kakihara123

That would be the next Sim Update which got delayed by a week. And if you want to believe Asobo because of the Flap fix. The only real problem are the encrypted planes. I just flew with the SR-22 which can't be edited. I loaded an ILS approach (which also activated it) well before my last enroute waypoint. Because it was a bit longer flight I did not flew it completely in VR. As ATC told me to decent I activated VR again and the approach got complete deleted. So I tried to load and activate it again. This caused my whole FP to completly mess up Deleting waypoints doesn work, going direct doesnt work and after trying to fox it somehow the sim froze. Luckily at least Onair works and I could resume the flight after slewing to the last position. So now I just did a visual approach since loading approaches doesn't work anyway and it was good weather. I didn't even really notice the flap issue on the SR-22. Touched down gently without much float. So now compare those 2 issues. What should be fixed first? Assuming Asobo told the truth and they are only delaying he update because of the flaps issue and not because it is not ready yet.

What I don't understand is how that flaps issue is more important then the horrible Garmin bugs. And i'm not even sure if they will be fixed. Anything approach related is basically impossible to modify in flight. Activating VR deletes the approach. How did that ever got through Q/A? Even if they thought they didn't have to bring the Garmins to study level this is still baffling. I really hope they will fix at least most of the bugs... It is such a mess.

Just go and download the Working Title mod for the CJ4 from Github and don't waste your money on FSX.

I can imagine that. As a cyclist I rode about 8km from my parents to my home with about 30km/h or so and started with sunshine. I came home completely drenched and it was like the apocalypse.

It is. The CJ4 by Working Title does this flawlessly. They even provide an option to either Use Simbrief or the Ingame Flight planner. Or you can simply enter the Flightplan manually.

Encountered a few in Africa for example. I did a quick random search and this one for example: FZUK This was just the first I found. And yeah this is a dirt strip, but in the middle of a town with fuel and aprons and at over 5000 ft long enough for a Cj4 for example. And from the limited knowledge about this plane I have they can land on grass strips too. No Idea if one would ever land a CRJ at such a place but the flight planning problem for those airports isn't exclusive to that plane anyway. At least Littlenavmap has all those airports and helps with planning somewhat.

Simbrief and Navigraph work until they don't. There are many airports not in their databases and then they refuse any flightplanning at all. That is when the ingame flightplanner comes in handy. It has it's flaws, but at least you can add any airport to your route. The missing ones are also not always just tiny grass strips. So an import function would simply make sense. As I said, simply provide a toggle option to hide the menu option if someone doesn't like that. It also helps to import a flightplan from simbrief into the default planner to look for the actual weather in the sim.

Well honestly... Having the option to import a flightplan quickly is a good thing. Even if it is not realistic, setting up everything for a flight specially with using VR can take some time and reducing this by eliminating pure busywork. Same as using Simbrief by itself. I mean I could use Navigraph and look for waypoints and Airways myself but after a full workday and a workout+ shower+ eating there is only so much time left of the day. Just input a toggle somewhere flightplan import enabled or disabled and everyone benefits.

Fair enough, I oversimplified it a bit. There are of course more factors then just failures. And I mean sure you watch for your airspeed and stuff like that without failures enabled too. Its more like a complete package.

For me failures are very important. I already use a program called random failures thats available on github and aditionally enabled Failures in onair (still pretty limited there). I don't want every flight ending in a Emergency. The reason is that you need to change the way you fly. And do it for a real reason and not just play pretend. If I fly with an Xcub over a large body of water I get a problem if my engine dies. So I adjust this by changing the flight planning to minimise the risk. And I will probably use the float version in the future. I want the engine to blow up if I over stress it enough. Why would I do the boring pre flight check if it will never be for a reason? Why monitor instruments in flight if they will never be relevant? By not using failures you basically cut of a huge part of the simulation, even if the failures are very rare. On the other hand that program exists and the developer is still active with it and if it is the first "complete" aircraft besides the modded ones that just works well that would be a plus.

One could argue those bigger signs are more realistic. Just ask yourself: if readability of those signs would be as bad as in the sim in real life, how big would they actually be? Or what is more realistic: being able to read them or not? How would pilots in a real plane feel if it would be impossible to read those? I think the first think would be to complain that they should be bigger. A slider for those things would be great. In VR stuff like that is even harder to read so that makes it a lot more bearable.

Doesn't matter where you bought it as long as you use SteamVR. And Oculus Headset might have a similar window function natively, I read.

You can use maps in VR. For SteamBR I use OVR Toolkit. Still a bit of a hassle but works pretty well considering it is not official. Downside is if you don't want to obscure your view outside you need to place it somewhere inside the plane. This is mostly on the right side a bit down. So you have to turn your head pretty far to the side each time you want to look at the map and the window needs o be pretty big to be able to read stuff well. This has the effect, however, that you don't want to be glued to the map all the time. So you need to memorise it a bit, which is kind of good in a way.

That is until you use it in VR. There it is quite nice.

Those suspicious quotes sound like Blackjack and hookers are available on the plane as well.

Same happened in EDDF for me. Smooth approach in VR with a TBM and as soon as I touch down the fps tanks to single digits. Switched VR off, but exactly the same even When i lowered the settings. This is clearly a bug and has nothing to do with hardware or settings.

Doesnt work because the intent is basically just a button. I simply assigned it to the "fire gun" buttons on the Joystick Since I won't fire a weapon anyway. Just put Throttle to idle, push the button and then you control the reverse thrust with your regular throttle.

I think one of the causes of this is that people always shout VATSIM!!!!11 as soon as the default ATC is mentioned. So Asobo might have the impression that the default ATC doesn't matter at all. But this is simply false. The default atc is the only way to manage players and ai traffic at the same time. Vatsim simply can't do that. Coverage is also too low for it to be a real alternative too me....and I am simply not really interested in it. Problem is: Third party ATC is also player only as far as I could see. The default ATC doesn't have to be perfect, but apart from the stuff you mentioned it needs to actually control players and ai at the same time. I want to hear what other players are doing as well. Same goes for communication on uncontrolled airfields. I also have a feeling that they are way too afraid of griefing or spamming to implement such features. But honestly It would still be much better as it is now. Just give it a mute function.

ATC not handling both ai planes as well as player planes and players not hearing shout outs via default atc. Lacking failure system.. At least there is a rudimentary plugin for that now.

I have that to using an Index with Steam VR: Exiting Steam VR helps. But for some reason it opens again after a while for a short time where FPS tanks and sound switches to the Index.

There is actually a way, but it is kind of silly. You can use OVR toolkit (10€ on Steam) to display any window in VR. Pop them out and use that. If it is really practical is be another thing, but might be worth a shot.

Of those two clearly the 3070. DLSS is planned for summer and this is a must have to get acceptable fps. Even my 3080 struggles hard with an Index

It also works with keyboard and mouse, but much clunkier to move the window around. At least I got that working in Beatsaber. Didn't try it in MSFS though.

The dev of OVR Toolkit just released a beta update which fixed the issues with MSFS: So that works now. Had a little bit of trouble scrolling around little nav map with my Index controllers but other then that it works well. Bit clunky of course compared to a real second screen but usable.

Is there any way to display any kind of Notepad in VR? I wanted to do a VOR to VOR flight and normally I would simply note the frequencies on my phone or something, but there seems to be no way at all for something like this while in VR. OVR toolkit doesn't work because of the lack of Motion controller support. The little Nav Map add on is out of date and doesn't seem to work anymore. And All Overlays aren't showing up in VR. This is so frustrating that such a minor thing ruins it atm for me.