Iadbound

If your budget is more flexible (i.e., you can spend way more), you might want to look at Falcon NW. https://www.falcon-nw.com/. Reviews of the products are not as frequent as they once were, but they were/are well regarded.

The reviews are mediocre. I would build it yourself if you can.

Instead of driving yourself crazy, just change the parking brake setting from Realistic to Simple in the Options settings in the FMC. Then you don’t need the toe brakes at all.

New previews https://www.flightbeam.net/post/fresh-previews-of-ksfo-captain-s-edition?postId=6d5f0c5a-c6c4-4293-a13a-cfea86148878&utm_campaign=55d8eb5a-7b17-4bfc-bccf-624c899286d7&utm_source=so&utm_medium=mail&utm_content=97c9369f-e1fe-4395-a68c-3be0d7c52f3d&cid=7cf120b1-56c7-49cb-b7c7-0c139f0fb372

More information would be helpful. Is this a Vatsim flight? What altitude are you flying, plane, etc. Why not just ask for flight following? Regardless, for the SJC section, yes you need to ask for the transition. For KOAK, it's a Class C airport, so you'll want to contact approach and state your intentions. Once they have acknowledged your call sign you can continue even if you don't have landing instructions just yet. Eventually, approach will hand you off to tower. Highly unlikely they would refuse your request to land since there are ample GA facilities there. One thing to keep in mind, KOAK is inside the KSFO bravo area. So keep an eye out for altitude restrictions or make sure you have clearance to enter the bravo. If this is a Vatsim flight, I wouldn't be surprised if it's all unicom anyway. PilotEdge on the other hand. Also, this isn't really a MSFS topic.

Just an FYI, PACX is still in development but TFDi has higher priority stuff at the moment —according to them anyway.

Self-Loading Cargo and PACX are two options. GSX can add passenger sounds on boarding and deboarding.

I run P3D v5.3, XP 12 and MSFS. MSFS performance is significantly better than anything I get in P3D or XP. If you can run P3D decently, you should be fine in MSFS — if not better than what you get now. Not that I’m suggesting you change, just an observation.

I’m afraid there may be no recourse. If you bought it recently, maybe try disputing the charge with your credit card company.

Mir -- as always, I'm looking forward to whatever you develop. Thanks!

Flightbeam is a essentially a one-man operation (Mir). So yes, it might take him longer than most, but his end results are excellent. He also mentioned, at FS Expo, that the bar is very high these if you want be in the A-tier of scenery developers, and that takes time.

And it never will.

No worries. Enjoy.

Failures in the Comanche are handled separately from the MSFS failures. So I would turn them off. https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=150&t=74862&p=567337&hilit=failures#p567337

The 172 makes a lot of sense since there so many people flying it IRL. Moreover, the steam gauge 172 in the sim is not available in the base package and it is relatively basic.