they broke it. Which in my mind makes it even worse. You'd think a broken training mission would be considered a release-breaking bug. Nope, not to MS/Asobo. "Ship it!" Known issues section of the release notes for the latest patch - https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/release-release-notes-1-14-5-0-sim-update-iii-now-available/375519 (for some reason it is not shown on the known issues page on ZenDesk.... I guess Copying and Pasting is a challenge for them as well)

Robert - your health is most important, take care.

They have really screwed a lot of people up as far as control bindings with this aircraft and it's probably one of the major reasons I won't buy it. Asobos fawning over it as the first implementation of a complex aircraft when it straight up doesn't work with people's control setups that work with every other aircraft in the sim just shows what a word not allowed this so-called "platform" is.

Do you have the "modern" flight model selected in the options menu?

I don't get this constant complaint about the "overdone" icing as a reason to not include visual effects. The aircraft maker gets to choose the icing map texture that corresponds to 100% structural icing. So just make 100% more understated. Is everyone flying around with the 'visual icing only' option set and no performance impacts of icing? It makes no sense to me to have 0 visual representation of icing because then you have no visual clues to go off of when flying.

Or they got free copies and they don't want to comment too much so they get more free copies in the future

The attitude I am seeing of "that's a sim issue" on things they could legitimately code around (in two days) means I won't be purchasing any Aerosoft addons anytime soon. Actually the entire holier-then-thou attitude of their forum means I won't be purchasing anything from them.

The performance got mucked up over the last two updates. Asobo says they are working on it. Some areas of the world seem smoother then others, NZ has been smoother for some of us.

I want less talk and more doing from MSFS upper management. So many things that have been promised over the last 6 months are not done.....The only thing I can measure against is what we get in patches which was not much in Sim Update 3.

I agree. I'm enjoying the MB-339 and the JF Arrow but it's difficult to justify spending a bunch of $$$ on something where one of the primary flight displays is wrong.

Without a way to implement a collimated HUD a lot of military aircraft make no sense to me to put in the sim.....